PDA

View Full Version : WC-735 by any other name is . . .



Canuck
05-23-2014, 07:10 PM
First time using Data 2200 powder:
I donít know about you but one of the reasons I reload is so I can shoot more but the way component prices are going up it isnít quite so cheap anymore. I managed to acquire some WC-735 powder recently and have put it to good use in my .223 rifles. Very inexpensive when compared to other powders out there. Meters well, seems to burn cleanly enough, and accuracy has been good.

WC-735 is a surplus powder only available, as far as I know, from Higginson Powder in Ontario. It crossed my mind that many ball powders like this would also be good in the .308. Maybe WC-735 as well? I contacted Higginson and they sent me the only data they carried- it was only for the .223. They said they had no other data available.

Being stubborn, I kept searching reloading forums and such and found some info. Apparently this powder also goes by the name Data 2200 or AA2200. I was very excited to see that it can be used in the .308. Reading further I was really excited to see that you can also use it in the 7.62 x 39 cartridge as well. I have a couple of rifles that use that round and an inexpensive powder would really make things a lot better in the reloading room.
Now maybe this is old news for some of you. I had never heard of Data 2200. If so, no point in reading any further but if you didnít know about it you might want to check this out. So, this powder burns 5% slower than H335. It is sold for $17.00/lb and shipping is free on 21 pounds or more. However there is a $35.00 Hazmat fee.

Back to the reloading room. I resized and trimmed 100 7.62 x 39 cases. I figured I would load up 50 of varying powder amounts, test them, and then load the remaining 50 with the best load. I am a very cautious reloader, I double checked the starting load (26.6 grs.) and then proceeded from there loading 10 cartridges at a time. I increased the powder by .5 grains every 10 rounds until I was at 28.6 grs. I used Hornady 123 gr. Fmj bullets for this test.

Then off to the range. I decided to shoot the test rounds in my new XCR 7.62 x 39 rifle. It has proven to be a very accurate rifle so I figured it would be a good choice. Cautiously fired the first round. Worked fine, positive ejection and was on target. Checking the case the primer looked fine so I proceeded to fire off the next four. I also checked all of those cases for pressure signs. Looking good. I fired five of the next increment- no pressure signs, rounds were feeding and ejecting without issue.

Long story short, I was able to fire all increments successfully with no pressure signs or functioning issues. Some of the groups were quite acceptable as well. You can see the groups below. I believe I will try the next batch at 29.1 grs.

FYI, there is a rumor going around that WC 735 is no longer available. I have been informed by Higginson Powders that this is not true and they are expecting a shipment shortly. I also plan on trying some in .308 cases to see how they work.

Please note that I felt confident in using this data. Nevertheless, I started at the first listed load and moved up. I believe that this data applies to WC 735 but who knows? Maybe I just got lucky. Seriously, use this data at your own risk. Donít start with upper loads and start over again if you change components.

All groups were shot at 100 yds from a rest using a Robinson Arms XCR in 7.62 x 39. I used WW and Lapua cases with CCI Large Rifle primers and a Hornady 123 gr. Fmj bullet.

Complete load data for this round and others using WC-735 can be found here: http://www.accuratepowder.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/DP2200.pdf

26.6 grs. WC 735 (lines on target are 1Ē apart)
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i293/picsalot_2006/IMG_1535_zps3696909f.jpg

27.1 grs. WC 735
Target Missing

27.6 grs. WC 735
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i293/picsalot_2006/IMG_1537_zpsea8faa04.jpg

28.1 grs. WC 735
5 shots= 1.089"
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i293/picsalot_2006/IMG_1538_zps61746c0d.jpg


28.6 grs. WC 735
The 4 shots on/near the orange 2" targ dot were my first, second, fourth and fifth shots. The four shots measure just over an inch. The one near the number three was my third shot and I pulled it. I was out of rounds by then but this and the previous loads were the best and I plan on doing this over again with Hornady VMax bullets and match primers. I am pretty sure if I do my part, they will group just under an inch.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i293/picsalot_2006/IMG_1534_zps9d182408.jpg

stevesummit
05-23-2014, 08:24 PM
Looks good and glad to hear about another powder that's cheap enough to shoot large volumes of 223 with !!

Rory McCanuck
05-24-2014, 01:15 AM
H-335 is one of my favourite powders, truly versatile, and I figured WC 735 could cover a lot of bases, too.I had decided to buy a batch of WC 735 to have on hand for a faster powder, but their site says they've been out for months now. Happy to hear it will be coming back.

Mark-II
05-24-2014, 05:56 AM
Perhaps some Manitoba guys would like to do a group buy in future? I don't really need 21 pounds of assorted powder in one shot...

H4831
06-08-2014, 08:51 PM
When Winchester adopted the NATO round and tagged it, 308 Winchester, about 1950, it was written by the major gun writers of the time, that it appeared to them, that H335 seemed to be the only commercial powder that was able to get 308 bullets up to the speed of the Winchester factory loads.

gunsnroses
07-09-2017, 07:10 AM
First time using Data 2200 powder:
I donít know about you but one of the reasons I reload is so I can shoot more but the way component prices are going up it isnít quite so cheap anymore. I managed to acquire some WC-735 powder recently and have put it to good use in my .223 rifles. Very inexpensive when compared to other powders out there. Meters well, seems to burn cleanly enough, and accuracy has been good.

WC-735 is a surplus powder only available, as far as I know, from Higginson Powder in Ontario. It crossed my mind that many ball powders like this would also be good in the .308. Maybe WC-735 as well? I contacted Higginson and they sent me the only data they carried- it was only for the .223. They said they had no other data available.

Being stubborn, I kept searching reloading forums and such and found some info. Apparently this powder also goes by the name Data 2200 or AA2200. I was very excited to see that it can be used in the .308. Reading further I was really excited to see that you can also use it in the 7.62 x 39 cartridge as well. I have a couple of rifles that use that round and an inexpensive powder would really make things a lot better in the reloading room.
Now maybe this is old news for some of you. I had never heard of Data 2200. If so, no point in reading any further but if you didnít know about it you might want to check this out. So, this powder burns 5% slower than H335. It is sold for $17.00/lb and shipping is free on 21 pounds or more. However there is a $35.00 Hazmat fee.

Back to the reloading room. I resized and trimmed 100 7.62 x 39 cases. I figured I would load up 50 of varying powder amounts, test them, and then load the remaining 50 with the best load. I am a very cautious reloader, I double checked the starting load (26.6 grs.) and then proceeded from there loading 10 cartridges at a time. I increased the powder by .5 grains every 10 rounds until I was at 28.6 grs. I used Hornady 123 gr. Fmj bullets for this test.

Then off to the range. I decided to shoot the test rounds in my new XCR 7.62 x 39 rifle. It has proven to be a very accurate rifle so I figured it would be a good choice. Cautiously fired the first round. Worked fine, positive ejection and was on target. Checking the case the primer looked fine so I proceeded to fire off the next four. I also checked all of those cases for pressure signs. Looking good. I fired five of the next increment- no pressure signs, rounds were feeding and ejecting without issue.

Long story short, I was able to fire all increments successfully with no pressure signs or functioning issues. Some of the groups were quite acceptable as well. You can see the groups below. I believe I will try the next batch at 29.1 grs.

FYI, there is a rumor going around that WC 735 is no longer available. I have been informed by Higginson Powders that this is not true and they are expecting a shipment shortly. I also plan on trying some in .308 cases to see how they work.

Please note that I felt confident in using this data. Nevertheless, I started at the first listed load and moved up. I believe that this data applies to WC 735 but who knows? Maybe I just got lucky. Seriously, use this data at your own risk. Donít start with upper loads and start over again if you change components.

All groups were shot at 100 yds from a rest using a Robinson Arms XCR in 7.62 x 39. I used WW and Lapua cases with CCI Large Rifle primers and a Hornady 123 gr. Fmj bullet.

Complete load data for this round and others using WC-735 can be found here: http://www.accuratepowder.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/DP2200.pdf

26.6 grs. WC 735 (lines on target are 1Ē apart)
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i293/picsalot_2006/IMG_1535_zps3696909f.jpg

27.1 grs. WC 735
Target Missing

27.6 grs. WC 735
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i293/picsalot_2006/IMG_1537_zpsea8faa04.jpg

28.1 grs. WC 735
5 shots= 1.089"
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i293/picsalot_2006/IMG_1538_zps61746c0d.jpg


28.6 grs. WC 735
The 4 shots on/near the orange 2" targ dot were my first, second, fourth and fifth shots. The four shots measure just over an inch. The one near the number three was my third shot and I pulled it. I was out of rounds by then but this and the previous loads were the best and I plan on doing this over again with Hornady VMax bullets and match primers. I am pretty sure if I do my part, they will group just under an inch.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i293/picsalot_2006/IMG_1534_zps9d182408.jpg

Hello, you say Higginson sent you reload data for .223 - would you still have that data? I just purchased .223 & 7 lbs of wc 735 and am having dificulty finding data for it. Thanx

Mark-II
07-09-2017, 07:28 AM
Didn't they indicate somewhere to use h335 data and reduce the starting load by 10%, then work up slowly?

It's been years since I looked at this, so could be wrong

Lee Enfield
07-09-2017, 09:39 AM
Didn't they indicate somewhere to use h335 data and reduce the starting load by 10%, then work up slowly?

It's been years since I looked at this, so could be wrong

I think you are right about using 335 data.. I have used 735 in reloading several thousand .223 with excellent results, sad it is no longer available.

Just checked Hodgdon and for 55gr .223 I am using within their recommended loads.

Justice
07-09-2017, 10:25 AM
"... about 1950..." More like 1954.
Lots of discussion about WC 735 on another forum 10 years ago. Made by St Marks Powders in Florida and marketed by Hodgdon. Supposed to be 5% faster burn rate than H335, but that means little as burn rates don't get measured for reloading. Anyway, the guy on the other forum said he talked to Higginson's who suggested reducing H335 data by 5%.

kennymo
07-09-2017, 12:19 PM
"... about 1950..." More like 1954.
Lots of discussion about WC 735 on another forum 10 years ago. Made by St Marks Powders in Florida and marketed by Hodgdon. Supposed to be 5% faster burn rate than H335, but that means little as burn rates don't get measured for reloading. Anyway, the guy on the other forum said he talked to Higginson's who suggested reducing H335 data by 5%.

I could be mistaken, but I believe burn rates are rather important to reloading....it might be why we just don't mix all our powders together in a big bucket for the sake of convenience.....

gunsnroses
07-09-2017, 07:58 PM
When I check Hodgdon site the only Winchester powder data they show is for wc 748 - nothing for 735. If you don't mind sharing what load did you use for your .223 with wc 735?

gunsnroses
07-09-2017, 07:59 PM
I think you are right about using 335 data.. I have used 735 in reloading several thousand .223 with excellent results, sad it is no longer available.

Just checked Hodgdon and for 55gr .223 I am using within their recommended loads.

When I check Hodgdon site the only Winchester powder data they show is for wc 748 - nothing for 735. If you don't mind sharing what load did you use for your .223 with wc 735?

Rory McCanuck
07-09-2017, 08:25 PM
WC 735 is a surplus powder, only made for gov't contracts.
Old Mr Hodgdon had an agreement with old Mr Higginson, that as long as Hodgdon made it, Higginson's would be able to sell it.
There just isn't any data around for it, as whoever had the contract to manufacture the ammo figured out a good load, and then just ran with it.
Each batch would be slightly different, so each batch of powder would be used in a slightly different load.
And by 'batch' I mean they'd tool up the plant to make 735, make a lot (tons?) of it, and ship out the batch to the manufacturer, but they'd hold back a few hundred pounds for Higginson's.

For data, just use H-335 data, reduced by 5 or 10%.
For instance, Hodgdon online data says:
55 GR. SPR SP
Powder Bullet Diam. C.O.L. -Grs. Vel. (ft/s) ----Pressure -Grs. --Vel. (ft/s) Pressure
H335 --------.224"---2.200" -23.0--3,018 ----40,800 CUP--25.3------3,203---49,300 CUP

So they say 25.3gr is max.
Using WC 735 I'd work my way up to around 24.0gr, but I'd be keeping an eagle eye out for any untoward signs of pressure.
After 23gr I'd go up in 0.3gr steps at most, more likely 0.2gr.
I don't have a lot of knowledge on reloading small cases so I'm a bit hesitant pushing the boundaries, as I think pressures can skyrocket quickly compared to larger rifle cartridges.

Nova316
07-10-2017, 07:36 AM
I love this stuff, I think I have about 25# left.
If you search Data 2200 load data you'll find more info, or check below
http://www.accuratepowder.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/DP2200.pdf

I believe my AR load is 22gr but I'll confirm with you when I get home