wc820 powder military surplus milsurp mil-surp pulldown 410 .410 W296 296 H110
The tables below show the chronograph results of reloads using the pulldown military surplus .30 M1 Carbine powder, WC820, which is roughly the equivalent of W296 and H110 -- but actually a bit hotter -- with three different wads and five stock MEC bushings.

WC820 is the same powder as Accurate Arms #9.

Scott Winders gets the credit for introducing this excellent, low-cost .410 propellant to Shotgun World reloaders, and now jadecker has found an additional source for it.

The known sources so far are:
Bartlett Reloaders

Hi-Tech Ammunition This is new, never-loaded WC820 and is cheaper than the new powder from Bartlett but higher than the pulldown. This seller also pays the hazmat fee if you order a four-pack of 8-lb. jugs. You must order a six-pack from Bartlett to get that.

At $56 - $64 per 8-lb. jug this powder is a world-class bargain for .410 shooters compared to W296, which sells for around $100 for 8 lbs. I've been so impressed with this powder that I bought 128 pounds of the pulldown, which should be every bit as good as the never-loaded stuff.

In addition to the WC820 powder, which was Lot No. 50320 from Jeff Bartlett, all the reloads in the tables below contain these constants:

Once-fired AA-HS .410 hulls
W209 primer
223 grains of Remington No. 9 Magnum shot

The MEC Nos. 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 powder bushings used were stabilized at the grains listed and all were highly consistent, since WC820 is an extremely fine-granule powder and meters very well. All those low standard deviations in the chronograph results are testimony to the excellent metering consistency of this powder.

The shells were reloaded on a MEC 600 Jr. Mk. V and the powder charges were thrown by stock bushings after they stabilized. The five bushings tested represent the practical range of charges for this powder from stock bushings.

Custom charges could be easily had by reaming out a bushing or using the Universal Charge Bar, but I'd think somewhere among those bushings would be one that would suit even the most finicky reloader. Nevertheless, the tables should provide a good framework for decision-making.

No pressure data is listed, since I don't have the equipment to test that. I may send some loads to OKShotgunner later on for pressure tests.

The second batch of this powder I bought from Jeff Bartlett was a different lot number. I'll load some of that later and compare it to this batch. I don't expect there to be much difference -- but there might be.

Of the three wads tested, the CB1050-41 and Yellow Duster are much more economical than either the Remington SP410 or Winchester WAA410HS and, as the results show, work just as well. I'd have included data for the Winchester wad if I'd had any on hand. I may add it later, since it would provide a good comparison benchmark for the other wads.

Possibly owing to its slightly hotter nature, in my estimation WC820 burns cleaner than either W296 or H110, but it also offers the same superior AA-HS hull longevity of those powders which you won't get with Alliant 410 or Lil'Gun. You should get up to about 13 good reloads from AA-HS hulls with this powder.

I've got as many as 21 using the No. 9 bushing, but anything past 13 is an unreliable crapshoot, with squibs, case splits and hull separation from the brass all definite possibilities on every next shot.

The reloads were fired from a Winchester 101 dedicated .410 Skeet gun and chronographed with an Oehler Model 35 using a two-foot bar and three screens, including a proof channel.

Personally, I've tentatively settled on using the No. 10 bushing with either the CB1050-41 or Yellow Duster wads. Those economical wads and this exceptionally low-cost powder make for some very cheap .410 reloading.

The Nos. 7, 8 and 9 bushings would also produce good Skeet loads and might extend hull life a bit.

Without knowing the pressures generated, I'd be VERY HESITANT to use the No. 11 bushing for loads in subgauge tubes. That one's a real barn-burner and could be an excellent Skeet load if the pressures don't exceed SAAMI standards. But right now I have no idea what pressures may come from that 13.5 grains.

I'd appreciate comments or questions from anyone using WC820 now or considering using it.

<center> <table width="600" border="2"> <tr> <td colspan="4" align="center"> MEC No. 7 Bushing - 11.3 Grains </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WAD </td> <td> CB1050-41 </td> <td> Yellow Duster </td> <td> Rem. SP410 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> AVERAGE VELOCITY </td> <td> 1125 </td> <td> 1142 </td> <td> 1149 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> HIGH VELOCITY </td> <td> 1135 </td> <td> 1152 </td> <td> 1166 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> LOW VELOCITY </td> <td> 1097 </td> <td> 1125 </td> <td> 1134 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> EXTREME SPREAD </td> <td> 38 </td> <td> 27 </td> <td> 32 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> STANDARD DEVIATION </td> <td> 11 </td> <td> 8 </td> <td> 9 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> INDIVIDUAL SHOT <br> VELOCITIES </td> <td> 1097 <br> 1135 <br> 1125 <br> 1129 <br> 1127 <br> 1128 <br> 1130 <br> 1130 </td> <td> 1125 <br> 1137 <br> 1152 <br> 1144 <br> 1144 <br> 1146 <br> 1149 <br> 1139 </td> <td> 1134 <br> 1143 <br> 1149 <br> 1149 <br> 1146 <br> 1153 <br> 1157 <br> 1166 </td> </tr> </table> </center>

<center> <table width="600" border="2"> <tr> <td colspan="4" align="center"> MEC No. 8 Bushing - 12.1 Grains </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WAD </td> <td> CB1050-41 </td> <td> Yellow Duster </td> <td> Rem. SP410 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> AVERAGE VELOCITY </td> <td> 1163 </td> <td> 1178 </td> <td> 1186 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> HIGH VELOCITY </td> <td> 1168 </td> <td> 1192 </td> <td> 1200 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> LOW VELOCITY </td> <td> 1156 </td> <td> 1165 </td> <td> 1179 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> EXTREME SPREAD </td> <td> 12 </td> <td> 27 </td> <td> 21 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> STANDARD DEVIATION </td> <td> 4 </td> <td> 8 </td> <td> 6 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> INDIVIDUAL SHOT <br> VELOCITIES </td> <td> 1156 <br> 1159 <br> 1165 <br> 1166 <br> 1168 <br> 1163 <br> 1166 <br> 1162 </td> <td> 1172 <br> 1165 <br> 1183 <br> 1178 <br> 1175 <br> 1187 <br> 1176 <br> 1192 </td> <td> 1182 <br> 1188 <br> 1179 <br> 1189 <br> 1188 <br> 1183 <br> 1184 <br> 1200 </td> </tr> </table> </center>

<center> <table width="600" border="2"> <tr> <td colspan="4" align="center"> MEC No. 9 Bushing - 12.4 Grains </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WAD </td> <td> CB1050-41 </td> <td> Yellow Duster </td> <td> Rem. SP410 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> AVERAGE VELOCITY </td> <td> 1184 </td> <td> 1198 </td> <td> 1209 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> HIGH VELOCITY </td> <td> 1194 </td> <td> 1211 </td> <td> 1222 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> LOW VELOCITY </td> <td> 1175 </td> <td> 1193 </td> <td> 1201 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> EXTREME SPREAD </td> <td> 19 </td> <td> 18 </td> <td> 21 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> STANDARD DEVIATION </td> <td> 7 </td> <td> 7 </td> <td> 6 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> INDIVIDUAL SHOT <br> VELOCITIES </td> <td> 1176 <br> 1179 <br> 1175 <br> 1190 <br> 1191 <br> 1192 <br> 1194 <br> 1179 </td> <td> 1209 <br> 1211 <br> 1200 <br> 1194 <br> 1195 <br> 1195 <br> 1193 <br> 1194 </td> <td> 1209 <br> 1201 <br> 1205 <br> 1212 <br> 1211 <br> 1222 <br> 1212 <br> 1205 </td> </tr> </table> </center>

<center> <table width="600" border="2"> <tr> <td colspan="4" align="center"> MEC No. 10 Bushing - 12.8 Grains </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WAD </td> <td> CB1050-41 </td> <td> Yellow Duster </td> <td> Rem. SP410 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> AVERAGE VELOCITY </td> <td> 1197 </td> <td> 1225 </td> <td> 1231 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> HIGH VELOCITY </td> <td> 1212 </td> <td> 1232 </td> <td> 1240 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> LOW VELOCITY </td> <td> 1182 </td> <td> 1218 </td> <td> 1221 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> EXTREME SPREAD </td> <td> 30 </td> <td> 14 </td> <td> 19 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> STANDARD DEVIATION </td> <td> 8 </td> <td> 5 </td> <td> 7 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> INDIVIDUAL SHOT <br> VELOCITIES </td> <td> 1191 <br> 1193 <br> 1212 <br> 1196 <br> 1203 <br> 1182 <br> 1199 <br> 1197 </td> <td> 1228 <br> 1218 <br> 1224 <br> 1227 <br> 1229 <br> 1226 <br> 1232 <br> 1218 </td> <td> 1221 <br> 1239 <br> 1229 <br> 1226 <br> 1225 <br> 1236 <br> 1236 <br> 1240 </td> </tr> </table> </center>

<center> <table width="600" border="2"> <tr> <td colspan="4" align="center"> MEC No. 11 Bushing - 13.5 Grains </td> </tr> <tr> <td> WAD </td> <td> CB1050-41 </td> <td> Yellow Duster </td> <td> Rem. SP410 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> AVERAGE VELOCITY </td> <td> 1269 </td> <td> 1288 </td> <td> 1292 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> HIGH VELOCITY </td> <td> 1277 </td> <td> 1296 </td> <td> 1301 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> LOW VELOCITY </td> <td> 1262 </td> <td> 1278 </td> <td> 1284 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> EXTREME SPREAD </td> <td> 15 </td> <td> 18 </td> <td> 17 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> STANDARD DEVIATION </td> <td> 5 </td> <td> 6 </td> <td> 5 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> INDIVIDUAL SHOT <br> VELOCITIES </td> <td> 1262 <br> 1277 <br> 1264 <br> 1274 <br> 1265 <br> 1271 <br> 1267 <br> 1274 </td> <td> 1291 <br> 1289 <br> 1287 <br> 1296 <br> 1278 <br> 1290 <br> 1280 <br> 1296 </td> <td> 1293 <br> 1290 <br> 1289 <br> 1284 <br> 1292 <br> 1301 <br> 1296 <br> 1294 </td> </tr> </table> </center>

UPDATE: Added results for No. 7 bushing.

GET THIS in a PDF file (20kb), which will make for easy printing.

Excellent info...thanks

I think Winders said the pressure is 11,100 with 13.2gr and a rem or yellow duster wad. 1250 Fps


Thanks for the research.

Thanks for the good info Case, its what I've been waiting for.
Gonna have to try some WC820 now.

I do have one question.
On the chart above, you have the Mec #11 bushing dropping 13.5 grains of WC820. In my loading with W296 the #11 bushing drops 14.5 grains. Is the WC820 a bulkier powder than the W296 being it drops a full grain less?

Thanks.

Thanks, you done good. I appreciate your efforts. My factory # 10 bushing drops 13.2gr. It is probably in the ball park . Thanks again.

I just compared the two under an 8x jeweler's loupe and if anything the WC820 is finer and the balls are of a much more uniform size and shape than W296.

A valid analogy might be that the WC820 is like factory No. 9 magnum shot and W296 is like reclaimed shot -- the difference is that striking.

So I don't understand the discrepancy.

If you get some WC820 put some of it next to some W296 on a white sheet of paper and compare the two under a magnifying glass.

You'll be amazed at the physical difference.



Nor do I understand that, even though the gap's not as illogical as Don's.

Since I remembered your saying that in the PM, I checked it very carefully -- with two No. 10 bushings. Both came out at 12.8 grains.

You have a differenct lot of WC820 and I suspect that's the reason for the discrepancy.

Still, all this is a bit disturbing and puts a nettlesome rip in the fabric of things as they ought to be.

BTW: That No. 8 bushing produced such high velocities I've reloaded another group with a No. 7 bushing, which drops 11.3 grains and should produce velocities closer to 1100 fps -- still a viable Skeet velocity.

Case,
Another of your great posts. I have been using the #9 bushing on my Mec 9000. I will have to check the weight again.

BTW, Jeff Bartlett only charges $10 for the haz mat fee if you order 4 of his 8 pounders so the price relative to the other source is basically a wash. I have 32# of it but am envious of your bunker of the stuff. I am glad to see it is right around 1200 which is where I wanted it to be.

BTW, does anyone else get a lot of this powder making it's own way out of the powder charge bar and onto the loader in various places? Probably have to expect that with someone that is more akin to dust.

Yeah, I get quite a bit of that. The stuff is VERY fine.

Case,

Thanks for sharing the results of your labors.

BH

Case,

Another example of a fine contribution to this site from you.

This is as fine an article as you'd find in a published monthly mag.

EyeMissum, cbxchris,

Let's order some!!

Bud

Thanks for the kind words, folks.

I just added the data for the No. 7 bushing and it does indeed look as if it would make a decent Skeet charge for anyone wanting a really mild load.

The lower-velocity loads may have a positive effect on patterns, since some .410 bore gurus have suggested that the close confines of the .410 barrel have a greater tendency than the gauges to distort shot.

Hopefully, I'll get around to doing some patterning and get my floppy drive replaced so I can post photos.

A note on the wads: You'll notice that with every bushing the Remington SP410 wad produces the highest velocities. This is because it's a few thousandths fatter than the other wads, thereby making a better gas seal.

While the differences are relatively slight, on the basis of pure quality I'd have to say that it's probably the best wad for the AA-HS hull. But it's not so much better that I'd pay its hefty premium.

You'll notice also that the Yellow Duster consistently produced the next highest velocities and the CB1050-41 the lowest by quite a bit. Interesting.

The SP410 is also the roomiest of the three wads, with the CB1050-41 next. The Yellow Duster, with its slightly higher base, makes for the tightest component fit, but still delivers a decent crimp with the 223 grains of shot.

When I get time, which is to say after I finish wrestling this Skeet range together, I'll add chronograph results for both the standard WAA41 and WAA41HS wads.

BTW: WC820 is also an excellent powder for many metallic handgun cartridges and, of course, the pipsqueak .30 M1 Carbine fodder, which is also chambered in some single-action handguns. Basically, it could substitute for any load calling for W296 or H110, but charges would have to be worked up from minimums, since it's a hotter powder.

If you Google around a bit you'll find more topics on discussion boards involving its use in the .45 ACP, .44 Magnum, .357 Magnum, etc., than the .410 shotshell. In fact, I had to wait for Jeff Bartlett to get in a new supply before I could get my two six-packs because he'd sold the entire remainder of the lot I'd previously bought to a commercial metallic reloader.



I use the Multi-Scale powder baffle on both the 600 Jr. and the Grabber and the WC820 doesn't migrate abnormally. Actually, it migrates very little, which is surprising considering its fineness.

Can you post some numbers on reloads 3 thru 13 if you get the chance?

Maybe 3, 6, 9, 13?


Thanks
EW

Case, I hope this stuff works as advertised, cause I just ordered 32 lbs. of it.
At $249.78 total, including shipping, its the best buy on powder I've seen yet.
If I had ordered W296 I would have paid $461.78 for the same amount of powder. Thats a $212.00 savings.

Hey, Don -- Could Scott Winders and I both be wrong?

Nah... Couldn't happen. Hell, we never even went tooth and nail with each other over this stuff.

And I'll be forever in his debt for turning me on to it.

You will, too.

Trust me on this one, good buddy...


Until I get mine finished in my backyard, the nearest Skeet range I have is about 60 miles away and I haven't been up there in a good while.

Therefore, I haven't been doing much Skeet shooting lately.

However, I've got a box of AA-HS on their sixth reload with the No. 9 bushing and CB1050-41.

I'll chrono eight of those on that reload and Reloads No. 9 and 12, then post the results in this topic.

That should provide a pretty good overall estimation of what, if any, performance degradation occurs.

Case...

What is your guess for loads for use in the old style AA .410 case? A smidge less I suspect, since I believe the HS case has a bit more capacity than the old style. I have enough of the old style that I don't have to go to the HS cases.

Bob,

Good question.

My guess is they'd be pretty close, and the AA-HS case is a mite roomier than the AAs. You sometimes have to hold them on the deprime punch to keep them from dropping off, which is seldom if ever the case with AAs.

I have a huge horde of old-style AAs and will chronograph them and post the results here as soon as I can get around to it.

I also hope to chronograph loads with the STS hull, probably using the Remington primer, for anyone patient enough to put up with those dogs.

The consensus among pistol reloaders is that recent lots of WC 820 are a close match for AA-9 although some of the early lots were H 110 rate. That's a pretty big spread.

Jeff also sells WC 820(f). It's advertised as HS-7 burning rate which seems to be accurate according to my limited testing

I stumbled on to WC820 several years ago while looking for surplus powder to load .30-06 for my M1 Garands. I did some Chronograph work on WC820 when I started using it. I found similar results as yours. Here is what I found with a #11 bushing, STS Hull, SP410 wad, and Win 209 primer.

Remington STS:

Lo 1324
Hi 1359
Avg 1337
ES 35
SD 10

Anybody in the Northern Virginia area want to split an order of 32# of WC820? I'm in King George, near Fredericksburg.

Just bumping this up so it doesn't get purged, since it's most likely the only source in existence even approaching a .410 load guide for this great powder.

I've got a bag of real WAA28HS wads ordered and when I get time I'll add some chronograph results for those so that all the popular wads are represented.