DK Firearms

Testing link to pdf

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • rotor

    TGT Addict
    Nov 1, 2015
    4,239
    96
    Texas
    In July I contacted oregon trail and they said NOT TO USE the load data in their manual but referred me to Lyman 49 or 50. I questioned them on the wide discrepancy between HP38 and win 231 which is the same powder. I can show you the whole email if you want to see it. My feeling is that one should NOT use their manual. The company has been sold also and no load data on the new site. Be careful.
     

    bbbass

    Looking Up!!
    Sep 2, 2020
    2,825
    96
    NE Orygun
    In July I contacted oregon trail and they said NOT TO USE the load data in their manual but referred me to Lyman 49 or 50. I questioned them on the wide discrepancy between HP38 and win 231 which is the same powder. I can show you the whole email if you want to see it. My feeling is that one should NOT use their manual. The company has been sold also and no load data on the new site. Be careful.

    Thanx for the info!!

    Good point.

    Looking up HP38 vs 231, apparently it is no longer the same powder. But yes, these things change all the time. Note the differences between most any old and new manual. The same warnings regarding the old data for the new vs old powders could be given.

    I'm not surprised that the new company wishes to avoid the liability of posting data for loads they haven't tested. Yet the old data works well for MOST plated bullets using the powders listed, provided that the powder formulation hasn't changed.

    Can they name me one load that has failed???

    I wish Berry's, Xtreme, etc would publish tested load data, but the trend is that none of them do. Apparently they just don't have the staff and funding to do the testing.
     
    Last edited:

    rotor

    TGT Addict
    Nov 1, 2015
    4,239
    96
    Texas
    Looking up HP38 vs 231, apparently it is no longer the same powder. But yes, these things change all the time. Note the differences between most any old and new manual. The same warnings regarding the old data for the old powders could be given.

    I'm not surprised that the new company wishes to avoid the liability of posting data for loads they haven't tested. Yet the old data works well for MOST plated bullets using the powders listed, provided that the powder formulation hasn't changed.

    Can you name me one load that has failed???
    I think if you go to Hodgdon site and check a load you will see that the same charge is for HP38 and Win231. They are the same powder. This is what I sent to Oregon Trail....

    Just reviewing load data for your 125 gr truncated cone for 38 special.
    Wondering why there is such a difference in HP38 and Win 231 when they are identical powders. Win 231 start is at never exceed HP38. In real world what do you recommend since I use win 231?


    They responded with not using their data. I know the legal mumbo jumbo but I do not trust their load data. Your choice and they no longer own the company.
     

    bbbass

    Looking Up!!
    Sep 2, 2020
    2,825
    96
    NE Orygun
    I think if you go to Hodgdon site and check a load you will see that the same charge is for HP38 and Win231. They are the same powder. This is what I sent to Oregon Trail....

    Just reviewing load data for your 125 gr truncated cone for 38 special.
    Wondering why there is such a difference in HP38 and Win 231 when they are identical powders. Win 231 start is at never exceed HP38. In real world what do you recommend since I use win 231?


    They responded with not using their data. I know the legal mumbo jumbo but I do not trust their load data. Your choice and they no longer own the company.

    Blanket statements of certainty often don't serve well because they don't address the entire picture.

    Let me make an attempt to be more clear:

    Sorry, I had it backwards: At one point these powders were not the same. Older manuals will have data that is diff between the two. Current website info will have data that is the same.

    In general, IMO it is safe to use older data provided by any older loading manual, provided that one researches any changes in powder before using a new can of powder with older data. This warning is the same across all loading manuals.

    FYI/FWIW:

    Oh gosh, not this again. Let me dig for your exact answer.

    In short, at one time they were different powders.

    They became the same powder when Hodgon acquired the rights for Winchester. 2006ish?

    Depending when your manual was published, they will show different pressures. Many manuals just reuse data from previous edition. Hell lyman publishes same stuff from like the 45th edition.

    A call or email to Hodgon will confirm they are in fact the same powder. (Today)
     
    Last edited:

    rotor

    TGT Addict
    Nov 1, 2015
    4,239
    96
    Texas
    Blanket statements of certainty often don't serve well because they don't address the entire picture.
    I can't say that i understand your statement. My only interest was that I did not think the Oregontrail reloading data was safe data to use. Anyone that wants to use it is free to do so but I personally would use a different source for data. Downloading a copy of their manual is still possible but can you trust the data?
     

    bbbass

    Looking Up!!
    Sep 2, 2020
    2,825
    96
    NE Orygun
    I can't say that i understand your statement.

    You said with certainty, as a fact, that HP38 and 231 are the same powder. But that statement as it applies to using manuals neglects that the powders were not always the same. Therefore, the data could be used with older batches of powder but not with newer cans. IMO It only requires a warning about powder changes, not an indictment of the entire manual based on one factoid.

    I can see why the company would say it, but I haven't seen similar statements from any other publisher regarding using their older books. Maybe I missed it... are you aware of any other publisher that has made a statement saying not to use their older books?
     

    rotor

    TGT Addict
    Nov 1, 2015
    4,239
    96
    Texas
    You said with certainty, as a fact, that HP38 and 231 are the same powder. But that statement as it applies to using manuals neglects that the powders were not always the same. Therefore, the data could be used with older batches of powder but not with newer cans. IMO It only requires a warning about powder changes, not an indictment of the entire manual based on one factoid.

    I can see why the company would say it, but I haven't seen similar statements from any other publisher regarding using their older books. Maybe I missed it... are you aware of any other publisher that has made a statement saying not to use their older books?
    You are the one that stated that they are not the same powder and then corrected yourself. I don't know if 20 years ago they were different powders or not but I do know that if one is using current powders they are the same. Oregon Trail is not the same company that it used to be and obviously the data that I inquired from them was not suitable for current use. How the average reloader is to know that a company has changed their powders is a mystery to me.

    In July 2020 when I contacted them and at that time they had been sold. Officially they say don't use their manuals. Do so at your own risk.

    In my case Win 231 start is at never exceed HP38 load data in their manual for the bullet that I was inquiring about. That I think is pretty significant and risky.

    If you can't trust the downloaded pdf for use on current powders buy a current manual. Anyone that wants to use the old Oregon Trail download needs to double check that the powder charge is reasonable by cross checking other sources. Go to the website and check loads.

    I couldn't find a source that says when HP38 and Win231 became the same and when they were different. Same for 296 and H110.
     

    bbbass

    Looking Up!!
    Sep 2, 2020
    2,825
    96
    NE Orygun
    You are the one that stated that they are not the same powder and then corrected yourself. I don't know if 20 years ago they were different powders or not but I do know that if one is using current powders they are the same. Oregon Trail is not the same company that it used to be and obviously the data that I inquired from them was not suitable for current use. How the average reloader is to know that a company has changed their powders is a mystery to me.

    In July 2020 when I contacted them and at that time they had been sold. Officially they say don't use their manuals. Do so at your own risk.

    In my case Win 231 start is at never exceed HP38 load data in their manual for the bullet that I was inquiring about. That I think is pretty significant and risky.

    If you can't trust the downloaded pdf for use on current powders buy a current manual. Anyone that wants to use the old Oregon Trail download needs to double check that the powder charge is reasonable by cross checking other sources. Go to the website and check loads.

    I couldn't find a source that says when HP38 and Win231 became the same and when they were different. Same for 296 and H110.

    Quite right, I get confused sometimes. Talk about stating things with certainty being a problem sometimes... My bad!!

    As far as tracking or discovering powder changes... the info is out there, at least in my experience I've run across it. I think. YMMV

    I don't want to argue, so I'll back out of this. Thanx for your input.

    bb
     
    Top Bottom