44mag rifle below minimum loads

O

oley55

New member
been working up some 44mag loads for a Rossi R92, 24" barrel. Barrel is a bit large at .433", so I am using .431" 240gr JSP bullets. The Lyman manual lists minimum at 23.5gr of H110, .429" bullets tested in a 20" barrel.

I am showing some primer distortion at 23.5 gr, which progressively gets worse to scary looking at 24.5" (but without leaking or piercing). tried to shrink photo size and post pics but was unable to. at 100 yds, 23.5gr gives me a 5 shot group of 3 3/8", and 24.5gr gets me 2 7/16".

to be sure 3 3/8" ain't bad, but with my tang sight and globe bulls eye front, I can shoot a 6" target better than I am getting. (I get 1 3/4" inch groups from my 24" 357mag shooting 280gr gas checked cast) with the same sight setup.

long story to get closer to the question. I worry about going below the minimum starting load of 23.5gr, but also I believe the 4" longer barrel is contributing the excessive pressure signs. Can I safely drop below published minimums without fear of case detonation?
 
Last edited:
The common response is going to be to not reduce an H-110 charge weight below minimum. I agree.

H-110 (or W296 - they are the same) is notorious for not liking to be underloaded. Some would even say it's potentially dangerous; although, I don't know about that specifically.

To stop swirling around the issue, I'll get to the point and recommend a different propellant. 2400 turns down much better, for instance. Another good choice might be AA#9. Neither of these will yield max velocity, but they will work better for what you are apparently trying to do.

Use a propellant that properly suits your application. H-110 is well known to be a "one trick pony." It does one thing really well - making max velocity magnum ammunition.
 
thanks Nick, good info.

I have 8 pounds of IMR4227 on hand but assume it is in the same category of H110. Besides I got dismal results with IMR4227.
 
Hodgdon site says 23gr starting, 24gr max for .429" Jacketed using H110

ADDING:

The issue with going lower with H110/W296 is NOT detonation (aka SEE), but that of incomplete burn and sticking a bullet in the barrel...

Spherical powders are hard to ignite, and are recommended for use with magnum primers (especially in really cold temps)...

Till not long ago, this was the disclaimer on the Hodgdon site pertaining to H110:

Reduce H110 and Winchester 296 loads 3% and work up from there. H110 and Winchester 296 if reduced too much will cause inconsistent ignition. In some cases it will lodge a bullet in the barrel, causing a hazardous situation (Barrel Obstruction). This may cause severe personal injury or death to users or bystanders. DO NOT REDUCE H110 LOADS BY MORE THAN 3%
 
Last edited:
I have 8 pounds of IMR4227 on hand but assume it is in the same category of H110. Besides I got dismal results with IMR4227.
Click to expand...

You know... I thought that too, until I shot it in my .41 Marlin 1894. You may need to fool with the charge a bit, or you may need a properly sized bullet... that .431" bullet isn't doing you any favors in the .433" barrel....
 
If your concern is based upon primer appearance, you might try rifle primers to get a thicker cup, sticking with the load.
 
Charlie_98

or you may need a properly sized bullet... that .431" bullet isn't doing you any favors in the .433" barrel....
Click to expand...

are you suggesting I'd do better with .429" bullets?
 
are you suggesting I'd do better with .429" bullets?
Click to expand...

I don't see any point to going smaller. If your barrel is .433" it's oversized, and other than replacing it, there's not much to be done about that.

However, you can cast bullets and live with the limitations of cast bullets, because I don't think you'll find jacketed in the right size.

Generally speaking most people recommend cast slugs .001-002" oversize, for best results. I would look into cast slugs .433, .434, and even .435 inch, to see how they shoot in your barrel.

Also I would not start out with fullhouse loads, until you figure out what diameter and alloy mix shoots best. The wrong mix of alloy, size and speed can lead coat your bore in just a few shots. The right mix will deliver the best mix of accuracy and power your rifle is capable of.

ONLY testing in your gun, with your loads will show which is which.

Good Luck!
 
44 AMP
Quote:
are you suggesting I'd do better with .429" bullets?
I don't see any point to going smaller. If your barrel is .433" it's oversized, and other than replacing it, there's not much to be done about that.

However, you can cast bullets and live with the limitations of cast bullets, because I don't think you'll find jacketed in the right size.

Generally speaking most people recommend cast slugs .001-002" oversize, for best results. I would look into cast slugs .433, .434, and even .435 inch, to see how they shoot in your barrel.

Also I would not start out with fullhouse loads, until you figure out what diameter and alloy mix shoots best. The wrong mix of alloy, size and speed can lead coat your bore in just a few shots. The right mix will deliver the best mix of accuracy and power your rifle is capable of.

ONLY testing in your gun, with your loads will show which is which.

Good Luck!
Click to expand...

I tried that route (cast billets), unfortunately an appropriately sized cast bullet plus shell casing would not function between the guides. Essentially a single shot lever action! with the exception of some Hornady .430" bullets, nearly all others are .429". these Jacketed .431" are by far the largest I've ever found and going larger will not function anyways.
 
Last edited:
so I am using .431" 240gr JSP bullets
Click to expand...

Sorry, didn't catch the JSP part... I thought automatically, with that bullet diameter, you were shooting cast. Hate to say it, but with that bore diameter, you are going to have issues trying to find anything that will shoot well. 44 AMP is right...

If your barrel is .433" it's oversized, and other than replacing it, there's not much to be done about that.
Click to expand...
 
Change powders.

Barrel length, with a rifle, does not contribute to increased pressure.
Nearly all cartridges reach peak pressure with less than 2" of bullet travel - most handgun cartridges with much less than 1" of bullet travel.
If you're what you believe to be over-pressure, it's happening WELL short of the 'extra' 4.5" at the end of the barrel.
 
My Puma also has a .432"-.433" barrel. I got fair to good accuracy with jacketed bullets, .430", but I went to .433"+ cast bullets. I used a Ranch Dog design bullets and now get good to very good accuracy with 2400...
 
Last edited:
My Puma also has a .432"-.433" barrel. I got fair to good accuracy with jacketed bullets, .430", but I went to .433"+ cast bullets. I used a Ranch Dog design bullets and now get good to very good accuracy with 2400...
Click to expand...

Do you have problems with chambering/action cycling with the bigger bullets... the OP says bigger bullets won't cycle in his.
 
Nope, my Puma feeds the RD bullets, both 240 gr and 265 gr with ease. One of the reasons I chose RD bullets, besides diameter, is the RNFP feeds 100%. A SWC hangs up in the chamber mouth unless I experiment with seating depth and using Special cases, and it's simpler to use Magnum brass. Did the OP say why the cartridge won't cycle? Where do they hang up?
 
Where do they hang up?
Click to expand...

they will not pass between the guides. had a whole thread on this a year ago. never intended this thread to go in this direction again since I had already determined .431" jacketed was my best option. just wanted feedback on wisdom or folly of going below published mins with H110.

thanks to all for responding.
 
Just as another data point, I have an older Marlin 1894 in 44 Mag. that gave hard extraction with a starting load of H110 behind Hornady's 240gr. XTP. I now run 22.3gr. and all appears well with that charge in that rifle.
 
oley55 said:
they will not pass between the guides. had a whole thread on this a year ago. never intended this thread to go in this direction again since I had already determined .431" jacketed was my best option. just wanted feedback on wisdom or folly of going below published mins with H110.

thanks to all for responding.
Click to expand...
W296/H110. I have not used these powders with below minimum listed loads. I have read enough, from many sources, that this powder becomes erratic and can lead to squibs/ignition problems to leave this experiment to others...
 
In the Hodgdon 2017 reloading pamphlet, they still caution against reducing H110/W296 more than 3%. But they also break their own rule slightly by listing a starting charge that is reduced over 4% below maximum for the 44 Mag 240gr. jacketed bullet load on their website.

If you look closely at the pressures measured by Hodgdon, it's apparent that the pressures drop rapidly with H110/W296 as you reduce the powder charge. In the case of the 44 Mag. with 240gr jacketed bullets, a 4% reduction in powder charge resulted in a 30% reduction in pressure. Compare the same caliber/bullet data using IMR4227. With IMR4227 an 8% reduction in powder charge results in a pressure reduction of 21%. So the small charge reduction cautions regarding H110/W296 would seem well founded.

A few more 240gr. jacketed 44 Mag load data points using H110/W296:

Sierra (5th) – Start 21.2gr. Max. 24.2gr.
Speer (14th) – Start 22.0gr. Max. 24.0gr.
Nosler (8th) – Start 22.8gr. Max. 23.8gr.
Hornady (9th) – Start 20.7gr. Max 24.5gr.

So there is pretty close agreement on the max. charge of H110/W296, but not so much agreement with the starting charge.

Sierra and Speer used CCI large mag pistol primers. Nosler and Hornady used Winchester large pistol primers. Hodgdon used Remington 2 ½ primers. Not saying that means anything specific, but it is a difference.

I've used H110, 2400, and IMR4227. I'm content with any of the three for my purposes. As pointed out, 2400 and IMR4227 do seem more tolerant of small load reductions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top