I've used 296 in my 32/40's with excellent success. 12.5 gr was a good load and I have taken it to 13.0.

Rick McHale, one of the best shooters in Modesto uses it and wins his share of matches there.

In chrono tests, i got single digit ES using F150 primers. 

Frank

The small metering chamber in a Ohaus measure works very well for small ball powders like WW296, WC820, AA#9 or H110. All almost the same powder.

As we happen to have a current thread on Win 296 in .32-40 and a current thread on primers, I'd like to share some recent experience with both.

First, 296.  Rick MacHale has successfully used 296 as a .32-40 load for quite some time.  Rick shoots a CPA rifle with an 11.5 twist RKS gain twist barrel and uses a 235 grain Paul Jones bullet.

I have a vintage .32-40 FBW rifle with a 16 twist barrel.  My bullet is a 204 grain Darr.

I have not been able to make 296 work - at all!  Powder charge and primers make no difference.  It doesn't work.  I speculate that Rick's success with 296 is due to the 235 grain bullet allowing the 296 powder to develop pressures that are not possible with a 204 grain bullet.

So, to address the question of whether or not 296 is good for use in .32-40, the answer is to a great degree dependent upon the configuration of the rifle.

However, the selfsame vintage FBW rifle is very happy when loaded with 15.2 grains of 4100.  And, it is quite tolerant of variations in primers.

This morning, I shot a series of five-shot groups at 200 yards using different primers: Federal 210, Winchester WLR, CCI 200, Federal 155 GMM magnum, and Remington 2 1/2.  The vertical dispersion for each different primer ranged from 3/4" to 7/8".  At the end, I shot a six-shot group with each shot alternating between Federal 210 and Remington 2 1/2 primers.  The vertical dispersion for this group was 3/4".

The final thoughts for all this is that (1) a happy load is likely to be primer tolerant, and (2) an unhappy load can not be rehabilitated by primer choice.

Notice the absence of Remington 9 1/2 primers for the list.  I don't trust those boogers.

JackHughs

gewehrfreund wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 7:23am:


Remington 9 1/2 primers have a very high brissance (burn rate).  Sort of a magnum, magnum primer.  This may or may not be meaningful in breech seating.   

My problem is just observed inconsistency in the lots of 9 1/2 primers that I've  used - altogether too many otherwise-unexplained high and low shots.  I just don't trust them to perform.  Others may have had had much better experiences.

JackHughs

gewehrfreund wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2015 at 9:32am:



Thanks - same with me - might explain some fliers.  Dang, and I bought 1K of them.....

RayH wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2015 at 7:06am:


Hi,

I did use Remington 7 1/2 primers in the .32-40 CPA.  They were quite good in the application.  However, the hands-down best primers were Federal 205 Gold Medal Match.

My first choice in any application is a Federal Gold Medal Match primer, but the dang things are all but impossible to find anymore.

JackHughs