WC-735 powder

manitou210 said:
Happen to read this today on a site in Canada

WC-735 in a 308 Winchester - Range Report

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclaimer: The following did not blow up my rifle. It might blow yours up. It might even kill you. I suggest you use EXTREME caution in using ANY load data worked up by some guy on the Internet (me) who didn't have a pressure-test rig. I take no responsibility if any of this turns out to be unsafe in your rifle. You have been warned!


That said, as I couldn't find any information like this floating around out there, I thought I'd share. Here's what I got in my first test run.


Components: RP brass, WLRM primers, Hornady 150grain FMJBT's - shot over a chronograph. 3 shots each per load listed below.

41 grains of powder: 2720-ish FPS
42 grains of powder: 2760-ish FPS
43 grains of powder: 2840-ish FPS
44 grains of powder: 2920-ish FPS


At 41 and 42 grains, I had signs of low-ish pressure (badly smoked case necks, and primers backing out without flatening).

43 grains kept the primer in place, but still smoked the case neck pretty thoroughly.

44 grains looked pretty good - just a very wee touch of case neck smoking, primer stayed in place fine, with just a touch of primer flatening (quite a bit less flatening than I get with my Varget loads at the same velocity, actually). If it weren't for the fact that the chrony said the load was already pushing the limits of expected velocity for a 150 grain bullet in a 308 Winchester, I probably would have kept going based on what the case looked like after firing. As it is though, I think the Chrony just gave me an early warning I might be about to push things, so I'm going to take that warning and stop there.

With all loads, the accuracy was just a hair less than I am getting with my Varget loads (about an extra 0.2-ish inches). Velocity spread looked a bit ugly (+/- 40 FPS, or about an 80FPS spread), but light conditions were very
Click to expand...




I'm lost, why is he using magnum primers?
 
hear is what higginsons sent me. dont help me, but it may help others

The only data we compiled for this powder is for the 223 Remington or 5.56mm NATO round. It goes as follows:
Bullet: 50 gr. Hdy V-Max C.O.L. 2.250" 25.2gr. 3408fps @ 53,000PSI
Bullet: 55 gr. Hdy V-Max C.O.L. 2.250" 24.0gr. 3212fps @ 49,500PSI
" " " 24.3gr. 3253fps @ 51,700PSI
" " " 24.9gr. 3302fps @ 53,200PSI
Bullet: 62gr. SPR FMJBT C.O.L. 2.250" 23.3gr. 3062fps @ 53,800PSI

This powder is very clean burning and very efficient.
 
Beater said:
hear is what higginsons sent me. dont help me, but it may help others

The only data we compiled for this powder is for the 223 Remington or 5.56mm NATO round. It goes as follows:
Bullet: 50 gr. Hdy V-Max C.O.L. 2.250" 25.2gr. 3408fps @ 53,000PSI
Bullet: 55 gr. Hdy V-Max C.O.L. 2.250" 24.0gr. 3212fps @ 49,500PSI
" " " 24.3gr. 3253fps @ 51,700PSI
" " " 24.9gr. 3302fps @ 53,200PSI
Bullet: 62gr. SPR FMJBT C.O.L. 2.250" 23.3gr. 3062fps @ 53,800PSI

This powder is very clean burning and very efficient.
Click to expand...

That helps me! I've been sitting on a few grains myself, but haven't gotten around to loading with it. Thanks!
 
Wc-735

Here is my data with WC-735, I am going out to the range tommorow to test some 50gn Nosler BT's in my .223. I will post that data when I get back.

223wc735all.jpg
 
Thanks for that too.
Questions:

Is #12 thru #15 the Amax or HPBT?
Also, is #15 really 19.9 gr. or is that a typo?
 
beltfed said:
Thanks for that too.
Questions:

Is #12 thru #15 the Amax or HPBT?
Also, is #15 really 19.9 gr. or is that a typo?
Click to expand...

They were the A-max's, shot really bad in my rifle as it has a 1:9 twist and they were too long. The 75gn HPBT would have been better but these were not available in my area at the time. The best (heavy) bullet for this rifle is the 77gn SMK, they are shorter than the 75gn Amax and shoot like a dream.

Yes, it must be a typo I think it was 20.9gn, I will need to check my old notebooks if I can find them.

Here is data from my range trip today.

WC-735 24gn, 50gn, Nosler BalTip 39522
Win Brass 1.75, COL 2.26, CCI_400 SR primer
3150fps (mild load)
10 shot group 0.6 inch at 100 yards

Compared to:
RL-15 24gn, 50gn, Nosler BalTip 39522
Win Brass 1.75, COL 2.26, CCI_400 SR primer
2800fps (very mild load)
5 shot group 0.4 inch at 100 yards


Temp was -4 C, and wind at 10-20 mph, tried to shoot between gusts
 
Only used this exclusively for plinking w/ the ARs'-
I chrono'ed this as a "NEW" powder in OCT.09 , got an average of for 10 shots of 2,860 fps ,out of a 20 ' bbl.
Useing 22 grains of WC735,behind a .224 ,55gr. remington flatbase fmj (couldn't wait to get rid of these pills btw! )
Haven't tested for accuracy ,---but as said it's for plinking.
Have also used it's sister powder the "wc845" - w/ the same results meters well too.
 
cancer said:
Not reliable though. Look at the three entries for .308. Two are the same bullet and weight, but the data is very different between them.
Click to expand...


Here's the information that I have on DataPowder 73. This seems more in keeping with my personal expirence. The maximum listed seems dangerous to me. For 150 grain bullets, I'd hold to to a Max. of 42 grains.

Datapowder73.jpg
 
cancer said:
Not reliable though. Look at the three entries for .308. Two are the same bullet and weight, but the data is very different between them.
Click to expand...

Please explain how the data is unreliable. It's odd that they call the two load ranges for the same bullet Start and Max, but the numbers make sense - look at the MV's and pressures. Looking at the other loads, do you detect any other "problems"?

6mm Shooter said:
I find it to be about 5% slower than H-335.
Click to expand...

That's strange - as I recall, the exact words used by Higginsons is that it is 5% faster than H335 (a meaningless statement IMO). What do you mean by that - you suggest using 5% more powder? I sure wouldn't.

If anyone wants to find any possible reason to throw out the Accurate Powder (AP) data, by all means do it (those folks typically don't even have any of the powder), but I continue to use it. I substitute H322 loads for it - which line up nicely with the AP data. If you're still nervous about that, then you should stick to new canister powders.
 
Andy said:
Please explain how the data is unreliable. It's odd that they call the two load ranges for the same bullet Start and Max, but the numbers make sense - look at the MV's and pressures. Looking at the other loads, do you detect any other "problems"?
Click to expand...
No, I did not look through the entire list for errors, but I find it concerning that the same bullet has two different maximum powder loads. To me that's a serious warning to be careful about using this data.
 
WC735 ? :eek:

Yer #### will fall off ! :runaway:

Don't buy a single pound of it! Buy SEVEN pounds of that stuff! :eek:

Better yet, don't buy it and leave it for me! :D That's ALL I have in my inventory! I use WC735 for my .223 , .22-250, and my .308..... yes, even at provincial and national level Service Rifle and Sniper matches! There I am with my $ 20/lb reloads! Works for me! Hey! I'm on a budget , okay?

:cheers: and peace be to journey!

yuk yuk yuk :nest:

Barney
 
Anyone else have experience with it using 69 grain match in .223?

Hungry here: In my SR loads using 68 gr Hornady HPBT and 69 gr Sierra MK bullets, I've had super success with 23.5 gr WC735 and my 20" and 16" barrels. Your mileage may vary. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom