H-110 versus 2400

[fiver]

just gonna start this out with I know/bet most of us here probably prefer 2400 over H-110 for our own reasons.

but are those reasons unfounded in many situations?
does H-110 have advantages over 2400 with cast bullets in some applications.
let's say with 300gr bullets in the 44 magnum.
does 110 have an advantage of a longer easier push in that situation, or does the bullet just suit the powder by decreasing the volume of the case down enough that things balance out better than if you'd used 2400 with it's higher attending pressure?

 

[Ian]

My relatively uneducated opinion based only on the 44 Magnum and an episode of driving cases out of my FIL's Model 29 with a brass punch and later finding a bulge in the barrel directly in front of the frame using a book starting load under 240 jax bullets:

IF your firearm can handle the attendant pressure necessary to actually burn the H110, it may be better or even best in a very few situations. That said, I have most of an 8-lb steel can of perfectly good WW 296 that is doing nothing useful for me whatsoever. Maybe I'll burn it up in my 300 BLKs with supers....or maybe I'll use 410/28 or 2400 or True Blue or Longshot or HS-6 because they don't do stupid things at slightly reduced load densities or pressures.

H110 scares me a lot worse than Titegroup, but I'd like to get better educated about it so will be staying tuned to this.

 

[Rick]

Couldn't possibly remember how many 8 pounders of H-110 I've burned up. Never any kind of issue with it in several calibers. Have maybe burned up a half pound of 2400. H-110 is great stuff . . . IF USED CORRECTLY . . . Do not try to reduce it, it loves heavy for caliber bullets, no probably not the best choice for your belly gun. Long range accuracy and downrange performance H-110 would be mighty tough to best.

 

[RicinYakima]

I will stick my toe in this puddle, but I will pull it out right quick if need be.

I have used about one pound of WW296 and still have 1/4 pound of H110. It is the best powder for .30 caliber M1 carbine and heavy bullet 357 loads. Now, I don't care about "burn clean" as all I care about is accuracy at the level of velocity I am looking to achieve. It doesn't come on to its own until the mid 30's thousands in pressure.

Shoot about two pounds of A2400 a year from 32 H&R Magnum to 50/70. For me it starts giving good accuracy at about 20,000 psi (+P 38 special loads) up to 28,000 psi (top end 25/20 loads). Over about 32,000 psi loads it gets flaky requiring special attention to crimp and bullet pull. While some folks say it is very position sensitive over the chronograph, holes in the target are usually close together.

Personally, I don't see much overlap between the two.

 

[Tomme boy]

@Ian if 110 scares you don't try lil gun. It spikes really fast in the 350 legend. The legend is a very efficient cartridge. Speeds are fairly flat over the powder pressure curve. Then it will blow a primer with a 0.2gr increase. 110 seems to let you know before it gets away from you. 2400 in the legend hits peak pressure way too fast and does not get you the speed.

I am getting a 1.5" groups that are repeatable. I am going to stick with 110 for this anyway. If it was being shot out of a bolt gun it would be 2400. It just does not have enough gas to run my AR.

 

[Winelover]

Have burned up many 8 pound jugs of 2400, in 357 Magnums, 44 Magnums and 45 LC. Once upon a time, I purchased a pound of 296 and one of H-110..............never emptied them. The 296 was dumped in the garden, before I left Michigan. The H-110, is still half full. I did, however, finally found a use for it. My Rossi 357 carbine likes it, just a tad better, than 2400 with 180 grain RNFP bullets. When it's emptied, I won't be replacing it. Alliant 2400 is just too versatile.

 

[Brad]

I use both. Each has it’s use for me.
2400 is great with cast loads in rifles. Stuff in the 13-1700 FPS range for most rifles and 2400 is my go to powder. I use it a little in mag handgun cartridges but much.
H110 is great for top end loads in the handgun cartridges. I use it a fair bit in the 44 mag and it does very well.
I see 2400 as a versatile powder for 90% of my loading. The H110 is the specialized tool for those times when top end loads are desired. It excels in that realm.

 

[dale2242]

Most all of us are aware , I hope, that H110/296 likes to be burned hot and heavy.
It is my very favorite powder for heavy /magnum loads in revolvers.
I use it with plain base bullets and a very few GCed bullets in a revolver.
I would not even venture a guess how much 296 we used in a DW 44 magnum when my wife and I were shooting IHMSA silhouettes.
It does not like to be down loaded and has no practical application in larger cases with cast bullets.
2400 is also very good for heavy magnum type loads in a revolver.
The beauty of 2400 in can be a great powder for reduced loads in medium to large rifle cases
I had a very accurate load for my 300 Weatherby rifle using 2400 and 311291 with a dacron filler.
2400 will do most everything 296/H110 will do in small cases, read 30 Carbine , 300BLK etc here plus more.
I use them both, H110/296 for heavy revolver loads and 2400 for cast rifle loads.
If I could only have one of them it would have to be 2400.
I has been rumored that 2400 will flame cut top straps in revolvers when shooting a lot of heavy loads.
I saw one Ruger SBH in 44 mag that had over 10K heavy cast loads through with 2400 that had some flame cutting in the top strap.
That does not seem excessive for that many hot loads, to me.

 

[RBHarter]

H110
It's fine in 357 but I don't have any more 140 or 158 XTPs and I think the Sierra 170 HC is discontinued now . In a 18" JM 1894C it was only a little behind the MV of 30-30 170 gr start numbers . May as well be a lifetime ago . One clear memory is don't shoot that load , the 170 HC in your SS 6" Sec 6 . Trust me , not a fun load , also I think the book says not for use in handguns or something .

 

[358156 hp]

I started out with 2400 and used it for many years before H110 pushed it off the bench. The primary reason was the consistency available in powder charge weights delivered by H110 translated into more consistent chronograph velocities and lower standard deviations. I had translated these figures to mean greater accuracy at longer ranges, but I now realize that eve if this position makes sens, which it does, this does not necessarily translate into greater, more consistent accuracy all the time.

Anyway, my needs at the time were for maximum possible consistency coupled with maximum possible power factor. These were my handgun silhouette, bowling pin matches, and deer hunting days. I was convinced that consistency equaled accuracy. Once again, not always. Internet ignorance was especially strong in those days and I migrated to military surplus powder WC820, and did full load workups rather than accepting the powder manufacturers load data and accuracy improved, primarily because I was doing load workups and my experience and knowledge had advanced as I progressed. My velocities also increased with WC820, but thats because I was almost certainly loading into the proof load range by using H110 data as a starting point with a powder that wasn't H110. WC820 was the non-cannister powder that ended up evolving into AA #9.

I feel that the ball powders potentially give cast bullets a softer start into the revolver throats and through the forcing cone, but pressures builds faster & harder from that point, sort of a progressive burn so to speak. It worked well for me at the time, but I still question my conclusions about burning rates and ball powder coating, especially the value to the burn rate deterrents role in the situation. It's something I can't quantify because I don't have the equipment to test each powder myself. I am aware that there can be advantages to using slower burning powders with cast bullets to allow the bullet to enter the barrel before full chamber pressure is reached, and I believe that is the situation that was the major factor to my conclusions in those days.

I really can't wait to see what Rick has to add to this thread.

 

[popper]

My understanding is WC820 evolved into H110 (W296 actually), but had large variations in burn rate depending on lot. A2400 works good/acceptable for low % loads, seeing low % loads for really heavy cast with H110 but I don't use it there. My guess the really fine grain H110 with light loads has a faster/different burn rate due to more exposed surface than when packed at high loads. As powder has pretty much same energy content per grain, burn depends on surface area and coating. Per unit volume, H110 has much more surface area.
From Hodgdon max load:
30 carbine 110gr bullet 15gr H110 case 20gr H2O
357mag 110gr bullet 23gr H110 case 27gr H2O 140gr bullet 19gr H110 4/30gr/gr.
300BO 110 gr bullet 19gr H110 24gr H2O; 150gr bullet 17gr H110 2/40gr/gr.
delta 7gr H2O and 8gr H110. Almost gr/gr.

 

[Creeker]

Guess I've used more 2400 than H-110. My first pound of H-110 was in a paper can if memory serves. I used it in both 357 & 44 mag, not to mention some 44 special loads I'll not go into here. The 357 worked great with H-110, 15 grains & the 170 Keith. That is a full load & a good one.

2400 has been my go to powder for heavier loads in both calibers. I use it in 45 Colt & 44 Special but in lighter loads which I'll not discuss here. Early on I used 21 grain of 2400 & the Lyman 429421 with a CCI 350 primer. This was the most accurate load for my Ruger SBH.

Once I made the switch to S&W & a 4" M-29 I cut the load to 20 grains & a standard large pistol primer. I shot that load exclusively for 8 years. It was the best I found giving 1201 FPS from that firearm. After reading Ross Seyfried & him insisting 23 grain of H-110 & the 250 cast was the load, I tried it. It didn't work for me.

Those were the days of Dry Creek Bullet Works & the writers called fairly often. On this occasion it was Brian Pearce. As the conversation went on I asked him about Ross' load. [And be it known he had nothing derogatory to say about Mr. Seyfried or anyone else, just want that out there.] His opinion agreed with mine that in the 44 magnum with standard weight bullets you couldn't beat 2400 especially for accuracy. Now the 300 grain stuff may be a different story but I've found no use for anything heavier than 250 in my neck of the woods.

What's been achieved in powder since that time I've not followed having settled on my 44 load long ago.

 

[CZ93X62]

WW-296/H-110 is a niche powder with a very specific tasking for me--jacketed bullets run at full potential velocity from Magnum revolvers. At this it EXCELS, and no other powder can match its performance in this niche IME. Magnum priming is a must, and near-100% loading density is required.

Alliant 2400 is FAR MORE flexible and forgiving. I use about 12# of 2400 for each 1# of 296/110 I burn up.

There is one other trait of 296/110 that is near and dear to my heart--from 4" revolvers, it lights up adjacent canyon walls and hillsides at dusk with muzzle flash like no other. Yes, I am easily entertained. Loud noises and bright flashes accomplish this goal readily.

 

[358156 hp]

LOL. Try it with a Magnaported revolver in semi-darkness. There are a number of Youtube videos about this as well.

 

[Will]

I have burned through a lot of H110 W296 and 2400. Both have their place as far as I’m concerned.

2400 is excellent for mild magnums and does very well in 357 magnum. Although anymore I’m leaning more towards AA#9 for a lot of those roles but that’s another discussion.

I have pulled the trigger on a lot of hot 44 magnums in a revolver. I have never been able to get 2400 to equal the accuracy I get with H110 when shooting bullets 270gr and higher.
I also found very similar results with Alliant Power Pro 300MP. Seems both powders perform well when loaded with a heavy bullet that creates the proper pressure to make it burn efficiently.

H110 and 300MP both show very inconsistent chronograph numbers until you start pushing a heavy bullet and 100% P.O.D. density. I’ve found this shooting both 357 maximum and 44 magnum.

A little compression also helps make the powder burn consistently. I shoot 21.5gr of H110 behind the lee 310gr bullet in my 44. 19- 20.5gr shot awful but I was not at 100% load density. Once I got the powder in the pressure range it wanted to burn it worked excellent. AA1680 performs very similar also.

Anyone using the data I posted do some cautiously. I worked these loads up using a chronograph and doing a lot of shooting. I’m also firing these in a super blackhawk hunter which allows me to crimp in the bottom crimp groove and load to longer OAL. When H110 and WW296 hot their pressure ceiling they tend to do it quick.

 

[StrawHat]

I first started with 2400 in the 70s. 22 grains initially and then 21 grains under a 240 KSWC in a S&W Model 29-2, spark with a LP primer. My go to load for years until I switched to a blackpowder 45 long Colt for hunting because it gave me better results.

I have a 22 Hornet so I will grab 1# to load until I quit shooting.

Kevin

 

[Cherokee]

Can't add much to this except I long ago went with 2400 and essentially stayed there for Mag loads. The W296 I tried was in 30 Carbine and hot 32-20. 2400 did better in both so 2# of W296 still sets on the shelf. Interestingly, my lot of WC820 does fine in 30 Carbine JSP loads and 308 Win 154 gr cast @ 16.0 gr charge.

 

[Matt]

At one point I believed 2400 was the only magnum handgun powder. Starting in the 1970s when I got my first S&W M28 it’s was 14.5 gr of 2400 with 358429 bullets cast from wheel weights ( or anything else that looked like lead) Once I got my drivers license I began driving to Lolo Sporting Goods in Lewiston ID where you could buy Speer bullet 2nds by the pound, cheap. I settled on the old 3/4 jacket 146 and 160 grain Speer bullets for .357 and shot very few .38 Specials in those days. The thing that has always bothered me was the yellowish particles that were all over inside the revolver when using 2400. You learned to keep your cylinder clean and not let oil or solvent accumulate or the mix would tie up your ejector rod. I continued using 2400 with the same issues when I got my first .44 and .41 Magnums. The yellow particle issue wasn’t a problem with single actions. One day when shooting metallic silhouette I complained to the guy next to me about the yellow particles. Since shooters are generous he gave me a partial can of W296. I had the Winchester loading pamphlet of the era and followed the warnings. If I remember correctly the loads did not feature start and maximum it was just one load. One reduced
try in .44 Magnum gave a weird “bloop” sound and smoke came out of the cylinder. The bullet was about an inch into the bore. The case was blackened at I was spooked! Since then I follow published loading data only for 296/110. I find it accurate and dependable in .32 H&R, .357, .41, .44,
.45 Colt (Ruger loads) and .480. It’s kinda magical in .300 Blackout with all bullet weights too. There’s now enough published data to safely have a good range of mild to wild loads. I reserve my 2400 for Hornet and a few heavy cast loads in .30/06. It’s noticeably more expensive and harder to find around here than 296/110. I will agree it’s more flexible, doesn’t need ( or seem to like magnum primers), isn’t as sensitive about crimps, case mouth tension, or tired brass, and has never given me the willies like 296/110. Wow maybe I should reconsider my position?

 

[Sandspider500]

I replaced 2400 with 800x and hs6 a while ago, as I can achieve the same velocities with 250-260gr bullets at approximately the same pressure with less powder in 45 colt. When I chronographed loads going from 4 5/8 inch black hawk to a 20" Rossi I was a little shocked that 2400 only gained around 300fps, the same as the other powders I just mentioned. I use hs6 and 800x for everything up to 300gr for medium loads, and they're quite accurate out to 100yds. Yes yes 800x meters like busted tortilla chips, but I've been able to just about master a technique with Lee dippers where I'm only varying by about .2gr.

296 or 300mp get the nod when I feel like bruising my shoulder or singeing my eyebrows. I've also seen no benefit in magnum primers with either as the only thing that stopped wide velocity swings was bumping the charge up a little.

 

[Sandspider500]

Also....I got 8 pounds of 800x at sportsman's Warehouse last year for $99, so I've learned to like it.