WidenersInline FabricationLee PrecisionReloading Everything
RotoMetals2Load DataMidSouth Shooters SupplyTitan Reloading
Repackbox
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28

Thread: h110 for .223 ?

  1. #1
    Boolit Master Wolfdog91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Amite County MS
    Posts
    976

    h110 for .223 ?

    Anyone tried it ? Trying to do a reduced thing. 1300fps and kinda quiet would be great for shooting out my single shot at short distance, 50yd is plenty.Dont have anything in the Lyman book not buying powder for a few months so just playing what I have. Everything I had bout for cast .223 was with the intention of running them in my AR @2100-2500 fps .Got sent this on FB from a fella who said he had good luck with this load though. I'm running 55gr bullets. Should I use a filler since it's such a light charge? Can't image it would ignite properly without one.
    Also have 748 but gezz that was some kind of a speed demon power out the AR.
    If anything I'll just stick to my accurate 2015 for now and just deal with the extra cleaning
    Thanks

    Sent from my motorola one 5G UW using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Wolfdog91; 07-26-2022 at 11:42 AM.
    A wise man will try to learn as much from a fool as he will from a master, for all have something to teach- Uncle Iroh
    MS Army Guard 2016-2021

  2. #2
    Boolit Buddy Krh1326's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Location
    Behind Enemy Lines, NY
    Posts
    281
    I’m far from a very experienced reloader, so I’ve been trying to do everything by the book and legit. One thing that I have seen time and time again , is to never reduce H110. I was following one fella that was trying to develope a load for .300 blackout 230 gr… but still using H335.
    I got curious and called Hodgdon, and actually got someone. Talked to them about that… then about using fillers and H110 , as I do have and use H110 for .357 mag and for 300 blackout.
    His answer, from Hodgdon, was to never use fillers with it. He said that using Dacron or even cream of wheat, CAN cause big problems with variables such as humidity etc.

    I don’t know if that is a standard response from Hodgdon, just to cover their butts…. Prolly….
    But I don’t have the experience to thumb my nose at the “pros”

  3. #3
    Boolit Buddy Sig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Wrong Island
    Posts
    310
    What Krh1326 said. Don't reduce H110/Win296.

  4. #4
    Boolit Master mehavey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,524
    MegaDittos to above:
    Do NOT reduce either H-110 or W296
    It requires near fill case-fill

    For one thing, Hodgdon doesn't even list it for 55gr/223 (to even reach barest min 80% fill would produce ~70,000psi loads)
    For another, QL tells me 1,300fps out of a 20" barrel would require a load leaving more than 70% empty
    -- if it ignited at all.
    Last edited by mehavey; 07-26-2022 at 12:11 PM.

  5. #5
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    sulphur springs, Tx
    Posts
    1,243
    When I first found this site I was experimenting with 296 in a .375 H & H. I was advised to not continue this by a number of members here. The load was astonishingly accurate but I took the advice of those more experienced. I still have my fingers and eyesight. I believe 296 and H 110 are very close to being the same powder.
    Decreed by our Creator: The man who has been made able to believe and understand that Jesus Christ has been sent into this world by the Father has been born of the Spirit of God. This man shall never experience spiritual death. He will live forever!

  6. #6
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,572
    wondering what that photo of data is. kind of looks like an old Lyman manual. one thing to keep in mind is back in the days of using copper crusher for pressure testing it was no where near as accurate as the latest technology available.
    wish I knew how to navigate searches better because years ago there were some huge threads on mouse phart loads that covers what your attempting.
    I agree with others as to h110/296 loads are best used in the smallish loading range in magnum handgun loads.4895, 2400, unique, red dot and other powders are much better candidates for down loading

  7. #7
    Boolit Grand Master


    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Aberdeen, South Dakota
    Posts
    7,136
    Well people use H110 for subsonic 300 blackout apparently. If it's all you have it is worth trying. Nothing bad will happen to you. Worst case is erratic ignition and possibly a bullet stuck in the barrel.

  8. #8
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,304
    Wolfdog91

    It takes a certain amount of psi for powders ignite and burn efficiently. More so with ball powders. That "start" load in Lyman manuals, even in the older early edition of CBH #3 that data came from, is where Lyman's testing indicated the H110 was igniting and beginning to burn efficiently.

    Note the 13.7 gr velocity is way above the 1300 fps you desire. Dropping the charge of H110 below that will probably result in erratic performance and probably be "dirty". You will be much better served for your desired 50 yard, 1300 fps load using bullseye, Red Dot, 700X or similar fast burning flake powder.
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  9. #9
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    754
    There's subsonic data out there (not with H110). I can't dig in my books right now but it's not too hard to find. I wanna say there's a recipe with Tightgroup out there.

  10. #10
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,222
    If you found data for H110 in .223 from a reputable manual, that's difficult to argue with. I won't, for a moment, say that the developers of said data aren't smarter than me, on the subject. They undoubtedly are.
    Even so, I can't think of one other propellant I'd MORE prefer NOT TO USE in a reduced-performance load, than H110. It's the propellant of choice for .30 Carbine, and gives stellar results in all the original magnum revolver cartridges, not to mention many rounds that came after. But it works best at or near max loading density and highest safe chamber pressures.
    Can you give us an idea of what other propellants you have on hand, that might be used?

    ADDENDUM: H110/W296 CAN be reduced and worked up, but the recommended maximum reduction is 3% of maximum. For a max load calling for 20.0 gr./H110, that means the starting load is 19.4 gr. A margin of 0.6 gr. is a bit thin for MY sense of comfort.
    Last edited by Kosh75287; 07-26-2022 at 04:28 PM.
    For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow. Ecclesiastes 1:18
    He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind: and the fool become servant to the wise of heart. Proverbs 11:29
    ...Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Matthew 25:40


    Carpe SCOTCH!

  11. #11
    Boolit Master Wolfdog91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Amite County MS
    Posts
    976
    Welp guess I'll keep that can of h110 for something else
    A wise man will try to learn as much from a fool as he will from a master, for all have something to teach- Uncle Iroh
    MS Army Guard 2016-2021

  12. #12
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2022
    Location
    Godzone country ,New Zealand
    Posts
    528
    I think that would be wise young fella...VERY WISE indeed.

  13. #13
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,222
    Hey, H110 is FIRST RATE propellant for magnum pistol cartridges! Got a .357? Yer SET!
    That picture of load data reminded me of using Red Dot powder in .223, with cast .22 caliber flat points. I settled on 6.2/Red Dot/56 gr. cast, and got 1-2" groups out to 80 yards (in a Mini-14, no less).
    If you have Hodgdon H4895 (NOT the IMR-4895), you can reduce the maximum charge weight for the 55 gr. J-word load by multiplying it by 0.6 and use THAT weight of H4895 as a starting charge. Ask Hodgdon about other faster-burning rifle propellants that might work in the same way.
    For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow. Ecclesiastes 1:18
    He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind: and the fool become servant to the wise of heart. Proverbs 11:29
    ...Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Matthew 25:40


    Carpe SCOTCH!

  14. #14
    Boolit Grand Master


    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Aberdeen, South Dakota
    Posts
    7,136
    Quote Originally Posted by Kosh75287 View Post
    ADDENDUM: H110/W296 CAN be reduced and worked up, but the recommended maximum reduction is 3% of maximum. For a max load calling for 20.0 gr./H110, that means the starting load is 19.4 gr. A margin of 0.6 gr. is a bit thin for MY sense of comfort.
    False.

  15. #15
    Boolit Master ACC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by Krh1326 View Post
    I’m far from a very experienced reloader, so I’ve been trying to do everything by the book and legit. One thing that I have seen time and time again , is to never reduce H110. I was following one fella that was trying to develope a load for .300 blackout 230 gr… but still using H335.
    I got curious and called Hodgdon, and actually got someone. Talked to them about that… then about using fillers and H110 , as I do have and use H110 for .357 mag and for 300 blackout.
    His answer, from Hodgdon, was to never use fillers with it. He said that using Dacron or even cream of wheat, CAN cause big problems with variables such as humidity etc.

    I don’t know if that is a standard response from Hodgdon, just to cover their butts…. Prolly….
    But I don’t have the experience to thumb my nose at the “pros”
    I have talked to them myself 3 years ago and they said the same thing. I tend to see Hodgdon as good folks.

    ACC

  16. #16
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2022
    Location
    Godzone country ,New Zealand
    Posts
    528
    Quote Originally Posted by ACC View Post
    I have talked to them myself 3 years ago and they said the same thing. I tend to see Hodgdon as good folks.

    ACC
    have a look at the companies mission statement......... yip they are good folks.

  17. #17
    Boolit Buddy
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Superstition Mountains
    Posts
    208

    Cool

    If you found data for H110 in .223 from a reputable manual, that's difficult to argue with.…
    Actually, it’s very easy to argue with - and to discount - obsolete data, which is the case in the OP’s photo. That was from Lyman #46 which was published in 1982. By #48 published in 2002 Lyman had removed that powder from their published data, see below. There are several reasons to do that, one being to allow room for newer powders - obviously not the case here.

    Another is that it proved to be erratic under some conditions not encountered in the initial testing, such as with different powder orientation or at different temperatures. It may even have proven unsafe in those conditions. Bottom line, it pays not to use obsolete data.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	AD21DF02-DE97-4502-8F93-9B46055D7AEC.jpg 
Views:	41 
Size:	92.9 KB 
ID:	302587

  18. #18
    Boolit Master murf205's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Dead center of Alabama
    Posts
    2,367
    Wolfy, here is some data sent to me by a member here and for the life of me, I can't remember the source. It might have been from the American Rifleman but I'll bet some sharp eyed member here will recognize it. Look in the top of the pic for the 223 loads , IF you can find Unique.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2019-03-25 UNIQUE POWDER FOR CAST BULLETS.jpg 
Views:	59 
Size:	68.2 KB 
ID:	302589
    IT AINT what ya shoot--its how ya shoot it. NONE of us are as smart as ALL of us!

  19. #19
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2022
    Location
    Godzone country ,New Zealand
    Posts
    528
    so...many years ago BEFORE I got my own reloading gear,I asked sports shop to make me up some loads for the .270w using a 110grn hp projectile and hoped to have a 3000fps velocity...not too hot just a mild load...well the yworked but sometimes would go ba-boom instead of boom...if I tipped barrel towards sky then lowered and fired no problem...so it was position of powder in case that was issue..that was using winchester 760 powder...fast forward 20 years and I made up same type of load myself without issues...and did so again recently... so it begs question ...was origonal loading somehow wrong?? were his primers milder with less flame???
    bottom line for me is whe na powder manufacturer/retailer says DO NOT reduce loads...and that same advice is in just about every loading manual...well I will tend to think there is a golly good reason for it.

  20. #20
    Boolit Buddy
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfdog91 View Post
    Welp guess I'll keep that can of h110 for something else
    Invest in a 44 Magnum.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check