The recent topic of duplex loads spurred me to wonder what W296 is used for generally? I have an unopened 8 lb. keg of W296, and never really saw loads listed for anything I reload for.

Thank you Frank! 
That makes me want to crack it open and try some. I've hesitated to open it without knowing as all I found were loads for some magnum pistol cartridges, and .218 Bee and .22 Hornet loads.
Sounds like a .32-40 load is in my future to test with my 195 grain Pope mold.

RSW wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2024 at 3:37pm:


Thanks Randy! 
I've had this keg for over a decade and bought it sealed at an estate sale simply because it was $40 back then. I bought a 4 lb. keg of 4759 at the same sale for $20 and since I already had a good stock of 4759 it's also not opened yet, but will soon since I'm down to a half pound of 4759 now. Probably open the 296 first and start working with it.

I don't want to throw water on other people's good experience, however, I have been at the range when four rifles blew up, two using W-W 296 and two using IMR 4227. 

Winchester-Western specifically warned against using 296 in reduced loads when they were actively selling powder.

In one case, two people held the rifle at the forestock and barrel, two people held the rifle buthe buttstock, one person held a hardwood 2X4 against the bolt and one person hit the bolt with a heavy hammer. The bolt eventually sprung open but the extractor was brazed into the bolt. 

In one case, I was sitting next to the shooter and was the one absorbing the shrapnel. The noise sounded like a hand grenade going off, that sharp high crack. The sound of an overloaded cartridge is more like a boom with a lower level of sound.The rifle was a Savage .308 Winchester 112BVSS. Pictures were sent to Savage asking if they had any input. 

The rifle was then sent to Savage at their request, they wanted to see how it held together. After examination, they were mystified stating they had never seen results of a mishap like this. They replaced the destroyed action with one of with the same serial number for a nominal fee. 

Based on observation, I think this one incident is Secondary Explosion Effect. The noise pattern and force did not seem like double charges. 

In my experience, powders in this burning rate range work well in straight cases and not bottleneck cases.

I called Hodgdon some years back and was told  296=H110.

jhm wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 2:16am:


I don't own any magnum pistol cartridge handguns. My only handguns are .45 Colt, .38 Special, a few .45 ACP 1911's, a few 9mm, and a .32-20 Colt.

I've used 296 in my 44mag and 22 hornet .
My ol' hornady manual listed a maximum charge of 12 grains behind a 50 grain bullet.
Usually Hornady's 50 grain SX.
I felt this charge was ok in my Ruger #3 carbine.

Somewhere around 25-30 years ago, I read that the difference between 296 & H-110 was that they have always been the same powder. The only difference was that H-110 was bulk powder and that Olin, then owned by Winchester, did closed bomb testing on the powder, that they released as 296. That made the burn rate more consistent, lot to lot than H-110 and that is why you will see slight differences in loading data between the two.

After Hodgdon  bought Olin, I don't know if they continued closed bomb testing but, they have had exactly the same loading data for both and that includes both velocity and pressure.

craigster wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2024 at 1:27am:



I cannot speak for Hodgdon or Winchester but in my .44 Auto Mag this is absolutely true.  It's a 1 to 1 comparison.