I loaded some WC 820 pulldown powder in a couple different recipes a few weeks back, and finally got to go to the range with it. Results are somewhat puzzling, to say the least.

I noted Hodgdon's recommendation of 13.5 grains of H110 as tops behind a 180-grain bullet in a .357 and used 13 grains. The group was very accurate out of the 2-1/2" Model 19. It shot to 1" offhand at 50'. Extraction was easy, and recoil very tolerable.

The problem came with a load from John Linebaugh's pages. He noted 23.5 grains of H110 behind the 310-320-grain bullet in a 45 Colt. Well, that, gentlemen, is way too hot. I shot five 320s in front of 23 grains of WC820 in my Redhawk, and the cases stuck.

Here is load data from Linebaugh's article on the Smith 25-5:


13gr
HS-6
Keith
260 cast
925
General duty load

23gr
H-110
Keith
260 cast
1,000


24gr
H-110
Keith
260 cast
1,080
Consistent

25gr
H-110
Keith
260 cast
1,130
Recommended Maximum

26gr
H-110
Keith
260 cast
1,200+
ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM

18gr
2400
Keith
260 cast
950


20gr
2400
Keith
260 cast
1,070
Recommended Maximum

22gr
2400
Keith
260 cast
1,130
ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM

23.5gr
H-110
Keith
310
1,100
ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM

23.5gr
H-110
LBT/LFN
320
1,120
ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM

24gr
H-110
XTP
300
1,100
ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM, crimped in bottom cannelure. Seated long.


Neither I, handloads.com nor the author of this article assume any responsiblity for any use of the data listed here. It is the responsiblity of every handloader to verify the data they are using is safe in their individual handguns.

I am not posting a disparaging remark about Mr. Linebaugh's data, or about him. I hold the gummaker in very high esteem. I just wanted you folks to know that in my estimation, 23 grains of WC 820 is way too hot for even the Redhawk, and even though Jeff Bartlett may say to use H110 load data, be careful. (My lot of 820 is marked for H110 data, guys, not AA #9.)

The table above was recommended for the Smith 25-5. My Mountain Gun won't ever see anything even close to that. Think I will pull the 45 remaining rounds and go back to about 19 grains, working back up.

Your thoughts/experiences?

quote:

Originally posted by Doubless:
Your thoughts/experiences?

Great info! Well done! those are my thoughts. roger

I SEE ONE MAJOR PROBLEM RIGHT OFF . . .

NOWHERE in Linebaugh's data do I see WC-820 mentioned.

MOST current lots of WC-820 have a "burn rate" that is more on the order of AA#9 and not . . . NOT H110.

Use AA#9 data with your batch of WC-820 and see how that performs.

The sticky extraction isse may well be there if you had used the full 13.5 in the 357 case.
One-half of a grain gets to be much more important as one moves down in case volume like the 357 Mag.

Just an opinion of course.

quote:

MOST current lots of WC-820 have a "burn rate" that is more on the order of AA#9 and not . . . NOT H110.

(My lot of 820 is marked for H110 data, guys, not AA #9.)

I also found that using WC-820 in the Casull .454 that using H-110 data was TOO HOT, I tried the mid range of recommended H-110 and found sticky cases and difficult extraction. I then changed to AA #9 data for my loads and found that they were acceptable. I marked my loading book to use AA#9 data for the .454.
I used H110 data for the 357 using the starting loads listed and found the pressures seemed to be acceptable. Did'nt check for accuracy.
Along the lines of surplus powders, I found pr-700 to be execelent in the 38 special and SM-231 to be fine for the 45 colt although I haven't been able to get any good accuracy with SM-231 in the 38 special.
Any loading of surplus powder shoulden't be for the weak of heart, or inexperienced reloader as loading data may not be intirely accurate

Mike, I agree wholeheartedly about using surplus powder not being for the "faint of heart". It just surprised me that there would be that much variation, if that is what we can call it, between what the 357 load did and what the Colt load did.

I have only handloaded for a bit over 20 years, and will tell you right quick I have a whole lot left to learn. But this is the first time I have ever had cases that sticky, and it bothered me. The Redhawk is a fine firearm. It doesn't appear to have suffered any damage, but one never really knows. This was more an attempt to let folks know than anything else.

I have shot a fair amount of AA #9, with splendid results. If this stuff acts at all like #9 I will be very pleased. It just appears right now that every cartridge I try this stuff in will be a "test case", and we are warned not to reduce H110 loads by more than 3%. That is not much room for backing down...

I agree!
I consider myself an ammature when it comes to reloading, although I've been at it for over 45 years. I've only had stickey cases previously when I was pushing for max velocity. At those times I knew what was happening, because I was over max listed loads. with WC820 this was a suprise, but like you say the SRH is a strong gun and I could find no indication of any damage to the gun.

I can tell you that WC-820 can be used for a nice .410 load if anyone is interested.

I'm interested!
What powder charge do you use? what weight of shot etc.?

http://www.10xshooters.com/reloading/WC820_Chrono_Data.pdf

I know a lot of the .410 shooters on Shotgunworld are loving this stuff.