24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
-->
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,285
B
BigNate Offline OP
Campfire Regular
OP Offline
Campfire Regular
B
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,285
I've been thinking about buying up surplus powders to keep the cost down but have no experience with them. There are several flavors all claiming similar performance to H870. I only have a half pound of H870 left so was wondering if one was preferable over others? What about IMR7383?


“You never need fear a man, no matter what his size. When danger threatens, call on me, and I will equalize.”
Samuel Colt.

�Common sense is genius dressed up in work clothes.� - Ralph Waldo Emerson

GB1

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,807
F
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
F
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,807
Only one I've got experience with is 844, I've got an 8# kegs worth of shtf so loaded with it for my 223.I've fired about 200-300 rounds from the stash and all went well.

Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 692
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 692
I have used several of the surplus powders, but I do not try to red-line the loads.

I have loaded WC852 with .30/06 with no problems. It is slow enough that a case full does not reach red-line pressures.

IMR7383 is a really strange triple-base powder, it does not burn well until you reach close to maximum pressure and then a little more is too much. I will not buy any more when I have used up what I have.

I am going to try WC872 in a .300 RUM. My plan is to load strong .300 Win level loads on the cheap, you can't beat $5/pound.

Michael

Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,954
A
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
A
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,954
Nate,

I shot a lot of surplus powder. Lot to lot variance can be greater then with canister powder, so work up.

Here are the general guide lines:

WC820 = H110
WC844 = H335
WC846 = BLC (2)
WC852 = H380

WC860 is slower the H870 by a out 8%

WC872 is slower then H870 by 10-12%


You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.

You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,237
M
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
M
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,237
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Nate,

I shot a lot of surplus powder. Lot to lot variance can be greater then with canister powder, so work up.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What he says.


molɔ̀ːn labé skýla
IC B2

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,285
B
BigNate Offline OP
Campfire Regular
OP Offline
Campfire Regular
B
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,285
So is WC872 the best bet for .300WM?


“You never need fear a man, no matter what his size. When danger threatens, call on me, and I will equalize.”
Samuel Colt.

�Common sense is genius dressed up in work clothes.� - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 378
Campfire Member
Offline
Campfire Member
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 378
I'm going to fix antelope Sniper's post.
WC846=WC844.

Nate, buy a Pressure Trace and you can do anything you want. The problem is 98% of the populace doesn't know what they think they do about powders.

WC846 has an original patent date in the early-mid 1930's. WC844 was a voluntary segregation on an "as-built" basis. There is only one recipe. The difference is based upon 0.25% differences in calcium carbonate. Hodgdon is only, and has only ever been a surplus reseller/blender. Doesn't it strike you funny that they refuse to list nominal burning rate variations?

The question to ask yourself is why it was surplussed. You can't honestly say with a straight face that WC870 = H870. How many different lots did Hodgdon combine and what was the end result burning rate they wanted? Where compared to that goal, is this WC lot you bought?
Buy a Pressure Trace, and you can test pressures yourself.


I'm a firm believer in the theory of " If it bleeds, I can kill it".
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 692
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 692
Originally Posted by BigNate
So is WC872 the best bet for .300WM?


Probably not, WC872 is very slow burning and is best used in very large cases.

Here is a link to Jeff Bartlett's surplus powder page.

He recommends WC857 for the 300 Win Mag.

Michael

Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,819
6
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
6
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,819
Tag

Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,954
A
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
A
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,954
Originally Posted by BigNate
So is WC872 the best bet for .300WM?


No, it's too slow.

It's better in the 300 RUM.


You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.

You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
IC B3

Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,954
A
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
A
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,954
Originally Posted by Darkker
I'm going to fix antelope Sniper's post.
WC846=WC844.

Nate, buy a Pressure Trace and you can do anything you want. The problem is 98% of the populace doesn't know what they think they do about powders.

WC846 has an original patent date in the early-mid 1930's. WC844 was a voluntary segregation on an "as-built" basis. There is only one recipe. The difference is based upon 0.25% differences in calcium carbonate. Hodgdon is only, and has only ever been a surplus reseller/blender. Doesn't it strike you funny that they refuse to list nominal burning rate variations?

The question to ask yourself is why it was surplussed. You can't honestly say with a straight face that WC870 = H870. How many different lots did Hodgdon combine and what was the end result burning rate they wanted? Where compared to that goal, is this WC lot you bought?
Buy a Pressure Trace, and you can test pressures yourself.


Yes, same formula, but segmented.

The fast lots are labeled 844, the slow lots 846. It's been that way since the Vietnam war.


You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.

You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,954
A
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
A
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 30,954
Originally Posted by mag410
Originally Posted by BigNate
So is WC872 the best bet for .300WM?


Probably not, WC872 is very slow burning and is best used in very large cases.

Here is a link to Jeff Bartlett's surplus powder page.

He recommends WC857 for the 300 Win Mag.

Michael


Mike, I didn't list WC857 because I haven't tried it. However based on what Jeff says, it sounds like a great powder for the magnums smaller then the RUM's/STW.

Last edited by antelope_sniper; 10/13/15.

You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.

You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 378
Campfire Member
Offline
Campfire Member
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 378
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper


Yes, same formula, but segmented.

The fast lots are labeled 844, the slow lots 846. It's been that way since the Vietnam war.


The segregation wasn't about burning speed, it was about CaCO. It took Frankfort several years and a few hundred thousand rounds with no cleaning, to identify the gas tube potential issue.


All that said, that was in Olin times, now that is wholly General Dynamics. So what makes them "different" may or may not remain the same.


I'm a firm believer in the theory of " If it bleeds, I can kill it".
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,187
M
MZ5 Offline
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
M
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,187
I like WC748, which is what the stamp on the outside of the Winchester box says that my most recent 8-lb-ers of 748 came in. smile

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 17,230
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 17,230
Originally Posted by mag410
I have used several of the surplus powders, but I do not try to red-line the loads.

I have loaded WC852 with .30/06 with no problems. It is slow enough that a case full does not reach red-line pressures.

IMR7383 is a really strange triple-base powder, it does not burn well until you reach close to maximum pressure and then a little more is too much. I will not buy any more when I have used up what I have.

I am going to try WC872 in a .300 RUM. My plan is to load strong .300 Win level loads on the cheap, you can't beat $5/pound.

Michael


what cartridge are you running the 7383 in? I've read it is ok for mid-sized bottlenecks, like 308, etc

Sycamore


Originally Posted by jorgeI
...Actually Sycamore, you are sort of right....
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 692
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 692
.30/06 I bought the IMR7383 as SHTF insurance early in the panic, as it was the only powder available that was "usable" in medium bore cartridges. It is cheap, it works ok for 2400-2500 fps with a 165gr bullet. It stinks, smells of ammonia. I have read that it is temperature sensitive, but I have not tested extensively to see.

Michael

Last edited by mag410; 10/15/15. Reason: spelling

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
AX24

623 members (007FJ, 1lessdog, 10Glocks, 222Sako, 21, 12344mag, 66 invisible), 2,445 guests, and 1,214 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,191,411
Posts18,470,431
Members73,931
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 


Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.



Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.064s Queries: 14 (0.003s) Memory: 0.8667 MB (Peak: 0.9804 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-04-26 15:14:19 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS