What I might like to know is under what conditions the force spikes ended up recognized. Was it because the plastic 410 wads became difficult within the chilly? Has everyone tried out it inside the Hornet starting off with 2400 data?
Only difficulty with not reaming the shot bushing to throw 226 of shot inside of a HS hull with .296" powder bushing, will be the shot will rattle while in the shell (my Edition of a practice only load When the shot rattles after you shake the spherical).
There is certainly not printed load data readily available for this powder for just about anything in addition to shotguns. In accordance with powder burn up rate charts it is very near 2400. Has anybody had any knowledge using this powder beyond loading shotgun shells?
Does any one have any more information on the main points of chilly weather conditions troubles encountered with Alliant 410? Are .410 shotshell loads Harmless if shot while in the bitter chilly... as winters are for many of us? I for a person, would want to know whether it is the particular chemical composition of Alliant 410 or ignition difficulties that could result in a 'double stress spike' in the time tension curve?
They are really telling it like it reall is. While in the 410, there isn't any much better propellant than H110/W296. It will get you the highest velocities, with pressures within just rationale and is also considerably simpler on instances than other powders and Alliant 410 is particularly really hard on AA HS cases.
Winchester 296 and Hodgdon 110 are a similar powder with a different label. You can obtain by just fine without the need of at any time weighing a shot demand or reaming a bushing; Practically not one person does both.
Incorporate to estimate Only show this user #two · Jun 17, 2020 I've been using H110 and don't like it. It is a ball powder as well as the demand bar hopes to stick after a shell or two. Perhaps a person will chime in on the things they use.
Confident must concur with this dialog that the the latest 410 powders just are not an improved propellant. I have tried these newer kinds also and 296 remains just how to GO!
I have however see this website to test 300MP, but from all experiences it is a fine 410 powder. I moved to W-296/H-110 quite a few decades in the past, for a similar factors that Bob states. Higher velocities with lessen pressures. It addresses this discipline nicely, and with very good circumstance existence.
Hope this will help you out. I would be loading the H110 powder for that newer HS hulls. You need to utilize the Acquire HS wad and Keep to the loading data towards the letter. Very high chamber pressures in 28 ga. as well as 410 ga. so Will not change primers or wads with similar powder loads such as you can inside the 12 ga. Doing so can place you excessive with chamber pressures. Fantastic Luck and Crack-em all. Jeff
Add to estimate Only exhibit this user #3 · Mar seven, 2008 Getting shot skeet for various years using the 410 gauge I have reloaded my share of such shells. I'm not familiar with the AAHS shells Except you happen to be referring to WW Double AA's. Discovered that this gauge is rather delicate to components used. Despite the fact that distinctive resources say there powders will perform, I discovered that only a pair would function with minor problems. Other folks would do amongst two issues--let the wad seat way too minimal or as well high.
While I have not tried using it I agree with your pondering with a 4 ball load, looks like the identical problem as I Beforehand pointed out by using a five pellet load of OOO buck.
If The rationale that you are swapping powders is a result of the migration problem on the fantastic ball powder rendering it way past the seal and clogging the device, John and I've come up with powder style seals that appropriate the problems from the PW equipment, and the design may be transformed over to your Bonuses Spolar machines as well.