I am finally having to buy a new keg of H110 and I was checking my load records and found a discrepancy - I hate it when that happens!

My newer manuals (Hodgdon and Speer) list maximum loads at 18.0 grains of H110 with a 140 grain bullet in a 357 Magnum.
My loading data shows loads of 19.3 with the same powder, bullet and gun.
I checked my old books (Speer and Sierra) and they list maximums of 19.5 grains of H110 with a 140 grain bullet in the 357 Magnum.

I like the way the load shoots that I have been using but I am wondering if the powder has changed or if Speer decided that the load was just too hot for some guns. (the only change in the data was that in the old books they used a Ruger and the new data used a S&W 19 as test weapons)
I am thinking that I will have to back the load down below the 18 grains and work my way up toward the data that I have.

Any suggestions for short-cuts?

Compare current Hodgdon data vs data from the mid 1980's... everything is backed off... some things a huge amount. Compare say 7STW data now and then... tremendous difference. I once emailed them asking and they didnt really give me a good answer. I think its legal speak personally and they are reducing loads well below max limits to give them a larger margin of saftey.



-DallanC

DallanC wrote:

Compare current Hodgdon data vs data from the mid 1980's... everything is backed off... some things a huge amount. Compare say 7STW data now and then... tremendous difference. I once emailed them asking and they didnt really give me a good answer. I think its legal speak personally and they are reducing loads well below max limits to give them a larger margin of saftey. -DallanC

Gidday Dallan. Don't know who was producing Hogdons powder in the 80's, but it is my understanding that ADI Limited (an Australian Company)supplies powder to them now. This may well account for the differences in load data.

The ADI powder equivalent listed for H4227/H110 is AR2205, which I have used for 357 magnum for a few years. They list 18.0 grains as the maximum load for 140 grain bullets. This leads me to believe that Hogdons are now listing the ADI AR2205 data for their powder H4227/H110.

I doesn't surprise me that Hogdon was a little reticent in disclosing their reasons for the difference in data as this sort of information is usually convered a a caveat of "Commercial in Confidence" and as such would not be released by the company.

Cheers, Vince

My Hodgdon manuals #22 printed in 1974 and #25 printed in 1988 - both list 17 grains as maximum loads for a 140 grain 357mag using H110. No change in that time span. I don't have a newer Hodgdon manual so I can't compare it to anything from them - their website doesn't list a 140 grain bullet it jumps from 125 @ 22gr to 146 at 17.2gr.
Speer #11 list 19.5 in a Security-Six; Speer #12 lists 18 in a S&W model 19; Speer #13 lists 17.2 in a S&W model 19
My Sierra manual from 1985 and my Lyman #47 manual both list 19.5 grains as maximum (both use universal receivers and Lyman uses a vented receiver)

So, the newest manuals are the Speer #13 (1998) and the Lyman (1995) and the difference between them is 17.2 - 19.5 or 2.3 grains differnce.
My experience seems to support the Lyman data which agrees with the oldest Speer manual and the old Sierra manual.
You can see why I am confused - the powder supplier is 2.5 grains lower than the maximum listed load in three of my other manuals and the Speer manual disagrees with itself by dropping the maximum in each successively newer manual. I am assured that the powder has not changed - I know that the SAAMI specs have not changed - The bullets are the same and my gun has not changed (that I can measure).
Can I trust that if I don't have sticky cases when fired, the primers look normal and the cases last more than ten loadings that I am not firing a load that is over the SAAMI standard pressure? Those symptoms may not appear until pressures are tens of thousands of PSI over the listed maximum. They cannot be trusted to indicate over-pressure loads. When the manuals disagree what is safe? wise? For a guy that has always thought that I was loading safely below the maximum I am now wondering.

PaulS wrote:

My Hodgdon manuals #22 printed in 1974 and #25 printed in 1988 - both list 17 grains as maximum loads for a 140 grain 357mag using H110. No change in that time span. I don't have a newer Hodgdon manual so I can't compare it to anything from them - their website doesn't list a 140 grain bullet it jumps from 125 @ 22gr to 146 at 17.2gr. Speer #11 list 19.5 in a Security-Six; Speer #12 lists 18 in a S&W model 19; Speer #13 lists 17.2 in a S&W model 19 My Sierra manual from 1985 and my Lyman #47 manual both list 19.5 grains as maximum (both use universal receivers and Lyman uses a vented receiver) So, the newest manuals are the Speer #13 (1998) and the Lyman (1995) and the difference between them is 17.2 - 19.5 or 2.3 grains differnce. My experience seems to support the Lyman data which agrees with the oldest Speer manual and the old Sierra manual. You can see why I am confused - the powder supplier is 2.5 grains lower than the maximum listed load in three of my other manuals and the Speer manual disagrees with itself by dropping the maximum in each successively newer manual. I am assured that the powder has not changed - I know that the SAAMI specs have not changed - The bullets are the same and my gun has not changed (that I can measure). Can I trust that if I don't have sticky cases when fired, the primers look normal and the cases last more than ten loadings that I am not firing a load that is over the SAAMI standard pressure? Those symptoms may not appear until pressures are tens of thousands of PSI over the listed maximum. They cannot be trusted to indicate over-pressure loads. When the manuals disagree what is safe? wise? For a guy that has always thought that I was loading safely below the maximum I am now wondering.

Gidday Paul. Firstly mate, I would be very wary about what I used in a Model 19 S & W. The K Frame was not designed to live on a diet of Magnum loads. Why do I know this you ask.....I split the forcing cone on one with Magnum loads. Didn't realise it until it locked the cylinder shut!! Silly about it was the cases showed minimal signs of pressure. The primers were flattened but not cratered and the cases pretty well fell out of the cylinder.

Trust me when I say look at the ADI loading data. I have it on very good authority that they are supplying powder to Hogdon so the loading data for their powder, AR2205, is the same as for H4227/H110 because it is the same powder.

Cheers, Vince

Vince,

I shoot a Ruger Security-Six - the manual lists the model 19 as its test weapon.
secondly, AR2205 can't be the same powder as both H4227 and H110.
H4227 is an extruded single base powder that is made in cylindrical kernals and H110 is a spherical, double base, powder that resembles small, soft, balls of powder.
The data for these two powders is way different and cannot be interchanged in any cartridge or loading that I am aware of - and I checked all of my manuals.
Since I am completely unfamiliar with AR2205 but in checking around I found this:

The following modern smokeless powders are manufactured for Hodgdon Powder Company by St. Marks Powders.

HP-38® HS-6
H110® H335®
H414® H870®
HS-7® BL-C(2)®
H380 ® H108®
H116® TITEWAD®
H872® TITEGROUP®
LIL' GUN® LONG SHOT®
H450 US869

and:

The following smokeless powders are manufactured for Hodgdon Powder Company by ADI, Ltd.:
H4227® H50BMG ®
H4895® H4831®
H4198 ® H4831SC ®
VARGET® H1000®
H4350® RETUMBO®

These are from the Hodgdon web site and so AR2205 is not H110 because it is made by St. Marks Powder Co. and not ADI

When in doubt go back to your starting load and work up again with a new lot of powder. All powder companies state to start over in their reloading manuals and guides. It might be a pain to start over but when guns come apart you don't have time to duck the many parts flying toward you.

Many of us exceed the SAAMI starting loads by observing case and primer signs as we work up the loads. Maximum in my rifle may be more or less than SAAMI. The SAAMI standards are for factory ammo and are listed as maximum in the manuals by agreement between powder companies and SAAMI. These limits are a guide and not a hard and fast maximum for your gun. The powder companies refuse liability when you exceed SAAMI loads. All of the loads in the manuals are for one specific firearm or a pressure gun/barrel. That is the reason that we rarely duplicate a velocity for a given load in a manual and why two different manuals have different numbers for the same powder and bullet weight combination.

Vince,
I think you are looking at the ADI burn rate chart and if so they are saying that the 3 powders are 'near' the same burn rate 'class' but they are not the exact same burn rate. You are right that ADI does supply powders to Hodgdon, ie Varget & Benchmark, and that information is in the ADI reloading guide and on their website.

All of the burn rate charts record one lot of powder tested and not a regular update for each new lot. That is why we should always start at the recomended starting load for any lot of powder.

You can even have problems when you work up a load to a published max. Hodgdon had a load for Hodgdon Clays that caused a 'ka-boom' in my 40 S&W pistol. The load I worked up to was well below the published max and no pressure signs until I squeezed off on that loading. The next published Hodgdon manual listed a much reduced load for the round and powder combo because of the many complaints of 'ka-booms'. So remember that the manuals and burn rate charts are guides and not bibles. They sometimes have some bum info from my experience.

popgun wrote:

When in doubt go back to your starting load and work up again with a new lot of powder. All powder companies state to start over in their reloading manuals and guides. It might be a pain to start over but when guns come apart you don't have time to duck the many parts flying toward you. All of the burn rate charts record one lot of powder tested and not a regular update for each new lot. That is why we should always start at the recomended starting load for any lot of powder. So remember that the manuals and burn rate charts are guides and not bibles. They sometimes have some bum info from my experience.

Agree with you popgun as far as starting again is concerned. It is probably the most sensible thing to do because of the ambiguity in the data and confusion.

As for the powders that ADI manufacture for Hogdon, I will look into that one a little more.

Cheers, Vince

OK all,

I got an email (the fourth one) from Sierra. I won't give out the person's name because I think some rules might have been broken to get me the information.
The new books have data listed as maximum that is generating pressures (as listed by the testers) at 17500 CUP below the SAAMI standard maximum. a jump of .8 grains moves the pressure up 4000 CUP (as tested in their lab) my load was a tad more than that much more so even if it doubles the pressure jump adding 8000 CUP to the existing pressure (12000 over the listed load) I am still 4500 to 5500 CUP below the SAAMI maximum pressures for the 357 Mag.
Shooting this load from my Ruger at 5000 to 9000 CUP below the maximum I should be safe with the load that I have been using that has shown no signs of excessive pressure in the last 20 years.
I will reduce the charge 3% from where I was reloading and work it back up to where I get my accuracy or hit the maximum listed of 19.5 in my Lyman #47, Speer #11 and Sierra manuals. It is nice to know that my load is and has been below maximum all these years.
It was nice to have the help that I got from the Sierra people when they knew I am using Speer bullets - Good people - Good products - just not the product I use in this loading.

Sierra techs have always been helpful to me. Sometime it takes a dialog with them to get what you are looking for. This dialog gives them a look at your reloading experience level and your knowledge of pressure signs, use of cronograph, etc.
The whole group of guys there are great!