excess650
posted this
16 October 2009
Even 20 years ago H110 was supposed to be a slightly different lot of 296....regardless, my loads are with H110 as it gave better accuracy, and I'm using Federal 205s (small rifle magnum primer with thicker cups for 17Rem and such).
Winchester always specified a very high loading density for WW296, but I don't recall Hogdon making the same for H110. I find that odd.
My Browning Lowall gets similar loads with the RCBS 35-200 which weighs in at 215gr from my mix (quenched yields 15bhn). These didn't show best accuracy until the loads got pretty warm, and the bullet was nearly on, or on the powder. The cases and primers aren't showing any issues, but the recoil is noticeable with the narrow crescent buttplate. At 1-1/2” at 100 yards for 5 shots with a peep sight, its a great load, but uncomfortable to shoot.
Regarding the current loading manuals, they are significantly revised from what was published 20 years ago. Loads that were the starting loads then are now maximums for some calibers. Pressure data for the 357 may have been downgraded by some 10K cup in that time.
Years back when Sierra introduced the 300gr for the 44mag, I bought a box and loaded them in my Redhawk. I “guessed” at where I thought I should be and worked up. It shot accurately, and extracted all 6 empties without sticking. Cases didn't seem stressed, and the primers didn't look bad at all. Sometime later I called Sierra and asked their techs what their recommended loading data was for that bullet, 44mag, WW296. Their response was a maximum load that was below my starting load. My “working load” chrono'd 1320fps from the 7-1/2” barrel.
That same Redhawk was my test mule for a heavy bullet load in attempt to emulate the .475 Linebaugh. I had considered having a Redhawk converted, but wanted to experience the recoil prior to dropping all of the $$ for the conversion plus dies, mould(s), etc. Veral Smith cut a 44-350LFN with the crimp groove for cylinder length. These weighed in at 370gr from my mix with GC, and were loaded over increasing charges of 296 checking for normal pressure signs like sticky extraction, flattened primers, etc. I stopped when the bullet was on the powder, and the 370gr cast chrono'd nearly as fast as the 300gr jacketed Sierra. Recoil was beyond brutal, so the conversion idea was scrapped. With the heavy bullet and heavy charge of 296, muzzle flash was minimal!
I DID have a Marlin 1894 44mag that didn't like the 24gr 296/240gr loads published at that time(circa 1980). It would kick the lever loose, and accuracy was poor. At 22gr, it shot cloverleafs at 60 yards.
The point is, your firearms have different barrels, chambers, throats than do what was used in ballistic testing by the powder manufacturers. Your results WILL vary.
