abb1 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 I have been told that 3N38 shoots softer that WAC. I find that WAC shoots softer compared to other powders, but how does it compare to 3N38? Is it worth the switch, as it is more expensive? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teros135 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 Yes ... in my gun. For yours, you'll have to experiment. Perhaps you can get some from a friend to experiment with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acsr Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 What's your current setup? Are you 9 or 38? Your going to have more powder in the 3n38 setup then the autocomp, which tends to create more gas to work the comp hence a flatter softer shooting gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abb1 Posted January 22, 2018 Author Share Posted January 22, 2018 (edited) 52 minutes ago, Acsr said: What's your current setup? Are you 9 or 38? Your going to have more powder in the 3n38 setup then the autocomp, which tends to create more gas to work the comp hence a flatter softer shooting gun. Major 9 with a 121gr bullet. Weird that this is what a lot of people are using, yet VV doesn’t even have load data on its website. Edited January 22, 2018 by abb1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 34 minutes ago, abb1 said: Major 9 with a 121gr bullet. Weird that this is what a lot of people are using, yet VV doesn’t even have load data on its website. .2 more WAC for 121’s vs 124 of same brand bullet. I rUn 7.4 WAC at 1.165ish with 121MG IFP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superdude Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 1 hour ago, abb1 said: Major 9 with a 121gr bullet. Weird that this is what a lot of people are using, yet VV doesn’t even have load data on its website. People are using Vihtavuori's 9X21 data for the 9mm Luger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teros135 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 9 major is basically a wildcat cartridge. The load data come from the experienced users, plus your own careful load workup in your particular gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximis228 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 (edited) 3n38 is going to be hard to load without spilling powder in a 9 major load. I run 7.5 of WAC under a 124 JHP with 3 holes and Binary engineering comp out of a SVI 5.5 hybrid barrel. Hits at 177-178 PF. Most tend to run WAC in the 6.8-7.1 area (for a 124) depending on set up Edited January 23, 2018 by Maximis228 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMcGowan Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 If your looking for more gas try some AA7 with a 124 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncman Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 1 hour ago, Maximis228 said: Most tend to run WAC in the 8.8-7.1 area (for a 124) depending on set up 8.8 WAC in 9 Major???? That's A LOT for WAC! I have tried, WAC, HS-6 , AA7 and 3N38 in my 9 Major during load development. 3N38 was real nice, but not spillage is an issue. I really like the AA7 as well. When I burn up the HS-6, may run the AA7 next. Match performance will be the deciding factor. Taking hundred of each this weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
echotango Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) I'm assuming it's a typo. 6.8-7.1. I run 6.8 w/124 and 7.0 w/121. Edited January 23, 2018 by echotango Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hi-Power Jack Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Definitely 6.7 - 7.2 gr WAC under a 124 gr MG JHP. Another grain WAC under a 115 gr bullet. Need another grain of HS6 ... All this for 9mm Major at 1.16" OAL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abb1 Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 What I am really asking is, is there a noticeable difference worth switching, keeping in mind the cost of VV powder, and the fact that you get 200 less rounds in a pound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3gunDQ Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 In super 3n38 is sauce... in nine major AA7 is the sauce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncman Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 6 minutes ago, abb1 said: What I am really asking is, is there a noticeable difference worth switching, keeping in mind the cost of VV powder, and the fact that you get 200 less rounds in a pound. Different comps will be more or less effective. You will probably just have to try them both. WAC is least effective in my pistol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximis228 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Oh crap, yes that was a typo, Fixed now. Sorry bout that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kneelingatlas Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 19 minutes ago, abb1 said: What I am really asking is, is there a noticeable difference worth switching, keeping in mind the cost of VV powder, and the fact that you get 200 less rounds in a pound. I use SP2 in 9mm which is basically the holy grail for that purpose, it's no longer imported to the US, but you might be able to get it in Canada; it has the same burn rate as 3N38, but is more dense so it's easier to load in 9mm (I load 9.4gr under a 115gr bullet). I can definitely feel the difference vs WAC, does it effect my speed? probably not, is it worth the extra money? that's for you to decide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teros135 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 52 minutes ago, abb1 said: What I am really asking is, is there a noticeable difference worth switching, keeping in mind the cost of VV powder, and the fact that you get 200 less rounds in a pound. You can't ask others to make your decision for you. You have to try it yourself, in your own gun, and see how it works for you. I think everyone has pretty much said what they need to say, so it's time to go out there and experiment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aircooled6racer Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Hello: Try some HS-6 with your 121's and your IPSC loads. WAC hits a little harder in the hand is a little hotter burning. Thanks, Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzt Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 HS-6 is noticeably softer than WAC at the same PF, but it's a little dirtier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abb1 Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 19 hours ago, kneelingatlas said: I use SP2 in 9mm which is basically the holy grail for that purpose, it's no longer imported to the US, but you might be able to get it in Canada; it has the same burn rate as 3N38, but is more dense so it's easier to load in 9mm (I load 9.4gr under a 115gr bullet). I can definitely feel the difference vs WAC, does it effect my speed? probably not, is it worth the extra money? that's for you to decide Thanks Atlas, that is what I was looking for, I never heard of SP2 though, so I doubt it is available in Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chillywig Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Those that have deemed one powder to shoot softer than another what is your criteria for picking hard vs soft feeling. I have been chasing this and tried some different loads. What I find is if the PF and bullet is the same I have a hard time telling which load is which. I think if I had not loaded the mags and known which load I was shooting I could not distinguish one powders recoil from the other. What am I missing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zzt Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 C, feel is the criteria. It also has a lot to do with your gun. Take something like a Dan Wesson DS with a 5-chamber comp. All of them are up ports. so you make a load at 170PF with WAC. Not enough gas is generated to 'work' all those baffles. Switching to HS-6 provides more gas and works the baffles more. gas pushing against the baffles draws the gun forward, so you fell less recoil in your hand. The muzzle also rises less. Go to VV 3N38 and more of the same happens right up until you have so much gas, some it jetting out the front. That increases recoil. Now take a gun with a 3-chamber comp and two 3/16" poppels. The main difference you will find between the WAC and HS-6 load is loudness. The poppels bleed off so much gas that the comp is not 'worked'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chillywig Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 I'd like to give zzt a gold star. This makes sense. And the two guns I have done some experiments with are both 9s with pop holes. The majority of my testing in a turbo comped limcat. I can tell a difference in bullet weight but powders didn't seem to make any noticeable difference when shooting loads back to back... Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aric Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 A 9mm case full of 3n38 has a nice recoil in my gun. A zip tie in my 1050 stopped powder spillage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now