Loaddata.com?

I don't trust it.
I looked when i reamed my chamber to 7mm-08AI. Loads there were grossly over pressure.
I try to use data published by either bullet manufacturer or powder manufacturer.

Only when i'm using components that don't match from either of those do i go to QuickLoad for guidance, and as always start low.
 
The site says:

"All the loads are developed by the staff of Handloader magazine and the archives of Handloader and Rifle magazines."​

As a result, a lot of the loads will be applicable only to the individual guns they were developed in. Some will be out of date, based on the performance of powders whose sources have since changed and on primers whose formulations have since changed and on cases whose exact capacities have since changed. If those guns are beefier than yous, this can lead to pressure signs in your gun. Like any other load source, you would be well advised to cross-check them against other sources, be sure you match their components and then knock 10% off the listed charge and work up, watching for pressure signs.
 
I am aware of the caveats applicable to their data, but there isn't a lot of data out there for .44 Colt so I'd like to see what is available for data. I'm quite capable of comparing to other data sources to weed out the hand grenade loads. .44 Colt is a niche round, at best, and I'm looking for cowboy-level loads, not magnum-level stuff.
 
If, per your other thread on the 44 Colt, you can tell me the length of your bullet heel, I can get you comparative estimates in QuickLOAD based on first tweaking it to match the performance reported by Hodgdon for their powders. The weight of water your cases hold when the water is level with the case mouth would refine the prediction accuracy.
 
Heel depth is 0.135". Bullet weight is advertised as 220-grain, the one I weighed was 219.

I'll have to work on getting a water weight. I hoped Starline might give the case volume in their specifications, but they don't. If you know the volume for .44 Special, these are the same diameter but .050" shorter.

Thanks
 
There's some .44 Colt data on Hodgdon's site. Appears that most of the Loaddata.com data is BP.
"...QuickLoad for guidance..." That'd be unguidance. Computer programs are not load manuals.
 
45Colt Man said:
They have 36 loads from Hogdon Pistol Data and 8 loads from Mike Venturino.
Also just a few other loads.
Click to expand...

Do they have any loads with a 220-grain bullet, using either Winchester 231/HP-38 or Trail Boss?
 
CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.


AB,

What I did was take Hodgdon's data and a 240 grain bullet and tweak the case capacity until 4.9 grains of HP38/231 gave me 9900 pressure units and 827 fps same as they got, even though they use CUP and QL uses psi, at this pressure they should be pretty close. Note there COL is just 1.380", so their bullet took up a lot of powder space, having a seating depth of about 0.32-0.33 by calculation. I then put in your bullet weight of 219 grains and a seating depth equal to the 0.125" heel length you gave me, but left the charge alone. The pressure dropped to 6800 psi. I think that explains your soot. The software thinks 6.1 grains would be needed to reach the pressure of the Hodgdon load with your short seating depth. I would work up to that very carefully, as this is a computer prediction and not tested and published data! But I think it will be about right in the end. Just go slowly!
 
Unclenick -

Looks like you went through a lot of work. Thanks very much.

Yes, the velocity I got with 4.9 grains of W231 was nowhere near 827 fps. Not that I wanted anywhere near 827 fps, but I would like to be at or a bit over 700, I think. What I got running five shots through the chronograph was an average of 546, a high of 635, and a low of 493. So, aside from generally low velocity, the consistency isn't there. The extreme spread was 142 and the standard deviation was 59. That may be partially due to difficulty seating the heeled bullets uniformly, and partially due to the W231 occupying so little volume in a relatively large case, making the rounds sensitive to position/orientation.

The next larger aperture on my Lee Autodisk drops 5.3 grains of W231, which is what I use for .45 ACP plinking loads with Berry's plated bullets. Your numbers tell me that I can safely jump up to that aperture, and probably the one beyond that (which I haven't weighed, but which should throw about 5.6 grains).

It has been suggested that I should be using Trail Boss for these cartridges, and there is probably some validity to that suggestion. What do you think?

Thanks again for cranking those numbers.
 
AB,

I'm guessing that what you are seeing is erratic ignition. If you still have it, even with the increased charge, you might try backing the new load down 5% and use a magnum primer and work back up to see if that settles it any. At 4.9 grains you are at less than 25% case fill, so there is a lot of empty space for the primer to pressurize. If not, I would be checking that the gun's chamber diameters are the same (often they are not on a revolver) and you get them reamed to match, which also generally improves accuracy.

I don't know what barrel length you have, but for the 6.1 grain load, for various revolver barrel lengths (revolver barrel lengths don't include the chamber, as pistol barrel lengths do), and assuming a chamber and barrel identical in dimensions to the one Hodgdon has (that caveat is always there), QuickLOAD has:

Velocities for 6.1 grains 231 in .44 Colt seated 0.135" different revolver barrel lengths.

2": 678 fps
3": 753 fps
4": 806 fps
5": 846 fps
6": 878 fps
7": 904 fps
8": 926 fps

You can interpolate those barrel lengths for what you actually have, then, as you work up, if you get a pressure sign, like sticky case extraction, you stop. If you hit 6.1 grains before you hit the velocity listed for your barrel length, then you stop, or if you hit the velocity first, you stop. That's a good first step.

QuickLOAD actually thinks you could get as high as around 7.0 grains and over 1000 fps (8" barrel) loaded to CIP specs, but I'm inclined to stick with Hodgdon's pressures for the time being and if and only if there are still zero pressure signs, think about going up. I am mentioning it here only to give you a sense that there is still some safety margin likely available. But again, only the pressure signs will tell.


Trail Boss should work well. I do not trust QuickLOAD's model of this powder because the maximums come out too much higher than those Hodgdon publishes. But it will fill the case way better and that may eliminate some of your erratic velocity results, so I expect it's worth a try.
 
It's a 7-1/2" barrel.

I picked up a shipment of Trail Boss from FedEx today, so I'll give that a true. Agree on load data. Hodgdon shows 3.0 to 3.9 for a 200-grain bullet, and 3.0 to 3.4 for a 240-grain. A friend who shoots cowboy action and uses a lot of Trail Boss suggested that I start with 4.0 grains.
scared.gif


I was thinking more like 3.2 grains, but I'll make up a few at 3.0, a few at 3.2, and a few at 3.4 to see how it shakes out.
 
Test cartridges loaded. I load on a Lee Turret Press with their Autodisk powder measure, so rather than hand measure the test loads, I went as close as the Autodisk would let me. The .82 hole drops 3.1 grains of Trail Boss. The next larger hole is the .88, which drops 3.7.

I loaded up five of each. We'll see how it goes with the chronograph. I don't think the 3.7-grain load is over the maximum, but it's closer than I'd prefer. Whether or not I actually light them off will depend on what I see from the rounds loaded with 3.1 grains.
 
Loaddata

Being a rifle junkie no telling what's in the works. Personally found Loaddate to be valuable resource. The search feature is very handy.
 
Aguila Blanca said:
Is anyone a subscriber to www.loaddata.com? I'd like to see their data for the .44 Colt, but it's not worth the cost of a subscription to get a couple of loads for one cartridge that I'm interested in only as a curiosity.
Click to expand...

Part of me is somewhat offended that you want me to spend money on a subscription so you don't have to. The other part wonders why you don't work up a proper load for yourself, using data published by the powder or bullet manufacturers.

Others will give you a load though...

Jeff



Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
weaselfire said:
Part of me is somewhat offended that you want me to spend money on a subscription so you don't have to.
Click to expand...
I don't want to buy a subscription because I'm living on social security and I can't afford to subscribe to something that I'll probably never use again. I know how to look up load data on-line, and I have already done so. The problem is that the velocities I'm seeing over a chronograph for this one, odd-ball cartridge are totally out of the ballpark (on the slow side) compared to what Hodgdon tells me I should expect. So I'm looking for input from other sources.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top