In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

W296 Loads

rsnyder55rsnyder55 Member Posts: 2,526 ✭✭✭
I was given some 44magnum reloads using PMC brass with 240gr XTP bullets and 25gr of W296.

In my OM Ruger Vaquero, I shot a couple of rounds and the recoil was stout. I looked at the primers and they appear to begin to flatten and marks on the primers show they may have hit the shield.

I looked in my reloading manuals and I can't find a load that heavy.
Is this load published anywhere?

I'm tempted to pull the bullets and try to reuse them.

Thank you.

Comments

  • 336marlin336marlin Member Posts: 201 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Hornady's manual lists 24.2gr as max for the 240gr XTP. A Winchester load data manual I have lists a load of 25gr but with a 240gr lead SWC bullet.
  • dcs shootersdcs shooters Member Posts: 10,870 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Winchester says 24.0grs is max.
  • 5mmgunguy5mmgunguy Member Posts: 3,092 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Think you are just a little hot. Suggest pulling the bullets and starting over.
  • rsnyder55rsnyder55 Member Posts: 2,526 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Thank you, I thought the load was hot. That's why I tested with a Ruger instead of one of my Smiths.
  • Rocky RaabRocky Raab Member Posts: 14,438 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Yet another reason to never shoot somebody else's handloads ...

    ... because "somebody" is an idiot.
    I may be a bit crazy - but I didn't drive myself.
  • partisanpartisan Member Posts: 6,414
    edited November -1
    +1 with Rocky.
  • gunslinger720gunslinger720 Member Posts: 8 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I just looked in the Speer manuel wich I noticed is usually hotter than others say with a 240 Grain JHP the Maximum Load is 24.0 Grains
  • rsnyder55rsnyder55 Member Posts: 2,526 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Thank you everyone. At least he wrote the load information on the boxes.

    I am getting a bullet puller this week to unload and save the bullets and primed cases. I got 100 rounds of this when I purchased the Vaquero along with 50 rounds of factory PMC.

    I figure the XTP bullets is worth effort.
  • 375H&H375H&H Member Posts: 1,544 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Not to disagree with everyone , but my Hornady manual lists max load for a 240 gr J.H.P. using win 296 as 24.9 gr's ( for 44 magnum )

    It's an older book , I think from somewhere around the early to mid 80's , because it still shows loads for win 630 powder .
    It's the one that has the tribute at the beginning for three persons , I believe where killed in a plane wreck , with a two tone brown cover .

    You would think that a 1/10th of a grain over would'nt hurt .
  • v35v35 Member Posts: 12,710 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Hodgedon's manual 26 gives 23.5 as max with a 240 grain jsp bullet.
    There's obviously some slack in the load as your gun is still together.
    I'd knock down those loads to recommended levels.
  • rsnyder55rsnyder55 Member Posts: 2,526 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Thinking it over, and not disputing anyone else's expertise, but some of my old manuals listed rifle and TC loads as a seperate section. Is it possible that this load would be suitable in a rifle action or a TC Contender?

    Looking for my old manuals now.
  • 44shotdoctor44shotdoctor Member Posts: 178 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Well I have several reload manuels current as well as very old. Old manuels generally are a bit more lax and load heavier. However the heaviest load I can find is 24gr. I guess I wouldn't fire them. I am a person that loves heavy loads but that sounds a bit risky.
  • Rocky RaabRocky Raab Member Posts: 14,438 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Here's what you have to ask yourself about variations in book data over time:

    Did the components change a little bit from when the old data was printed?

    Did the company start using more accurate pressure equipment since their old data?

    Did the old data happen to be based on a hotter or cooler lot of powder than the new data?

    Now ask yourself this: If you load to a heavy charge because (unknown to you) the lab happened to have a cool lot of powder - but YOUR lot is at the hot end of the range - what might that do to pressures? That might reveal itself in plenty of time with powders that you can back off and work up. That is NOT so with W296, which should be used as printed IN THE CURRENT BOOK.

    As has been written many times, the interval between trigger and tragedy is far too short to reconsider your load.
    I may be a bit crazy - but I didn't drive myself.
  • 375H&H375H&H Member Posts: 1,544 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Very well said Mr Raab !!!

    It is also very true that one can indeed , learn something new each and every day .
    I never thought about the variations over time .
  • bpostbpost Member Posts: 32,669 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Rocky Raab
    Here's what you have to ask yourself about variations in book data over time:

    Did the components change a little bit from when the old data was printed?

    Did the company start using more accurate pressure equipment since their old data?

    Did the old data happen to be based on a hotter or cooler lot of powder than the new data?

    Now ask yourself this: If you load to a heavy charge because (unknown to you) the lab happened to have a cool lot of powder - but YOUR lot is at the hot end of the range - what might that do to pressures? That might reveal itself in plenty of time with powders that you can back off and work up. That is NOT so with W296, which should be used as printed IN THE CURRENT BOOK.

    As has been written many times, the interval between trigger and tragedy is far too short to reconsider your load.



    On the other hand,
    How can you tell the powder used by you is not cooler than the lot used by the tester, or OLDER where loads were a LOT stiffer? For all intents and purposes the 25 grain load is safe and listed, hot? yes, safe? yes. Safety is paramount in reloading but unless the empties are sticking the loads are safe in my book.

    BR shooters are routinely exceeding book loads by considerable margins, this is not a practice I suggest but shying away from stout loads is not necessary either. Only a chronograph can tell if those loads are too fast for the cartridge, indicating excessive pressure. The loads may kick like a mule, roar like a lion and have a muzzle blast the size of Texas, yet still be safe.

    My .02
  • rsnyder55rsnyder55 Member Posts: 2,526 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    When the primers showed some flattening, that was what first generated my concerns.

    After exhausting myself banging that silly hammer trying to remove the bullets, I'm ordering a bullet pulling die and collet to finish them off.

    I'll try reloading with 23.5 grs.

    Thanks everyone for the insight and information
  • Mark TMark T Member Posts: 140 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I use 24gr of 296 for my 44, some books list 23.5 max up to 24.9gr. Depends on which book and vintage. With 24 gr and a 240gr HP/XTP I get 1388fps thru the chrony in my Super Redhawk. No primer flattening or case sticking. It is super accurate, but it is a hot load for sure. I wouldn't shoot somebodys "hot" load, that is listed over the max.
  • Rocky RaabRocky Raab Member Posts: 14,438 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Well, bpost, I guess you'd know for certain when you look down and the top half of your revolver is missing. With a little luck, you won't find any of it in the brain of the guy at the next bench.

    There are no "mulligans" on shots like that, you know. Read the last line of my post above again. Better yet, post it above your bench.
    I may be a bit crazy - but I didn't drive myself.
Sign In or Register to comment.