How low on 44 special?
- Thread starter Chainsaw.
- Start date
chainsaw
when i was cowboy shooting i was using 44spl,,200gr. lead rnfp bullets,,,but i was using universal (clays),,,and if i remember it was 750-800,,,nice load easy to run hard and fast out of a vaquaro 5.5 and it was very accurate
you should check the cowboy data to get what you are looking for and not get in trouble out of spec
just my .o2
ocharry
when i was cowboy shooting i was using 44spl,,200gr. lead rnfp bullets,,,but i was using universal (clays),,,and if i remember it was 750-800,,,nice load easy to run hard and fast out of a vaquaro 5.5 and it was very accurate
you should check the cowboy data to get what you are looking for and not get in trouble out of spec
just my .o2
ocharry
This is 240 grain Hornady swaged SWC's over 3.9 grains of Bullseye at 25 yards. IIRC, it was running about 620 fps from a 3" Charter Bulldog barrel. It was a 6:00 hold fired offhand back when I was competing in what's now called Conventional Pistol a lot and had a steady hold. The fixed sights weren't timed quite right on windage, you can see. But it still shot OK.
I should mention the gun had replacement grips that added a place for the little finger to hang on. It also had been returned to the factory with a complaint about its out-of-the-box accuracy, and they replaced the frame and with it, from what I could tell, everything else on it, too, and they had tested its grouping ability. So it is a selected gun, in that sense.
I should mention the gun had replacement grips that added a place for the little finger to hang on. It also had been returned to the factory with a complaint about its out-of-the-box accuracy, and they replaced the frame and with it, from what I could tell, everything else on it, too, and they had tested its grouping ability. So it is a selected gun, in that sense.
m&p45acp10+1
New member
A starting load with Trail Boss is probably going to be what you are seeking, or close to it. It will also be a clean shooting load.
Now the warning.
Never Use Trail Boss With Full Wad Cutters. Ever.
You will get a squib. It has to have some case volume.
I have some light loads for my Charter Bull Dog that were made so my wife could shoot more at the range without giving her wrist such a beating.
Now the warning.
Never Use Trail Boss With Full Wad Cutters. Ever.
You will get a squib. It has to have some case volume.
I have some light loads for my Charter Bull Dog that were made so my wife could shoot more at the range without giving her wrist such a beating.
m&p45acp10+1
New member
Yes there just is not enogh room with them. I had to remove some squibs because of that fact.
Jim Watson
New member
Phil Sharpe showed the .44 special 246 gr with 3 gr Bullseye at 635 fps from 6.5".
There seems to be a lot of Internet Confusion of "starting load" vs "minimum load."
There seems to be a lot of Internet Confusion of "starting load" vs "minimum load."
There are wadcutters and there are wadcutters. If you insist on seating them flush with the case mouth, powder space can be a problem for Trail Boss, but you usually aren't forced to do that. You can often crimp into a lube groove instead of the crimp groove and then have enough space. Matt's Bullets is a vendor who has four 0.430" wadcutters to choose from. (I haven't ever bought from him, so if someone has, please mention your experience.) He has a light and short 150 grain WC that shouldn't cause a Trail Boss loading problem. However, in a fixed sight gun, like any extra light bullet, they will hit low. He also has a heavy 250 grain WC that has a bore riding front section and a crimp groove at about half its overall length that should work with TB. Even with a standard design like his 215 grain WC, you can, as I mention already, crimp into the top or middle lube groove instead of the crimp groove and gain powder space that way.
sawdustdad
New member
I think Trail Boss is too slow a powder for really light loads. IMO.
I have.
All good. Fulfills orders quickly. Packaged well with fiberglass filament tape (the good, strong stuff). Well marked, etc.
I've tried a number of his .359" wadcutters. I've settled on the 150 grainer. Fantastic wadcutter that cuts a really sharp, full-diameter hole. And my guns seem to like the .359" diameter. But that's all for a different post. I haven't tried any of his .430" slugs; but I'm sure they're as good as his 38-jobbiedoos.
Sawdustdad,
Trail Boss is designed for CAS which employs lots of very light loads. In QuickLOAD's data base, where the properties are taken from tested samples, it has about the same burn rate as Bullseye and it is slightly progressive burning where Bullseye is slightly digressive burning. Being designed to work in the old black powder cartridges, its energy content is 3000 Joules per gram, same as black powder, whereas Bullseye has slightly over 5000 Joules per gram. That and the progressivity are why Bullseye loads that develop the same pressure and velocity have smaller charge weights. But the TB burn rate is just fine for light loads.
Nick,
Good to hear about Matt's Bullets. I think I'll get a hundred of each of his .430 wadcutters to experiment with. I know from past experience with the Bulldog that either the 185's or the 215's are likely to go about to the fixed sight POA, while the 250 will need a low 6:00 hold on a standard bull at 25 yards and the 150 will definitely shoot low. But sights can be changed. I'm mainly interested to see which has the best grouping behavior in each of my guns.
Trail Boss is designed for CAS which employs lots of very light loads. In QuickLOAD's data base, where the properties are taken from tested samples, it has about the same burn rate as Bullseye and it is slightly progressive burning where Bullseye is slightly digressive burning. Being designed to work in the old black powder cartridges, its energy content is 3000 Joules per gram, same as black powder, whereas Bullseye has slightly over 5000 Joules per gram. That and the progressivity are why Bullseye loads that develop the same pressure and velocity have smaller charge weights. But the TB burn rate is just fine for light loads.
Nick,
Good to hear about Matt's Bullets. I think I'll get a hundred of each of his .430 wadcutters to experiment with. I know from past experience with the Bulldog that either the 185's or the 215's are likely to go about to the fixed sight POA, while the 250 will need a low 6:00 hold on a standard bull at 25 yards and the 150 will definitely shoot low. But sights can be changed. I'm mainly interested to see which has the best grouping behavior in each of my guns.
sawdustdad
New member
Unclenick,
I shoot CAS, and have used Trail Boss in several different cartridges. It is quite popular with the CAS crowd, though I use 700x for my match loads in .38 spl. I have a 5lb jug and 6-9oz bottles of TB on the shelf right now. I've been also using it in 30-06 for some very light (1400fps) loads, that's a hoot!
My comment about Trail Boss being slower than Bullseye was based on Hodgdon's burn rate chart where Trail Boss is about 10 positions on the list slower. (I realize the chart is not perfect so some variations in actual use may be experienced.)
My experimentation with Trail Boss in very light loads shows it to not burn completely and leave powder residue in my revolvers. I've had better results with TB in .45 Colt with slightly heavier loads and heavier bullets, where it burned more completely.
There are many folks who are perfectly happy using Trail Boss in light loads, but my experience was such that I prefer Red Dot, Clays or 700x. I got smaller extreme spreads and lower SDs with the faster powders for loads in .38spl, .45C, .44spl, and C45S.
I shoot CAS, and have used Trail Boss in several different cartridges. It is quite popular with the CAS crowd, though I use 700x for my match loads in .38 spl. I have a 5lb jug and 6-9oz bottles of TB on the shelf right now. I've been also using it in 30-06 for some very light (1400fps) loads, that's a hoot!
My comment about Trail Boss being slower than Bullseye was based on Hodgdon's burn rate chart where Trail Boss is about 10 positions on the list slower. (I realize the chart is not perfect so some variations in actual use may be experienced.)
My experimentation with Trail Boss in very light loads shows it to not burn completely and leave powder residue in my revolvers. I've had better results with TB in .45 Colt with slightly heavier loads and heavier bullets, where it burned more completely.
There are many folks who are perfectly happy using Trail Boss in light loads, but my experience was such that I prefer Red Dot, Clays or 700x. I got smaller extreme spreads and lower SDs with the faster powders for loads in .38spl, .45C, .44spl, and C45S.
Interesting to hear your experience. I ran some light Trail Boss loads in .45 Auto at one point and was astonished by how cleanly it burned in them. Not even any soot or blackening inside the cases. They looked like they'd just come out of the tumbler. Way better than Bullseye does for me. However, that was with a very heavy bullet of my own design, which would have helped it burn better.
The problem with burn rate charts is they include a lot of guesswork. A Hodgdon tech told me the burn rate test is expensive to have a lab do, so they don't pay to have it done to competitor's powders, especially since you can't know from one purchased sample to the next how close to their target value they are. All the distributors consider their in-house numbers to be proprietary, so they aren't sharing the information, either. Additionally, the exact order can flip around under other pressure conditions than are present in the standard test. I always think the charts that group powders together by application have a more realistic perspective on the whole thing.
TB is, as you say, positioned down from Bullseye, but its above 231/HP38 which is used in most of the same kinds of loads Bullseye is used in. So these guys are all sharing a ballpark. All faster than, say, Unique. All slower than Clays or N310, or the several other very fast powders out there.
The problem with burn rate charts is they include a lot of guesswork. A Hodgdon tech told me the burn rate test is expensive to have a lab do, so they don't pay to have it done to competitor's powders, especially since you can't know from one purchased sample to the next how close to their target value they are. All the distributors consider their in-house numbers to be proprietary, so they aren't sharing the information, either. Additionally, the exact order can flip around under other pressure conditions than are present in the standard test. I always think the charts that group powders together by application have a more realistic perspective on the whole thing.
TB is, as you say, positioned down from Bullseye, but its above 231/HP38 which is used in most of the same kinds of loads Bullseye is used in. So these guys are all sharing a ballpark. All faster than, say, Unique. All slower than Clays or N310, or the several other very fast powders out there.
ShootistPRS
New member
If you want to see the latest procedures and test devices used in the apparatus for military spec closed bomb testing you can find a public document in PDF format here
As you will see, the closed bomb measurements have little correlation to the expanding containment of a bullet moving down a bore. The larger the bore the greater the variation in burning speed results.
As you will see, the closed bomb measurements have little correlation to the expanding containment of a bullet moving down a bore. The larger the bore the greater the variation in burning speed results.
Yes. Exactly. Burn rate changes exponentially with pressure, and in a gun it will therefore be affected by rate and volume of expansion. In a given gun, expansion rate changes with bullet mass. Peak values and acceleration will also be affected by start pressure which, in turn, is affected by details like proximity of the bullet to the lands, crimp strength, bullet hardness, bullet lubrication, etc. For all these reasons and because of the different shapes of pressure curves produced by different powder formulations and grain geometries, burn rate rankings are only exactly comparable in the standard set of conditions created in the fixed bomb volume.
Thanks for the link!
Thanks for the link!