H380 for the M1A/M14

[mehavey]

Since it appears that Greek HXP(68) is using 52.x grains of what appears to be (and calculates out as) H380 (aka civilian WC852) in their 30-06 milsurp -- shot in Garands all over the place -- is there any real reason not to use it in M1A as well?

(yes, I know it looks slow on paper)

[Sunray]

You can't tell anything about any powder other than the grain shape and colour from looking at it. You can't 'calculate out' powders either.

[Hefights]

That's what I thought too when I took some apart some time ago. Who knows what the characteristics are of that powder developed for that specific lot of ammo. To me H380 is not optimal for the M1 or the M1A, but no doubt somebody has gotten it to work. I did get it to work fine in my DPMS LR308, but its hard to find an inaccurate load in that thing.

[rider]

"---- appears to be (and calculates out as)" is an assumption, and you know what they say about those.

[mike33]

Do not go by your system of looks, weights, smells, &l tastse like. I have used WC 852 in my M1 rifle. I would not guess about data Use a known powder with published data. My WC852 data came from Gov't manual and I still reduced the load by 10% and worked it up PLEASE BE SAFE

[Ed Buie]

The reclaimed (WC852) powder that came from Jeff Bartlett some years ago had a tag that said use H380 data. I have used it with that recipe with good results.

[mehavey]

Thank you, Ed.

For those who expressed concern over visual appearances and "calculations," please know that H380 is cannister-grade WC852.
See also << http://www.jouster.com/forums/showthread.php?1165-M1-Garand-reload-with-VV-N150-amp-150gr-load >> for it's military loading pedigree w/ the M1/Garand

For those interested, I pulled the HXP ammo apart after a chronograph (Oehler35) session at the range some weeks ago to find it loaded with 52.2gr of "some" ball powder. Using QuickLoad and filtering it to run multiple powders for that speed, that powder weight, that bullet, that barrel length, that case volume for ball powders producing no more that low 50's kpsi got an exact hit on H380. (Surprise!)

Comparing the QL calculations for known classic Garand powders:
http://i51.tinypic.com/bzy8i.jpg
It appears H380 compares pretty well. (It is 1% higher in muzzle pressure than IMR4895 where the gas port is... but is that disqualifier? Not if you remember that we loaded it by the carload in M2 ball.)

So if (as it seems) the Greek HXP is loaded with WC852/H380 and 100's of thousands/millions of rounds have been used in the M1 (supplied by DCMP/even being issued by match sponsors), would that powder not also be suitable for the M1A?

[Danny]

Thank you, Ed.

For those who expressed concern over visual appearances and "calculations," please know that H380 is cannister-grade WC852.
See also << http://www.jouster.com/forums/showthread.php?1165-M1-Garand-reload-with-VV-N150-amp-150gr-load >> for it's military loading pedigree w/ the M1/Garand

For those interested, I pulled the HXP ammo apart after a chronograph (Oehler35) session at the range some weeks ago to find it loaded with 52.2gr of "some" ball powder. Using QuickLoad and filtering it to run multiple powders for that speed, that powder weight, that bullet, that barrel length, that case volume for ball powders producing no more that low 50's kpsi got an exact hit on H380. (Surprise!)

Comparing the QL calculations for known classic Garand powders:
http://i51.tinypic.com/bzy8i.jpg
It appears H380 compares pretty well. (It is 1% higher in muzzle pressure than IMR4895 where the gas port is... but is that disqualifier? Not if you remember that we loaded it by the carload in M2 ball.)

So if (as it seems) the Greek HXP is loaded with WC852/H380 and 100's of thousands/millions of rounds have been used in the M1 (supplied by DCMP/even being issued by match sponsors), would that powder not also be suitable for the M1A?

mehavey,
That's a very good post. You did a lot of homework on that one and it seems like you've answered your own questions as well or better than any further responses might provide. You've also shown me the value of QuickLoad as a tool, another piece that can be used to help with safety, if nothing else. I think that from what I see posted as results from the program, this could be a big help in working out potential loads for long range Highpower use with the Garand, M14/M1A and the M16/AR15. I'll have to get this sooner rather than later. I always like as much information before beginning to load a cartridge, especially loads that other people have shot. I don't consider this loading information as such, but rather extra indications and data of what I might expect to see happen, in addition to what I find with my own loading sessions. Quick load should help me out more in this aspect.

Danny

[Hefights]

H380 did not produce very accurate reloads for me in either type of rifle. I had one pound of H380 on hand, and many pounds of IMR 4895, 4064, and Varget that work great. Thus you can guess what I have stayed with. Your data research is very good, and if you can get it to work in M1A as well as M1 we sure would be interested in the results. Thx

[Sunray]

"...H380 is cannister-grade WC852..." And? You still can't tell anything by just looking at a powder.

[McLovin]

"...H380 is cannister-grade WC852..." And? You still can't tell anything by just looking at a powder.

If you would read the original question you would see that Mehavey stuck a "and calculates" in there too , he has done some actual scientific work and has come to a logical conclusion (I be he was home schooled). In my opinion and in his question he is not asking for speculation but a "Real Reason" not to use the powder in a M1A.

If anyone cares I don't know one way or the other, would I use his data and try it? probably. There is nothing about his question that causes me to say "Hey that is unsafe, don't do it" so I was going to sit back and follow this thread. From the comments posted this thread is about dead and I would like to know how it works out. That is why I had to stick my two cents in.
It is funny how anyone who thinks outside the box is browbeaten rather than applauded.

[mehavey]

- H380 is canister grade WC852
- WC852 was developed for M2 ball and loaded by the 10's (probably 100's) of millions into military rounds .
- Greek HXP is a military round, loaded by the (many) 10's of millions
- Greek HXP powder "looks" like WC852
- Greek HXP powder performs by weight and by velocity exactly like H380
- H380's burning characteristics are not inconsistent with requirements for the M1 Garand
- M1 Garands shot millions of rounds loaded with WC852
- WC852 is H380 (which is where we came in)

Bottom Lines:
No one ever loads based on "looks."
One should load on data.
The data here is considerable
... and consistent w/ H380

[mehavey]

FWIW, I had dabbled with this two months ago and was simply considering going back to look more in detail...
http://i55.tinypic.com/jza4ok.jpg
The M1A in question gives me reliable 3/4 - 7/8 (bench) groups using IMR4895 & 4064 with both 168 & 175 SMKs. I was simply intrigued by HXP's (very good) performance in the Garand, and wondered if I could get even better performance by handloading the M1A w/ a powder that was a dream to throw out of the Harrells.

As far as the rifle itself goes, it's far better than my old eyes.
(A bittersweet observation to be sure ):icon_pirat: