Has anyone had any luck with this powder? I have read that you can use BL-C(2) data . Is there a website that lists loads developed with milsurp powders? Thanks!!

I've used it with very good results with bullets from 50 - 77gr. I basically use BL-C(2) data but be aware that there can be noticable variance from lot to lot. I know we all hear to rework data when changing lots of powder but it looks like you really need to keep this in mind with this powder. (unless you like picking blown primers out of your action)

I get Sub MOA results using this powder in my 20" AR Frankengun with a 1-8" twist. I also had splendid results in a 10" .30-30 Contender using Sierra 130gr single shot bullets.

Rick

Rick

[ 04-04-2003, 07:34: Message edited by: Rick R ]

I've had extremely good results using 22-24.5 Gr. and 69, 75, 80 Gr. bullets. Meters very well. I've been using Rem 7-1/2 BR Primers.

WC844 gives the same results, different loads.

Steve
My Reloading Site

WC 846 is the same spec powder as BL-C2 and WW 748.

That's not to say that all of them behave the same -- the commercial distributors require each lot of their powders to come much closer to a particular standard than do the manufacturers of military ball (one reason branded commercial powder is justifiably more expensive than generic surplus). Because the ammo manufacturers adjust the load for each lot of powder anyway, they can adapt to greater powder variations -- up to a point. I suspect that much of the surplus powder on the market has burning characteristics outside the range specified by the ammo manufacturer, therefore the lot is rejected and ends up on the surplus shelves. That, among other reasons, is why you are likely to find a greater lot-to-lot variation with WC 846 than with its commercial cousins.

Some loaders have commented that their lots of WC 846 were very fast and closer to H-335 (spec clone of WC 844) than to BL-C2. Actually, the absolute burning rate of the two powders is extremely close, but 844 is formulated specifically for smaller cases (.223), so as the case gets bigger, 844 becomes effectively faster burning. WC 846 is preferable to WC 844 in .308, but both work well in .223 and similar cases. There's also the possibility of WC 844 being mislabeled and sold as WC 846. (Surplus dealers will tell you that there are two "lots" of WC 852, one of which is identical to H-380 and one of which burns more like 4831. Horsehockey. The slower lot is likely mislabeled and, I suspect, is the spec equivalent of the discontinued H-450.)

I've had excellent luck with surplus powders; just be cautious to clearly determine the actual burning characteristics before proceeding.