H 110 and forcing cone erosion.
12-18-2013 | 08:49 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Dominant Buck
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 26,274
Likes: 0
From: land of the Lilliputians, In the state of insanity
H 110 and forcing cone erosion.
I have been using H 110 for most of my mag loads, 44 mag revolvers mostly. I have not had an issue with it. I have a friend who is seeing some force cone erosion and he believes it is the H 110 powder. He is shooting jacketed rounds, but light ones. I load heavy rounds and told him I believe it gives the powder a little more time to burn. What are your thoughts.
Last edited by burniegoeasily; 12-18-2013 at 10:21 AM.
12-19-2013 | 07:50 AM
#3
Thread Starter
Dominant Buck
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 26,274
Likes: 0
From: land of the Lilliputians, In the state of insanity
I looked over his pistol, there is no flame cutting, just a rough force cone. The back strap above the cone is clean as can be. Not much, I can clean it up by reaming it to 8 degrees, most likely.
12-19-2013 | 10:10 AM
#4
Typical Buck
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 992
Likes: 0
From: Buffalo, WY
Light bullets with heavy powder charges accelerate forcing cone erosion. I can't explain exactly why but I learned all about it loading for a 357 mag many years ago.
I stick with heavy bullets in magnums. It works and that's good enough.
I stick with heavy bullets in magnums. It works and that's good enough.
12-19-2013 | 11:09 AM
#5
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,780
Likes: 0
I burn 296 (H 110) in my heavy loads and have never had any kind of problem with it. My bullets weigh 240 - 300 grains for the heavy loads and are all jacketed. This has been my favorite heavy load powder for many years.
12-20-2013 | 07:31 AM
#6
Thread Starter
Dominant Buck
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 26,274
Likes: 0
From: land of the Lilliputians, In the state of insanity
I believe a lighter bullet will leave the chamber faster allowing the unburnt powder to escape and burn as it is passing the force cone. Where as a heavier will move a little slower and allow most of the powder to burn in the cartridge. Just my 2cents.
12-20-2013 | 08:10 AM
#7
Typical Buck
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 992
Likes: 0
From: Buffalo, WY
I never really saw the benefit of light bullets in magnums anyway.
12-21-2013 | 04:29 PM
#8
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,834
Likes: 0
01-12-2014 | 04:57 PM
#9
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,834
Likes: 0
BTW, I too think "flame cutting" to have an impingement component.
Using light bullets one needs a healthy crimp, to develop higher back pressure for more efficient burn.
It still lacks efficiency compared to other powder/bullet weight combos.........but that doesn't mean performance isn't gained.
One needs for judge if the pluses are worth the minuses. Everything has a trade off.
I love 180's on max+ charges of WW296. They are fun to shoot too, as long as the bbl length is shorter. Longer it does seem to have more blast.
Kinda like being slapped in the face with a cookie sheet.
To keep the sinuses from being battered one could go with 200grainers. But when shooting deer both the 180 and 200's just zip through (broadsiders).
Using light bullets one needs a healthy crimp, to develop higher back pressure for more efficient burn.
It still lacks efficiency compared to other powder/bullet weight combos.........but that doesn't mean performance isn't gained.
One needs for judge if the pluses are worth the minuses. Everything has a trade off.
I love 180's on max+ charges of WW296. They are fun to shoot too, as long as the bbl length is shorter. Longer it does seem to have more blast.
Kinda like being slapped in the face with a cookie sheet.
To keep the sinuses from being battered one could go with 200grainers. But when shooting deer both the 180 and 200's just zip through (broadsiders).
