close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

231 vs WSF vs WST

Discussion in 'Reloading' started by XDRoX, May 7, 2010.

  1. XDRoX

    XDRoX

    6,316
    2,117
    Jan 24, 2009
    San Diego
    I only have experience with WST.
    Would you guys mind comparing the other two to WST so I can get an idea of how they will be in 9mm.

    I want to experiment with another powder and I think I have narrowed it down to 231 or WSF.
    A brief breakdown or description of each would be awesome so I can easily see the differences between them. Things like burn rate, whether they like light/medium/hot loads. Any thoughts/likes/dislikes you have regarding them.

    Thanks
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2010
  2. shepheard

    shepheard

    27
    0
    May 18, 2009
    Where they sit on the burn rate chart I'm not sure. 231 is an excellent powder to use for just about any hand guns, except full mag hot loads. I have used it in 9mm,40,45 and 357. In 9mm I have used 4.4gr with a 124fmj (nice plincking round) In 357 I believe I was loading around 6.5 with a 158jhp, again a nice smooth shooting target load. I can't recall what my charge was for the others but I find 231 to be a great powder for all my target shooting needs. For hot loads there are better powders to use but for paper punching it's a great powder.
     


  3. fredj338

    fredj338

    21,698
    914
    Dec 22, 2004
    so.cal.
    W231 is slightly slower than WST, WSF slightly slower than W231. If you are happy w/ WST for light to std. vel.. then going to W231 will get you nothing but more soot (it is a bit dirty compared to WST). WSF is a great powder for std vel to +P loads in most service rounds, my fav 40s&w powder, works great in 9mm as well, but best above midrange load levels. All are spherical powders that meter well. It's not wise to try & tell the diff on appearance alone.
     
  4. XDRoX

    XDRoX

    6,316
    2,117
    Jan 24, 2009
    San Diego
    Thanks Fred, good info. 231 is practically impossible to get now, but it sounds like it can't hurt to pick up a pound of WSF to mess around with. WST is great for light to medium loads, but not the best for hot loads. Looks like I can use WSF for some higher velocities.

    I just found these descriptions in the ABC's:
    Fred, the ABC's note 231 as the fastest of the Win powders. Looks like we just found a typo.
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2010
  5. GOA Guy

    GOA Guy

    228
    0
    Feb 22, 2010
    Ohio
    I have seen some Winchester info that says 231 is their fastest......but then you go to a burn chart in the same manual (Hodgdon #27) and it is shown as slower than WST. In the real world WST is faster than 231. In my experience, all three of the mentioned Winchester powders are great in their proper applications with 231 being the most useful across the spectrum.
     
  6. fredj338

    fredj338

    21,698
    914
    Dec 22, 2004
    so.cal.
    No, a quick look at a burn rate chart will show what is what. W231 is designated a pistol powder, so fastest of the pistol powders. Many shotgun powders work equally well in pistols, is designated as shotgun powder.:dunno:FWIW, I have never seen a burn rate chart that shows WST slower than W231. In any caliber I have loaded it in, it is faster than W231 (less powder to reach the same vel=faster burning).
    IF you want top end 9mm loads, WSF is a good choice.
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2010
  7. MisterLady27

    MisterLady27

    194
    0
    Oct 25, 2006
    w/ Lady 27
    Howdy All,

    1. I can't speak to the WSF, haven't used it. But I've used a little 231 in 9mm and lots of WST.

    2. On the lighter loading side, I found 231 to be distracting to shoot - soot and glowing "pieces of something" flying out of the barrel. OK, so maybe I wasn't concentrating on the front sight like I should have been - I quit using it and still have 1.5 lb on the shelf (1 lb unopened) Anyone else see this? It may be light load issue.

    3. I bought WST in a 4 lb container, and now am most of the way through my second 8 lber. I use WST in .38 spc, 9mm, .40, and lots of GTR folks use WST in .45. I use TiteGroup in my larger stuff. If I only could get one powder for handguns - WST. WST doesn't scorch cases like TG.

    4. WST meters like a dream through my 650. I like it. My .02

    ML27
     
  8. XDRoX

    XDRoX

    6,316
    2,117
    Jan 24, 2009
    San Diego
    Thanks ML:wavey:
    If you have time would you mind adding your 38spl loads with WST to this thread:
    http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1216235
    Thanks
     
  9. owtlaw

    owtlaw

    117
    1
    Dec 4, 2007
    I use alot of WSF for .45 ACP. It is cleaner than 231 and seems to flow well through the meter.
     
  10. D. Manley

    D. Manley

    1,604
    0
    May 30, 2005
    Southern US
    While I have no problem with W231/HP38 or WST, for all 9MM bullet weights I'd pick WSF over either, hands down. WSF is a middle-of-the-road burn rate ideally suited to 9MM and gives great accuracy over a broad range of bullet weights and pressure levels. WST & W231 are both faster powders and while they both can be very good in 9MM, IMO neither offers the versatility of WSF. Between WST and W231, W231 does not burn as cleanly as WST but is probably the more versatile of the two. I might add that WST is cursed by a lack of loading data...it is more capable than the lack of data might suggest plus, you get that nice black pepper smell at no extra charge....:supergrin:
     
  11. Starman99

    Starman99

    15
    0
    Feb 25, 2008
    I have not used W231, but I've used both WSF and WST in 9mm. Both meter extremely well. I would give a slight edge of cleaner burning to WST but WSF is a clean burning powder. As far as accuracy, I really couldn't tell much difference.....both were very good.

    When it came down to ordering another 4lb. jug of powder, I almost had to flip a coin between the two. I ended up ordering the WSF this time. Do yourself a favor and order some WSF and give it a try.
     
  12. XDRoX

    XDRoX

    6,316
    2,117
    Jan 24, 2009
    San Diego
    Great info guys. Thanks for sharing.
     
  13. 21 shooter

    21 shooter

    572
    23
    Aug 22, 2001
    NC
    I have used 231 and WSF with 45ACP loads and 9mm loads. I find that WSF gives me less felt recoil with the heavier 147gr. bullets in 9mm. 231 is more "snappy" than I like. In 45ACP with 200 and 230gr. bullets, 231 is nice and provides some excellent accuracy. May get around to trying WSF in 45ACP someday just to see how it will compare.