one of us
| montdoug, good question! I would like to know too. |
| Posts: 4068 | Location: Bakerton, WV | Registered: 01 September 2003 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| Here you go, striaght from the source: Hodgdon Data for 44 Mag That should get you the published velocity data. As to accuracy, I have tried it in the 41, 44, 45, and 480. The results are OK with regard to accuracy, but I seem to always get better groups with other powders. I always seem to get the best results with H110, 296, or 2400. YMMV |
| Posts: 54 | Location: Saltsburg, PA | Registered: 07 March 2002 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| Stan, do you use the same charge with 296 and H110? I found a very slight difference in them and haven't figured out if I need a half gr. more or less with H110 to match 296. I ran out of H110 long ago so I can't test it. It's the same powder but I still think the batches sent to Hodgden are in a different burn rate range then what is sent to WW. |
| Posts: 4068 | Location: Bakerton, WV | Registered: 01 September 2003 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| Quote:
Stan, do you use the same charge with 296 and H110? I found a very slight difference in them and haven't figured out if I need a half gr. more or less with H110 to match 296. I ran out of H110 long ago so I can't test it. It's the same powder but I still think the batches sent to Hodgden are in a different burn rate range then what is sent to WW.
They are bound to be different lots. It is pretty much the lot-to-lot difference you'd expect to see in cannister grade powders. Still I prefer H110 and I don't have any logical reason for it. |
| Posts: 2324 | Location: Staunton, VA | Registered: 05 September 2002 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| I have to agree with Hobie. I have found 296 and H110 to be almost identical. I don't see any more difference between the two powders than I see between lots of the same powder. That said, I also seem to come back to H110 more than 296 for no particular reason. I use these powders for top end loads only, using the manufacturer's published data.
Lately, I have been leaning toward more moderate loads and have consequently been using more 2400 and Blue Dot. I get some amazing accuracy with these two powders in the 41, 44, and 45. You certainly don't get the velocity, but the speeds that I am getting are not too far off of 296 and H110. I also tend to use heavier cast bullets these days, and find that if I can get these bullets to speeds of 1050 to 1200 I have all the gun I need for any hunting I want to do. Plus, the loads are more pleasant to shoot. Just some food for thought when you are experimenting with new loads.
Have fun! |
| Posts: 54 | Location: Saltsburg, PA | Registered: 07 March 2002 |
IP
|
|
Moderator
| I haven't loaded Lil-gun in the 444, but have used it in the 480. Using it in the 480, I find that I get the same velocities and accuracy with 400 gr loads with both Lil-gun and H-110.
My prediction would be that you should be able to get the same performance with Lil-gun as W-296 using ~300 gr bullets. Lil-gun should be better with the lighter bullets, and H-110 better with heavier bullets.
Lil-gun is a faster powder then H-110. |
| |
one of us
| I tried it in my .44 mag and it worked well enough. It did not seem to offer any advantages over H110/W296/WC820 in the larger bores to get me to switch. I love it in my hornet and is my #1 powder there and it did well in .357 mag though. I need to do some more with the .357 to match it against my favorite load ( 158gr over 16.0 H110 ) but it seemed more promising that with larger bores. If you're getting 8 pounds, that ought to be enough to feed several experiments. I say go for it. |
| Posts: 338 | Location: Johnsburg, Illinois | Registered: 15 December 2002 |
IP
|
|