reduced 44mag load?

I think OT listed just one load because they were close enough to 1,000. The point of a reduced load is enough for accuracy and no more. I would not try for much more with a fast powder like HP-38/W231. The only pressure signs I've seen in a revolver are sticky cases and erratic velocities, but you might not get any warning signs with a fast powder.

FWIW, I have not loaded down any .44 mag rounds, but I have done with my .45 Colt Blackhawk in an effort to get a "field" load that doesn't sting my hand. You can back off a little bit with H110, but I haven't found that to be useful. I have loaded AA#5 and now Power Pistol to get some 900 fps rounds (250 OT). Next test is 255 Missouri Bullets over AA#9. I'm looking for right around 1,200. That may not sound "reduced", but a less-than-max load of H110 drives a 360 Cast Performance almost that fast out of my pistol. That's a knuckle buster.
 
"...confirm book-data is safe..." Ever hear of a reloading company being sued for bad data?
Absolutely, you can use .44 Special data in Magnum cases. Just like you can .38 Special data in .357 cases.
"..."11.0 grains of hp38" isn't extraordinary..." 11.0 is the MAX .44 Mag load for a cast 240. You do not want to start at any Max load. 11.0 isn't unsafe, but you just don't pick a load and hope. You work up the load from the start load.
Mind you, there is something wrong with the data when the velocity is higher with a cast bullet using the same amount of powder. Been noticing that a lot on Hodgdon's site. Using magnum primers in magnum named cartridges but not non-magnum named with the same powders too. Oddly not with .44 Mag loads.
 
Following up with the first round of tests for posterity, and based on your suggestions:

Ruger Super Redhawk 9.5"
Oregon Trail Laser cast 240grain
CCI350 LP-mag primer
44mag brass

HP38 7.4 1018
HP38 7.7 1035
HP38 8.1 1098
HP38 8.6 1155

2400 17 1307
2400 18 1319

H110 23.5 1480


So, given my powders, I can get a full range of FPS. The HP38 loads match book data very closely. The 2400/H110 loads exceed book data by 10-20%, in fact, they're more consistent with rifle book data. Brass was easy to eject and primers generally looked the same after all loads, H110 flattened the primers just a bit.

It looks like HP38 can meet my goal of 1000-1100 fps for targets. The real question is if I'll see the same speeds in the smaller 4.25" S&W model 69 after it's liberated from gun jail. Recoil was noticeable in the Ruger at 1100fps. The H110 recoil made your ears ring, nose run, and chrony move at 1500fps


cool,
-edfardos
 
Go get some Red Dot, Clays, and/or Bullesye
Any of those three will get you 950-ish out of the 4½" and at pressures the hard-cast lead needs to operate.
 
mehavey, I will, absolutely. Just as soon as they exist on store shelves :).

The lack of inventory certainly has driven some creative combinations lately. Though, even when supplies are high, it's still economical to minimize the total different types of powder used.

best,
-craig
 
In my experience, going down to a 4½" barrel from the 9½" Ruger will cost you about 60-75 fps with the same HP38 loads. It will be interesting to see your chrony results.
 
You can drop down to 800 fps with HP38 since you have lots of it.

None of the powders that you listed require the magnum primers other than the H110.

2400 will burn dirty unless you are loading at max load and a little less.

Take a look at the Hodgdon data online and you can see the loads you need to pursue.


I have never tried to reduce loads for the 44 much, but I do have a good cast load for a 260 gr HP cast bullet with 17.0 gr of A2400.

I think the AA#5 would not be a good choice. FWIW.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top