HP-38 identical to 231??

[condor bravo]

There are still plenty of gun magazines out there and Montana Mike has some three or four articles appearing on a monthly basis. I always jump to them first even if not that interested in the particular subject matter, but because of his writing style. His book, Lever Guns of the Old West, is certainly a favorite.

[Rule3]

Good grief! How many times does this topic need to be beat to death!

Dead horse is deader than dead.

Now lets discuss H110 and W296

[condor bravo]

Well I recently did try H110 instead of 4227 since it seems to be so popular but the fineness of the granules would become lodged between the sliding surfaces of the Dillon 550 powder measure and would require a shutdown to clear the jam. I ended up burning a partial can to get rid of it and went back to 4227. With the same loadings of 14.5 gr of either for the .30 carbine, the powder level of the 4227 can be observed where the powder level of the 110 cannot.

[Nick_C_S]

Now lets discuss H110 and W296

Or, we can wait until Hodgdon releases an equivalent to W572

[Rule3]

Just one of a gazillion. Not sure if we can link to other forums here?? I am shelled shocked from "rules" on other forums

https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=470152

It is all not going matter eventually anyway.

Both powders are made by St Marks Powder (General Dynamics) here in Fl.

The technology/chemistry is "old school" too much waste "downstream" the old chemistry is going to be phased out and new "stuff" made. This is per Hodgdon.

You know, New and improved

[Jim Watson]

I think it was one of the Hodgdons who said that 231 et al were too popular to discontinue but because of cost and environmental burden would be rather deemphasized.

I don't understand or believe that because the powder distributors have been getting powder of the same nominal grade from different sources all along.
If Hodgdon and St Marks/Gendye wanted to, they could undoubtedly use the current "clean" process to make a powder indistinguishable from 231. Just like they are getting the powders in the Clays lineup from IMR/Gendye.

I bet Titegroup and CFE Pistol are cheaper to make than 231 but will handle much of its application. They could make 231.1 by splitting the difference in burn rate.

[Rule3]

Yes, I agree with you on the above. It was a while back that they said that. HP38 and W 231 are very popular (I use a lot of it)

Would seem to be a poor business decision to eliminate one of the most used powders without having a direct replacement.

Kinda like Alliant pushing BE 86 like it's the next miracle powder.

Would they dare eliminate Unique??

[Nick_C_S]

HP38 and W 231 are very popular (I use a lot of it)

Me too. I have over 11 #'s of it in my stock right now.

Would seem to be a poor business decision to eliminate one of the most used powders without having a direct replacement.

The stuff (W231/HP-38) flies off the sporting goods' shelves - even in times of non-shortage. I don't see it being discontinued any time soon.

Would they dare eliminate Unique??

I have almost 2 #'s of Unique, and have no particular use for it. Not likely I'll ever buy any more of it. But . . . your point remains. It is indeed very popular.

[noylj]

Yes, yes they would.
452AA was eliminated.
All old powders with downstream waste issues will be eliminated at some point.
Why do you think there is so much effort for equivalents to Unique and Bullseye being released in the last 5 years--all crowded in the same burn rate area.

[buck460XVR]

I think it was one of the Hodgdons who said that 231 et al were too popular to discontinue but because of cost and environmental burden would be rather deemphasized.

I have heard similar. Cost of disposal of bi-products in manufacture resulting in high production costs. Still, if it sells and they are making a profit, not an issue. I think Hodgdon realizes reloaders have brand loyalty and that eliminating either 231 or HP-38 may mean they folks would consider another product instead of their identical twin. The fact that this question comes up all the time from experienced reloaders on gun forums, shows that many folks still do not know they are the same.

[Rule3]

FWIW if anything

Here is what "Hodgdon" said in a e mail (this was in 2015)


"Winchester 231 certainly has been hard to get. The plant that makes Winchester powders does not want to make 231 as well as a few other powders. These older technology powders have different chemistry than the new powders and this older chemistry makes it much slower to make powder: basically, you can make about 2.5 times as many pounds of new chemistry powder in the time it takes to make 1 pound of old chemistry powder. During the process of making the old powders, the waste stream created is huge compared to the waste stream of the new chemistry powders. Chemical waste is very expensive to get rid of. So, the plant wants to phase out the old chemistry powders and replace them with new chemistry powders. While they are still making 231, the amount is being reduced and the amount of new powder such as Titegroup and Longshot is being increased.
Now, we are kind of stuck in the middle. The market is demanding 231 but the maker is not wanting to produce the powder. The result is, over time, 231 is going to go away. Shooters should begin using other powders as they can.
Mike Daly
Hodgdon Family of Fine Propellants
Hodgdon Smokeless Powder
IMR Powder Company
Winchester Smokeless Propellants
GOEX Blackpowder"

[ShootistPRS]

As a long time user of 231 and HP-38 I am switching to TiteGroup for the accuracy, higher velocity, and lower pressures. It is simply a better powder for my 38 Special and 9mm ammo.

[egd]

It wouldn't surprise me if someday the mfgr. will (if not already) produce a new process powder with the same characteristics as 231/38 and just put it in the same old canisters and never say anything. If it shoots the same, etc. I wouldn't care.

[Jim Watson]

Precisely.
Not like it hasn't been done before.
The AA Powders have been sourced from all over the world.
Israel, China, and USA that I know of, but they still have the same label and load data.
Hodgdon themselves are now getting Clays etc. from IMR Canada instead of ADI Australia, and 700X, 800X from Alliant instead of IMR. But they call it the same thing.
IMR moved from New Jersey to Canada years ago.

I doubt all these different powder mills are using the same equipment and process, but they still offer the same grade of powder from wherever.

[Nick_C_S]

As a long time user of 231 and HP-38 I am switching to TiteGroup for the accuracy, higher velocity, and lower pressures. It is simply a better powder for my 38 Special and 9mm ammo.

I bought my first # of W231 in 1985 and haven't been without it in my inventory since. I currently have about 11#s.

A about three years ago, I bought 5#'s of TiteGroup untested (during the shortage; desperation purchase). I have a little over a # left, and don't plan on getting any more. Don't get me wrong, I found it to be a very consistent performer. It is an excellent propellant for plated bullets. But for lead, not so much. It runs really hot and leads up my barrels. W231 doesn't do that.

As far as accuracy goes, I have found that bullet selection is the primary factor in accuracy. If the bullet fits the barrel, it's gonna go straight. I've never thought of one propellant being more accurate than another. (We're talking handguns here - rifles are likely a different story.)

As far as velocity goes, when I'm using either W231 or TiteGroup, velocity won't be much of a factor in the application. When velocity becomes an issue, a slower propellant is likely getting the call.

IMO, anything TG can do, W231 can do. But not the other way around, necessarily. W231 doesn't melt my lead slugs like TG does. TG runs blazing hot.

TiteGroup makes excellent range shooting ammo; and it does it economically and all that. It's good stuff. But W231 it is not.

If W231/HP-38 was discontinued, I'd likely turn to AA#2 as the substitute; not that there actually is a substitute for it. In its burn rate range, nothing is better than W231/HP-38. With 11#'s in inventory, it'll be a while before I'll have to worry about.

[buck460XVR]

Now, we are kind of stuck in the middle. The market is demanding 231 but the maker is not wanting to produce the powder. The result is, over time, 231 is going to go away. Shooters should begin using other powders as they can.

I believe this is why Alliant has introduced their new "Sport Pistol" powder. It has similar charge weights as W231/HP-38 and gives similar performance. Would be an very viable alternative anytime W231/HP-38 is not on the shelf and it is. "Sport Pistol" has just been introduced, and I have not seen it on the shelves yet, but I am eager to give it a try, just in case W231/HP-38 disappears. I'm curious as to the cost per #, since W231/HP-38 is still one of the cheapest powders by pound available. I'm also curious as to why Hodgdon's supplier just doesn't raise the price and make more if the demand is there.

[Rule3]

What about AA 2 In the same ballpark (burn speed) as HP 38??

Have not used it myself

[reddog81]

I don't understand how it can take 2.5 times longer to make and create considerably more waste yet cost less than most powders. There are a few powders cheaper than HP-38, but most cost more and that includes the more recently introduced powders.

[buck460XVR]

Originally posted by reddog81:

I don't understand how it can take 2.5 times longer to make and create considerably more waste yet cost less than most powders. There are a few powders cheaper than HP-38, but most cost more and that includes the more recently introduced powders.

Kinda why I said....

I'm curious as to the cost per #, since W231/HP-38 is still one of the cheapest powders by pound available. I'm also curious as to why Hodgdon's supplier just doesn't raise the price and make more if the demand is there.

At my LGS, W231/HP-38 is one of the few powders that can still be had for a little more than $20 a pound. I see on some online places like Midway, it's price has jumped considerably. Probably a sign of things to come.

[reddog81]

Sorry for a post agreeing with your position...

[Nick_C_S]

What about AA 2 In the same ballpark (burn speed) as HP 38??

They are pretty close in burn rate. I'd say AA#2 is just a tick slower from my experience (mostly building 38 Special lead target ammo).

It's a super fine powder, yet kind of fluffy (I know, they rather contradict). Meters second to none.

I get excellent results with it in 38 target ammo. Some of the lowest Standard Deviations I've ever recorded was with AA#2. Very consistent burning stuff.

Really, about my only complaint with it is that when you turn it way down to pure target levels, it leaves behind a lot of chartreuse colored, sandy semi-spent grains of stuff behind - more of an annoyance than anything. This is also what tells me it's a little slower than W231. Oddly, even when turned way down to this point, the chronograph readings are still amazingly consistent.

So yeah. I'm a fan of AA#2.

It also works great for 9mm with 115 grain plated bullets - your basic range ammo type of stuff.

[Jim Watson]

All comes out of the same factory now, 231/HP38, Titegroup, AA#2.
I wonder how many production lines they have to turn out all the many grades of Ball powder.