I'm thinking of going to HC110 for consistency with my Double X.

[rpavich]

I currently use D96 (replenished) to develop my Eastman Double X film but I was thinking about changing to HC110 as a one-shot to get consistency. Im always wondering if the mix is the same every time or if there are small changes that I don't notice.

I looked at the spec sheet for double X and it only lists D96 as a developer so I guess some testing is in order. I checked the massive dev chart and got:
Kodak Double-X (5222)
HC-110
Dil:B
ASA 250
6m @ 20C

But I always wonder if whoever submits those numbers got good negatives or just got "savable" ones.

Has anyone here used HC110 with XX?

 

[Arvee]

Yes and the MDC recommendations are most likely for the 'old' 110, not the new stuff from Tetenal. I made the switch from the old to the new and found the new developer doesn't behave (less activity) like the old 110. As always, pick a starting point and, in this case with the new 110, divide a normally exposed roll into thirds and develop each segment for, i. e., 6', 6.6' and 7.2 minutes. Pick the developing time that produces the negs that satisfy your expectations. I haven't used XX with 110 in quite a few years but this should get you where you can produce consistently exposed/developed negs to your liking.

 

[rpavich]

Yes and the MDC recommendations are most likely for the 'old' 110, not the new stuff from Tetenal. I made the switch from the old to the new and found the new developer doesn't behave (less activity) like the old 110. As always, pick a starting point and, in this case with the new 110, divide a normally exposed roll into thirds and develop each segment for, i. e., 6', 6.6' and 7.2 minutes. Pick the developing time that produces the negs that satisfy you expectations. I haven't used XX with 110 in quite a few years but this should get you where you can produce consistently exposed/developed negs to your liking.

Thanks Fred, I hadn't thought about splitting the roll. That's what I'll do.