at 12.5 grains. I heard 12.8 would be better, but I was happy with 12.5 because it seemed to please all.

We all are aware of the shortage. No.9 was no longer available at the time. I did find Winchester 296 and ordered a pound. Understanding that it is close to Hodgdon 110. 

My questions are: H 110 starts at 14.0 grains. Should I stick with that same number for starting with W 296? Has anyone used the W 296 in the carbine? I see No.9 is available now, but I have a full pound of W 296 and hate to not at least give it a spin. I try to stay in the 1,900 fps area with the 110 grain FMJ bullet. All my shoots are 25 to 50 yards for plinking. I do like to play a little at 100 yards if my eyes are in the mood.  Input?  Thanks again to all for your input in the past. 

 

Not my area of knowledge but do follow many of these posts just for my curiosity.

This thread at CMP may be of use

https://forums.thecmp.org/showpost.php?p=189624&postcount=11" rel="nofollow - https://forums.thecmp.org/showpost.php?p=189624&postcount=11

and here's a search here for 296 by topic

http://www.uscarbinecal30.com/forum/search_results_topics.asp?SearchID=20230205222501&KW=296" rel="nofollow - http://www.uscarbinecal30.com/forum/search_results_topics.asp?SearchID=20230205222501&KW=296

also

Looks like 14.5 will be a great starting point. Save the primers is a great goal nowadays for testing.

It was a huge step in the right direction and many thanks. I love the dance, but at 25 cents for a primer, cutting safe corners I more than welcome.  

Just a new powder untried and looking for a starting point. All answers have been very helpful and much appreciated. Earlier said: Save the primers when you can. The fun of self dialing it in has become expensive plus hard to re-supply. 

 H110 and W296 are one and the same and data is 100% interchangeable. My goal is to load .30 Carbine that duplicates the ballistics of the original load so I can regulate my sights such that they' work with any load running a 110 gr. FMJ 1990 fps +/- a couple dozen fps. I have steel target on my 100 and 200 yd. range and it's quite gratifying to be able to hit consistently at those ranges. To that end, I load 15.0 gr. of H110/W296 and get the velocity I want. I'm betting 14.0 gr. will get you around 1900 fps.

  The last few months I've been using Accurate 4100/Ramshot Enforcer (same powder) as both are generally available. 14.8 grs. and a 110 gr. Hornady consistently yields right at 2000 fps, while loading a 110 gr. Armscor drops the velocity to around 1970, depending on the primer. I like these powders so well that  I'll probably stop using H110/W296.

 Speaking of primers, this weekend I tested a couple of loads with W296 and Ramshot Enforcer with several different primers including small pistol, small pistol magnum, small rifle and small rifle magnum. My goal was to see if one type primer gave markedly different results than another. If you're interested, here's the link-  https://www.ar15.com/forums/armory/-30-Carbine-Primer-Tests-and-Comparisons/42-542023/" rel="nofollow - .30 Carbine Primer Tests and Comparisons - AR15.COM

 

I'm using Hodgen LilGun at 15 1/2 grain as maximum with CCI small rifle, magnum primers my experience has been that cold weather ignition and cycling is improved. It's a bit slower, burns a tad cleaner and cooler.

During my last load development with my current lot of LilGun powder I used factory Federal FMJ 110 grain as my base control. They clocked 1920 at 10 feet over my Caldwell chronograph, ejection was positive, 3 to 4 feet between 1 and 2 o'clock looking over the muzzle. I found that 3 out of 5 cases from Federal showed catered primersand ejector marks leading me to consider that peak pressure was near maximum.

I took loads of LilGun starting at 13 grain to 16 1/2 grains in half grain increments with me. Again clocking at 10 feet, the 13 grain load produced 1910 FPS average with zero pressure signs but weak extraction. The velocity increased with zero pressure signs and proper extraction up to and including 15 1/2 grains. At that time velocity was 2260 FPS, zero pressure signs, primers were a bit more flattened and extraction was positive, 3 to 4 feet between 1 and 2 o'clock.

At 16 grains there was no increase in velocity but now 2 out of 5 primers showed catering and 3 cases had ejector marks.

These are working rifles and I have zero consideration for longevity, I have plenty of parts and will rebuild as required. I also do not participate in competitions with them so round count will be low. These are PDW, truck and farm rifles and the magnum primers, modern powders safely produce a significant improvement in cold weather performance as well as a nearlm300 foot pound increase of on target energy.  That's nearly 65%over the factory Federal ammunition. 

Hey Lightning333

Yeah H110 and W296 burn rates are identical.

Below are the results of my testing w/ H110 w/ CCL primers on my CHRONY:

14.0gr-----1,863f/s average

14.5gr-----1,943f/s average

15.0gr-----1.968f/s average

Off the shelf Ballot & Sellier 110gr FMJ consistently at 2,100f/s average.  A bit hot but acceptable.

Other S&B calibers I shoot run warm also. It’s good stuff.

The 13.2 grains of W296 from David Albert is interesting with him using that load for so many years. Bigger is not always better, but that does sound on the light side. I'm sure I will load a few myself just to check it out. Also impressed with 35 Whelen's ability to ring a steel plate at 200 yards with 15.0 grains of W296. Heck, I can't even see that far.  Looking forward to hearing more. 

Did you see any pressure signs?

Nope

Is this true, or just media talk? Ha - stirring the pot!

Reflecting back on pressure signs relating to the Sellier & Bellot cartridge:

There was noticeable flattening of the primer  but no cratering of the firing pin point of impact and no discoloration relating to powder blow back or extractor marks.

I bought the S & B for the brass casings to reload. 

 

 The key to shooting well with open sights (aside from the principles of shooting) is to have a target that works well with the sights. Trying to see a black post or Patridge front sight such as these against a black target is difficult, at best. My 100 yd. target is a 12" diameter piece of AR500 that I keep painted white.

The dark front sight of an M1 Carbine provides great contrast and makes it easy to repeat the sight picture.  

 My 200 yd. target is a piece of 24" AR500. It too is painted white, only it has a roughly 12" black center with a roughly 4" white center. My almost 60 year old eyes can just make out the 4" white center, and when the white "splotch" almost disappears behind the front sight I know elevation is good.

 

 This target works very well, even better than the 100 yd. target.

  If I can do it, anyone can!

 Regarding PPU ammunition, I believe it's still available, but not in .30 Carbine, at the moment.

Not until I got to 16 grains of LilGun. The +300 FPS over factory Federal ammunition velocities improves the in close performance. With magnum primers winter performance was improved, however the 30 Carbine is still limited to 200 yards for high reliability in terms of hits. H110 did not perform will for me in winter even with magnum primers, it worked with no stoppages but it had wider variations in velocities and ejection went all over the place. Winter testing went down to 10 degrees F.

I've been using LilGun for some time now, I switched from H110. LilGun is one step faster on the burn rate chart than H110.

The 30 Carbine gas port is pretty close to the chamber and I had used H110 for years for various cartridges and the 30 Carbine. 

Well with a report or rumor that may be relevant to me, I like to see if I can turn up some source material.  In some ways no different than historical research.

If its a government law or regulation, those are all public. Regs typically go through public comment periods before implementation.  So there might be an original version and a revised version.

So for example the restrictions on Russian made goods - I haven't looked it up, but I don't think it would be hard to find.

Now for a commerical item, from a specific company, often these days they will post info on their website. 

Looking at PPU's US website, I'm not finding anything to indicate their products are not available.

https://ppu-usa.com/" rel="nofollow - https://ppu-usa.com/

If it makes you feel better I bought some PPU .30 carbine not long ago. They probably made a batch after catching up with the high demand stuff. It wasn't on the shelves long. 

In general. Where is your normal cut off point on brass? Minus load and crimp variables. Just the general time frame of use. Love the plate shoots at 100 and 200 yards. Very nice carbines as well. 

I have a nice 10" swinging chain steel plate that I want to try. But at my local suburban gun range, it's all about working with others and their down time while you set up and tear down. Everyone works together, but you carry guilt as well. Hence: I have had it 2 years and never set it up. It's all good stuff guys and a great read full of good and possible info for me.   

I decided to give up the tactical shooting and completely rebuilt my rifles and have them and my ammunition inventory setup as PDW/Truck rifles.

That process had me testing H110, LilGun and lubricants for extreme cold and heat. A load that's worked for cold weather may produce excessive pressure at 100+ degrees.  

Also from my experiance and talking to WWII and Korean War veterans cold weather performance was a problem, however to say it as I see it, the rifles in WWII seemed to have less issues in the cold than those used in Korea. I'd think that Howa and FN rebuilds were not as up to snuff as the newly built rifles and the ammunition quality was low and possibly susceptible to the cold.

My testing utilizing cold storage and wet/icy winter conditions had my rifles working cleaner and loads have less extreme spreads in velocity with LilGun and magnum primers.

The M1 Carbine with the gas port position is much like a long barreled handgun. It (as it should be for a defence rifle) is over gassed and produces powder residue in the action. That causes issues with contaminating lubricants in the cold. A grease or oil that does not freeze up in the extreme cold liquefied quickly becomes contaminated with powder residue and can after cooling render a rifle less reliable or inoperable.

I have tested moly lubricants against various other types and found that reasonable people have good arguments both ways. With extreme cold, clean and lubricated rifles both types of lubricants feel a bit  stiff at startup but function flawlessly.  After firing 100 rounds and placed back into the freezer for 3 hours the dry lubricated rifle showed little powder build up and functioned flawlessly for another 100 rounds.  The rifles with better greases were more dirty but still functioned flawlessly for another 100 rounds.

In the end I felt the moly lubricants were cleaner to the shooter but provided no better service. In the end any choice still requires the shooter to protect the rifle in the field from icing and to regularly clean the metal well for long term service.

The carbine was oiled up with some Hoppes No9 (their oil, not the grease), and I didn't notice any issues with moisture/ice build up.