What can you tell me about Win 244 ball?

308Loader · February 23, 2021, 08:02 PM

Powders have been hard to find as you all well know. LGS had some 244 ball – win clean *handgun powder on the shelf. On an impulse I picked up a can. As usual with an impulse buy, I did some basic home work later. Want to know the general consciences on this powder. Loading for 9mm-45ACP. Might be too slow for 32ACP? With things the way they are right now, didn’t want to pass on an opportunity.

Thanks for any input.

**Mike Irwin** · February 24, 2021, 09:30 AM

I don't know much about it, but Hodgdon's site lists loads for .25 ACP and .32 S&W Long, which makes me think that it would also be suitable for .32 ACP; maybe there's just no load development for it yet.

Given the range of cartridges for which there's data on the Hodgdon site, it seems that it's going to be fairly versatile, but looking at the data for .357 and .44 mags, it's definitely not a powder for loading to the top of magnum performance.

That makes me think, burn wise, it's closer to WW 231.

MarkCO · February 24, 2021, 09:50 AM

I have a bunch of .45ACP loaded with it for testing, just been too cold the last 2 weeks.

Looks and meters like N320, so hopeful.

Should have some data next week.

**Unclenick** · February 24, 2021, 10:40 AM

Looking at their .380 and 45 Auto data, 244 max loads produce a little more velocity. In most instances, its charge weight is higher, but for a couple of the heavier 45 Auto loads it is equal or lighter charge weight, but still produced more velocity. So, apparently, its burning characteristics are somewhat different than 231, even if their relative burn rate chart only has them separated by one powder.

**Mike Irwin** · February 24, 2021, 10:53 AM

" So, apparently, its burning characteristics are somewhat different than 231..."

welll.....

Yeah.

If its burning characteristics were the same as 231... it would be 231.

ballardw · February 24, 2021, 12:32 PM

I suspect that given the position that 244 occupies on Hodgdon's burn rate chart, two positions slower than 231, and the comparisons of loads that show both 244 and 231 that they are pretty comparable. The 32 ACP loads in the 2021 Hodgdon manual with exactly 1 bullet are exactly the same as in the 2011 manual. The 2018 manual where 244 was introduced only shows some loads, no actual write up of what it is supposed to do other than "mid-range" loads in a number of pistol cartridges.

I suspect there just isn't a lot of 32ACP load developing going on at Hodgdon. Maybe letter of interest would get some response.

**Mike Irwin** · February 24, 2021, 02:09 PM

"I suspect there just isn't a lot of 32ACP load developing going on at Hodgdon."

Which is sort of surprising given that they do show loads for .32 Long -- 3 bullet weights, IIRC.

308Loader · March 22, 2021, 07:04 PM

Update…
Finally got around to shooting this powder. Picked a middle of the road charge weight (min 5.1-max5.6) of 5.3 with berry’s 230gr RN, COL of 1.255. It shot and cycled well in my RI-1911 GI. As far as clean… Meh… cases weren’t sooty, had burn marks on one side. Not disappointed in the performance. Will need to do a more through testing from min to max with chronograph to see where I am really at.

February 23, 2021, 08:02 PM	#1
308Loader Senior Member Join Date: August 24, 2014 Location: Minnesota Posts: 639	What can you tell me about Win 244 ball? Powders have been hard to find as you all well know. LGS had some 244 ball – win clean *handgun powder on the shelf. On an impulse I picked up a can. As usual with an impulse buy, I did some basic home work later. Want to know the general consciences on this powder. Loading for 9mm-45ACP. Might be too slow for 32ACP? With things the way they are right now, didn’t want to pass on an opportunity. Thanks for any input. __________________ Just a dude with stuff.

February 24, 2021, 09:30 AM	#2
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,389	I don't know much about it, but Hodgdon's site lists loads for .25 ACP and .32 S&W Long, which makes me think that it would also be suitable for .32 ACP; maybe there's just no load development for it yet. Given the range of cartridges for which there's data on the Hodgdon site, it seems that it's going to be fairly versatile, but looking at the data for .357 and .44 mags, it's definitely not a powder for loading to the top of magnum performance. That makes me think, burn wise, it's closer to WW 231. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

February 24, 2021, 09:50 AM	#3
MarkCO Senior Member Join Date: October 21, 1998 Location: Colorado, USA Posts: 4,308	I have a bunch of .45ACP loaded with it for testing, just been too cold the last 2 weeks. Looks and meters like N320, so hopeful. Should have some data next week. __________________ Good Shooting, MarkCO www.CarbonArms.us

February 24, 2021, 10:40 AM	#4
Unclenick Staff Join Date: March 4, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 21,063	Looking at their .380 and 45 Auto data, 244 max loads produce a little more velocity. In most instances, its charge weight is higher, but for a couple of the heavier 45 Auto loads it is equal or lighter charge weight, but still produced more velocity. So, apparently, its burning characteristics are somewhat different than 231, even if their relative burn rate chart only has them separated by one powder. __________________ Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle

February 24, 2021, 10:53 AM	#5
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,389	" So, apparently, its burning characteristics are somewhat different than 231..." welll..... Yeah. If its burning characteristics were the same as 231... it would be 231. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

February 24, 2021, 12:32 PM	#6
ballardw Senior Member Join Date: September 19, 2008 Posts: 1,411	I suspect that given the position that 244 occupies on Hodgdon's burn rate chart, two positions slower than 231, and the comparisons of loads that show both 244 and 231 that they are pretty comparable. The 32 ACP loads in the 2021 Hodgdon manual with exactly 1 bullet are exactly the same as in the 2011 manual. The 2018 manual where 244 was introduced only shows some loads, no actual write up of what it is supposed to do other than "mid-range" loads in a number of pistol cartridges. I suspect there just isn't a lot of 32ACP load developing going on at Hodgdon. Maybe letter of interest would get some response. __________________ -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ All data is flawed, some just less so.

February 24, 2021, 02:09 PM	#7
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,389	"I suspect there just isn't a lot of 32ACP load developing going on at Hodgdon." Which is sort of surprising given that they do show loads for .32 Long -- 3 bullet weights, IIRC. __________________ "The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.

March 22, 2021, 07:04 PM	#8
308Loader Senior Member Join Date: August 24, 2014 Location: Minnesota Posts: 639	Update… Finally got around to shooting this powder. Picked a middle of the road charge weight (min 5.1-max5.6) of 5.3 with berry’s 230gr RN, COL of 1.255. It shot and cycled well in my RI-1911 GI. As far as clean… Meh… cases weren’t sooty, had burn marks on one side. Not disappointed in the performance. Will need to do a more through testing from min to max with chronograph to see where I am really at. __________________ Just a dude with stuff.