.44 Magnum load data


PDA






jrop11
July 21, 2009, 03:34 PM
I am reloading .44 Mag with a 240 grain JHP and 10.3 grains of Unique and find it to be a little weak. My manual says this is close to Maximum load and don't want to push it. I'd be interested to hear if anyone else has a recipe with a bit more punch.

If you enjoyed reading about ".44 Magnum load data" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Ben Shepherd
July 21, 2009, 04:05 PM
Yeah. But you're going to need a different powder like AA9, 2400, 296, N110, etc.

rcmodel
July 21, 2009, 04:11 PM
If you want full power, you need to use a powder better suited to .44 Magnum power levels.

Unique is great for high mid-range loads, but it falls a couple three hundred FPS short of what you can get with 2400, H110, WW296 and other Magnum powders.

And you can't tell what you are getting by how it feels.
Both blast & recoil will be less because it is a faster burning powder then what you normally find in .44 Magnum loads.

Now, with all that said, Lyman #49 shows 12.0 grains Unique & the Speer 240 grain as a Max load giving 1,084 FPS at 38,700 CUP.

The same bullet with a Max load of 24.0 grains WW296 gives 1,292 FPS at only 38,500!

rc

243winxb
July 21, 2009, 04:12 PM
WW296 for top velocity. Mag. primer. Dont reduce maximum powder charge more than 5% for a starting load.

Leanwolf
July 21, 2009, 05:54 PM
Try ol' Elmer's standard load: 22 grains of 2400 and a 240 grains bullet.

You won't find that one "weak." :)

L.W.

jrop11
July 21, 2009, 06:35 PM
LOL I'm not trying to blow my hand off :) Just get a little bit of the old "What the heck is he shooting!?"

Ben Shepherd
July 21, 2009, 06:52 PM
Try ol' Elmer's standard load: 22 grains of 2400 and a 240 grains bullet.

NOTE: That load is right at or over any current published maximums, so approach with care.

I will also note that in my 9.5" SRH, that particular load has proven safe, very accurate, and happens to clock right at 1550 fps with no leading using lazer-cast slugs.

Jrop11- What firearm are you using?

Remo-99
July 21, 2009, 09:26 PM
LOL I'm not trying to blow my hand off Just get a little bit of the old "What the heck is he shooting!?"

Powders like 2400, 296, etc. will give the 44mag the sting it is meant to have, producing magnum velocities within it's pressure limits. Were as the faster burning powders like Unique are good for taming 44mags back down to 44spl levels, when called for.

Ol` Joe
July 21, 2009, 09:39 PM
LOL I'm not trying to blow my hand off Just get a little bit of the old "What the heck is he shooting!?"

You want H110/W296. This powder will give all the FPS the 44 is capable of and offers great muzzle blast to boot!
I use it in mine and the 1st time my dad saw me shooting it (about 35 yrs ago) he claimed I was scorching the grass 20 yd down range. :D :D

flipajig
July 21, 2009, 09:50 PM
LOL at scorcheing the grass.. The two pdrs that im using in my SBH are W231 and 2400
the 2400 load is running at 1250 rpms and my 231 is just over 800 with cast bullets and im happy. both are accurat and a pleasure to shoot..

jrop11
July 21, 2009, 10:22 PM
Hey Ben it's a Taurus 4 1/2" with a ported barrel. It's actually a great gun to shoot although the ribbed stock gribs are starting to break off. I know a lot of people have bad impression of Taurus, but this is my 3rd taurus and I think they are fine.

myg30
July 22, 2009, 08:24 PM
2400 or H-110? Try them both.. you'll like em.

Be safe, Mike

jem375
July 22, 2009, 10:33 PM
I use Unique only for target loads...........7.5-8 grs is about the 44 special load and is a good target load....
WW296 and H110 along with 2400 for the heavy loads....

MovedWest
July 23, 2009, 04:59 AM
Seriously if you want the :what: effect you should roll up with 2400. The cylinder and muzzle flashes will light up the range. If you want attention this is your powder.

I was firing 21.0gr of 2400 behind my 240gr bullets at the range today. Not only did I draw a small crowd and a few questions, but I spurred conversation amongst a good share of the folks that I overheard talking about what the heck I was shooting. Many Dirty Harry references were made.

Let's face reality though. The 2400 Elmer Keith used is different than what we're loading these days. With the current make-up of 2400 I think 22.0gr under a 240gr bullet is a bit too much, but 20-21gr is wickedly appealing and very accurate. ;)

-MW

Ben Shepherd
July 23, 2009, 07:20 AM
With the current make-up of 2400 I think 22.0gr under a 240gr bullet is a bit too much, but 20-21gr is wickedly appealing and very accurate.

You are correct. Currently most manuals list somewhere between 20 and 21 grains of 2400 behind a 240 grain slug as a maximum charge in 44 magnum. Folks going past that do so at their own risk.

The 22 grain charge mentioned by leanwolf and noted by me as a "good load" is just that, a good load in my gun,(which happens to be a big heavy framed gun) that was worked up to very carefully and slowly.

It is most assuredly a maximum effort load, and should be approached with caution and the use of a chronograph.

Martyk
July 23, 2009, 07:52 AM
Unique is a relatively slow burning pistol powder, so it will feel softer. Moving to something a little faster like some of the suggestions above will produce more of the SNAP you're looking for. I use H110 and that's got a pretty impressive muzzle blast.

kelbro
July 23, 2009, 10:17 AM
I don't think that I would load 21-22gr of 2400 in a Taurus. Not knocking the Taurus but I think that would qualify as a 'Ruger only' load.

Ben Shepherd
July 23, 2009, 10:18 AM
Martyk, actually you've got it backwards. Unique is one of the faster powders, h110, 296, 2400, etc., are relatively slow as far as powders used in handgun calibers go.

Slower powders give higher velocities because they hold a higher pressure for a longer period of time on the back of the bullet than a faster powder. And in some cases are actually easier on the gun because the peak pressure builds slower.

Think of it as a hard heavy push vs. a hammer blow. The end result may be similar, but the methods used to get there aren't.

EDIT: I see kelbro and I typed at the same time. I agree with him completely. You may find that heavy 22 grain load safe in your gun, but I would not recommend anything even approaching a steady diet of them in it.

ADKWOODSMAN
July 23, 2009, 11:14 AM
Have a friend who tried the 12 gr. of Unique load and had to pound the cases out of a 629.

fatelk
July 23, 2009, 01:05 PM
IIRC, the old Keith load was 22gr. 2400 with a 250gr bullet.

What the others are saying is absolutely correct. I don't use 22 grains; 21 is max in my model 29. A friend has an old Dan Wesson, and 22 grains is fine in his gun. He would still load them with 21 though; less wear and tear on the gun, and safer if they accidently got used in a different revolver.

Kernel
July 23, 2009, 11:11 PM
With 240 gr bullets in my .44 Mags I've had good luck with max loads of Vihtavorui N110. Top velocity and acuracty without the "flame thrower" effect you get with 2400 and some other powders.

MikeS.
July 24, 2009, 05:35 AM
These Keith loads you mention, does the bullet style matter? If so, which style?

ArchAngelCD
July 24, 2009, 05:45 AM
Like the others have said, you will need to use a slower powder which will give you better results.

IMO there are so many good powders available on the market you shouldn't have a problem finding something you like and will work well in your revolver. For the most part pick a company you like and use their "Magnum" powder. IMO with a 240gr jacketed bullet in a .44 Magnum W296/H110 will give you top velocity and accurate ammo. AA#9 isn't far behind and 2400 is a good powder if you want to load from hot to medium hot loads because it can be safely downloaded.

Acurate Arms AA#9
Alliant 2400
Hodgdon Lil'Gun
IMR IMR4227
Ramshot Enforcer
Winchester W296 / Hodgdon H110
And I'm sure VihtaVuori (http://www.vihtavuori-lapua.com/) had a good powder or two for the .44 Magnum but I don't know enough about them to recommend one.

MovedWest
July 24, 2009, 05:51 AM
These Keith loads you mention, does the bullet style matter? If so, which style?

The odd thing about the "Keith style" bullet is that Elmer Keith used several different bullet castings. I believe most of them were lead cast bullets, but I'm guessing they used gas checks? At those velocities non-gas-checked bullets would be liquefied before leaving the chamber.

-MW

ArchAngelCD
July 24, 2009, 05:53 AM
I don't think Elmer Keith used gas checks in his reloads because the Lyman bullet molds (like the Lyman #429421) he used weren't for GC bullets.

MovedWest
July 24, 2009, 06:01 AM
I don't think that I would load 21-22gr of 2400 in a Taurus. Not knocking the Taurus but I think that would qualify as a 'Ruger only' load.

Personally I see signs of maximum pressure at 21.0gr of 2400 in my Ruger SBH. I've loaded rounds above that during test runs, but I pulled them afterward realizing it would be bad judgment to fire them. The primers don't flatten, but they do square off considerably.

A charge of 21.0gr of 2400 under a 240gr projectile is max IMO even for a Ruger load. don't forget that chemical advances and powder redesigns have come about since the Elmer Keith days. Alliant's 2400 is a more efficient powder nowadays then it was 50 years ago. 22gr of 2400 in 1954 is worth about 21gr of 2400 now.

Most importantly work your load up like you were approaching a landmine. Observe every round you fire, check each shell for stress signs, and check the operation of your weapon after every cylinder of hot rounds.

May the net force be with you.

-MW

MovedWest
July 24, 2009, 06:10 AM
I don't think Elmer Keith used gas checks in his reloads because the Lyman bullet molds (like the Lyman #429421) he used weren't for GC bullets.

Wow. Just curious - has anyone out there fired a lead bullet with this kind of load without a gas check? I'm curious as to the result.

rcmodel - do you have any insight? You're usually really good with these kinds of things.

-MW

jrop11
July 24, 2009, 09:00 AM
Thanks for all of the replies! I think I will look at H110 and the 2400, but porbably lean more towards the 2400. I like the grass scorching possibilities :)
I'll keep the Unique for the .38 and .45ACP.

Kernel
July 24, 2009, 11:28 AM
2400. I like the grass scorching possibilities
Kill it, and cook it, in one step.:p

Ben Shepherd
July 24, 2009, 12:12 PM
Wow. Just curious - has anyone out there fired a lead bullet with this kind of load without a gas check? I'm curious as to the result.

Yes. A lot. No leading to speak of. But I use the lazer cast slugs. I have driven them as fast as 1700 in a rifle, but over 1600 they start leading a bit.


I also note that my "standard" 240 HCKT load is 20 grains or 2400 for just about 1300 at the muzzle. The 22 grain load we're discussing is for hunting only, and not shot on a regular basis.

243winxb
July 24, 2009, 01:45 PM
At those velocities non-gas-checked bullets would be liquefied before leaving the chamber.
lol, No.

Ben Shepherd
July 24, 2009, 02:07 PM
I'll keep the Unique for the .38 and .45ACP.

Don't rule it out for plinker/small game loads in the 44. Most reloaders find that somewhere between 7 and 7.5 grains under that 245 SWC makes a wonderful combination.

jrop11
July 24, 2009, 05:03 PM
I went looking for 2400 and no one had it. I ended up with H110. I'll give it a shot and see how it goes. It seems like there is a rolling run on reloading stuff. I can find primers now, but powder and brass seem to be back ordered. Anyone else see that?

Ben Shepherd
July 24, 2009, 05:16 PM
Use magnum primers and a firm crimp with the H110, jrop11.

jrop11
July 24, 2009, 07:35 PM
Well that takes all the fun out of my Saturday. I only have CCI 300 Large Pistol Primers. If I back of the charge can I SAFELY use the H110? I was thinking 20 Grains to start on a 240 grain JHP.

I know it's a fairly common question and right now I'm not concerned about performance just safety. It's not safe I don't want to test it. If it's just a reduced velocity I am okay with that. I'll stick to the Unique until someone tells me otherwise. I know midway/cabelas everyone else is out of mag primers......

buck460XVR
July 24, 2009, 09:17 PM
I only have CCI 300 Large Pistol Primers. If I back of the charge can I SAFELY use the H110? I was thinking 20 Grains to start on a 240 grain JHP.


IMHO....NO! That is below any published load I have with a 240 grain bullet and the chance of a squib is too high. Again......in .44Magnum, you NEED to use a magnum primer with H110/W296 for proper ignition. My most accurate hunting loads for my 629 are with H110........but it has very small parameters and is very unforgiving when not used according to published recipes.

fatelk
July 24, 2009, 10:19 PM
Wow. Just curious - has anyone out there fired a lead bullet with this kind of load without a gas check? I'm curious as to the result.

Many hundreds, perhaps thousands. Use a properly lubed, reasonably hard alloy bullet of the correct diameter.

It's actually not even that complicated. For years I used unsized bullets from wheel weight lead, cast in cheap Lee molds, tumble-lubed with alox. Little or no leading.

My standard load is 21.0 gr. 2400 with the Lee 240gr. bullets. A friend of mine kills bear with them (only after working up the load in his revolver, of course).

Martyk
July 24, 2009, 10:50 PM
Thanks for the correction Ben. I completely understand and agree. Don't know what I was thinking.

jrop11
July 25, 2009, 01:10 AM
Hey Buck, Thanks for the response. I'll stick with the Unique until I can get some magnum primers. I like to be safe when reloading and that's why I came here looking for some pointers from people that have been doing this for a long time.

frnkeore
July 25, 2009, 06:52 PM
Here is my take on 2400, the 44 mag was originally made for up to 42,000 average CUP loads and all modern loading data is for 34-38,000 PSI (a little lower pressure scale in this range). What they say about modern 2400 being different may well be true but, i believe it is a little slower than "old" 2400. Alliant Powder (the company that really should know about there own powder) lists 20.6 gr @ 34,700 psi with a lead gc 240 gr bullet (gc's will generally give a little higher pressures than plain base) with a oal of 1.6 in. They list a 240 gr swift jacketed at 21.5 gr of 2400 @ 33,600 psi loaded to 1.62 in. oal.

Keith did not like gas check bullets so, his data was for plain base bullets cast hard enough to take the 42,000 pressures.

Skeeter Skelton (sp?) thought that 21.0 was better because, it was'nt quite so hard on his hand and he thought it might be more accurate.

Here is what I think........ if you load 22.0 gr @ 1.7 oal with ANY bullet 240-250 gr, it should be safe in any gun chambered for 44 Mag. If you get sticking it most likely because of chamber smoothness. Ruger Red Hawks should be able to take 50,000 cup and Black Hawks 42,000 cup. Some Taurus's are chambered for 454 Causul and that frame should be good for anything (Raging Bull). And a 5 shot dosen't have the bolt notch in the chamber area so,i think they should be good for at least the Alliant loads they list.

The Over All Lenght means quite a lot as far as pressure goes. In a Ruger RH you can load way out, about 1.8 in or more, in a BH you can do 1.7 in, a Taurus I don't know about.

What do you think?

frnkeore
July 25, 2009, 07:04 PM
Stick with standerd pistol primers on Unqiue and 2400. I have found no real differance with Mag primers on 296 and H110. By that I mean that I get a little better accuracy and lower vel/pressure with std primers and a little higher vel/pressure and less accurate with mag primers. I know people will say i can blow myself up with std primers but, i've used 13.0 gr of 296 in a 32/40 case (much larger and ANY pistol case) with std pistol primers for more than 20 yrs, as well as 100's of other people in 32/40.

ArchAngelCD
July 27, 2009, 02:37 AM
frnkeore,
It's not a good idea to recommend someone ignore the powder company's recommendation of using only Magnum primers with one of their powders. (and most, if not all reloading manuals) H110 and W296 (exactly the same powders) are hard powders to ignite. If you don't use a Magnum primer you will probably get an incomplete powder burn. If you couple that with a light crimp you can cause a squib load. That can be very dangerous. You can do what you want with your own ammo but it's really not a good idea to recommend someone else do it, especially a new reloader. I'm sure you have had no problems but you never know how someone else will fair. I'm sure you meant no harm but they may not have the necessary reloading skills to achieve the same outcome. (I mean no harm either)

frnkeore
July 27, 2009, 03:49 AM
I'm sorry if you miss understood me. I only recomended using std pistol primers with Unique and 2400. I said that I used std primers and got better accuracy and had no problems. I suppose that I should have had warning with it but didn't think of that at the time. I've studied reloading manuals since 1968 and find that H110 and 296 are diffinatley NOT the same powder. Even the flame color isn't the same with them. You can use approx. the same charges but, can get into real trouble in some calibers. I also mean no harm but I try to be very accurate in reloading.

Ol` Joe
July 27, 2009, 09:35 PM
I've studied reloading manuals since 1968 and find that H110 and 296 are diffinatley NOT the same powder. Even the flame color isn't the same with them. You can use approx. the same charges but, can get into real trouble in some calibers. I also mean no harm but I try to be very accurate in reloading.

Call Hodgdon and tell them that......they`ll be interested to know. The two are exactly the same except for lot to lot variation. They distribute and package both as well as HP38/ W231, and a few others and will admit to the linage of their powders.

jrop11
July 27, 2009, 10:54 PM
Yikes! I didn't mean to start a fight :) break it up fellas

ArchAngelCD
July 28, 2009, 01:34 AM
frnkeore,
You can believe anything you like but like "Ol' Joe" said, Hodgdon is the one who verified both W296 and H110 are the same exact powder.

The combination that I'm sure are the same:
W231 = HP-38
W296 = H110
W540 = HS-6
W571 = HS-7
W760 = H414

If you doubt this just check the Hodgdon online load data site and you will see the charges for each are exactly the same with the same exact pressures and velocities. If you still doubt the facts just write either Winchester or Hodgdon and ask them. The answer you get will be signed "Hodgdon/ IMR/ Winchester." Believe what you wish but that doesn't change the fact the powders listed above are exactly the same.

Have a nice day...

warnerwh
July 28, 2009, 03:54 AM
One thing to keep in mind is that lead bullets and jacketed bullets have separate loading data for a reason. Loading jacketed bullets to loads listed for lead can be a problem but not likely the other way around. Either way always start about ten percent below published loads. The best accuracy is usually below max loads in all of my guns.

frnkeore
July 28, 2009, 06:25 PM
You can believe anything you like but like "Ol' Joe" said, Hodgdon is the one who verified both W296 and H110 are the same exact powder

I do stand corrected if you only refer to the powder made since Hodgdon bought Winchester powders (Olin). I have there '08 Annual Manual. But consider this.......... H110 was introduced in '62 as a military surpus powder (to my understanding WC825, carbine powder). Military powders are made in large lots and blended to produce a specific velocity for that cartridge (M1 Carbine in this case). What criteria Hodgdgon used for there lot to lot variation I have no idea. Also lots are controlled with deterants (such as DNT and have flash inhibitors).

Winchesters 296 was introduced in '73 as a canister powder that was closely controlled lot to lot. I would find it hard to to believe that they they tried to make it exactly like H110. Especially since they were competitors and i doubt that it contained a flash inhibitor (hince a different flash) since civilian powder doesn't need it. I have a article done with high speed cameras documenting the flash differance.

I actually thing that Hodgdon should have a warning or specify that one or the other are "new" powders or say that there can be at lest 4,000 CUP differances in lot to lot containers of powder. Check Lymans pistol manual on 44 Mag. Light as opposed to heavier bullets using the same charges and componants.

I bought 8 pounds of 296more than 2 years ago and I'm sure I'm not the only one that has 296 made by Winchester. There for there still needs to be caution used in loading it!

Ol` Joe
July 28, 2009, 10:08 PM
I do stand corrected if you only refer to the powder made since Hodgdon bought Winchester powders (Olin). I have there '08 Annual Manual.

Hodgdon doesn`t own Winchester powders, Olin is the name holder, St Marks is where it is manufactured and Hodgdon is the licensed distributor of late. Hodgdon until the last couple of years when they bought IMR Powders has never manufactured a smokeless powder. They got their start supplying mil-surplus powders to the civilian market. The 1st was 4831 which is slightly different then their 1st batch of surplus today.

I actually thing that Hodgdon should have a warning or specify that one or the other are "new" powders or say that there can be at lest 4,000 CUP differances in lot to lot containers of powder. Check Lymans pistol manual on 44 Mag. Light as opposed to heavier bullets using the same charges and componants

Actually there is a warning in every reloading manual to reduce the max charge by 5%-10% to start. Hodgdon themself recommend the 10% figure in their 2008 data book in the intro to their reloading data on pg 14. I believe this is to accomodate the variation in burn commonly found in smokeless powders.

JimKirk
July 28, 2009, 10:34 PM
I think neither Winchester nor Hodgon had made any powder up until recently. Hodgon purchased The IMR from Dupont. Primex(Olin)(now General Dymanics) in St. Marks, FL made Winchester and most of Hodgons. Some of the Hodgons are made in Austraila(ADI (Australian Defense Industries)) and the IMR(Expro) is made in Canada.

Jimmy K

Joe beat me to it !

JimKirk
July 28, 2009, 10:51 PM
http://www.hodgdon.com/PDF/MSDS%20Files/Smokeless/Hodgdon/Spherical%20Powders/St%20Marks%20-%20Spherical%20Powders.pdf

MSD for (New)Hodgon Spherical powders

frnkeore
July 28, 2009, 10:57 PM
Actually there is a warning in every reloading manual to reduce the max charge by 5%-10% to start. Hodgdon themself recommend the 10% figure in their 2008 data book in the intro to their reloading data on pg 14. I believe this is to accomodate the variation in burn commonly found in smokeless powders.


Untill Hodgdon Started Distributing 296 Wincherster/Olin. The data said DO NOT reduce loads and I quote........ Do not reduce powder charges with 296. These loads need to be used exactly as shown. A reduction in powder charge or in components can cause danerous pressures.

bluetopper
July 28, 2009, 11:32 PM
I've started experimenting using AA4100 powder. So far I really like it!

Kramer Krazy
December 26, 2009, 01:34 PM
I only have CCI 300 Large Pistol Primers. If I back of the charge can I SAFELY use the H110? I was thinking 20 Grains to start on a 240 grain JHP.

I've been away from shooting and reloading for nearly four years and decided to reload some ammo while on Christmas vacation. I have my 44 mag brass ready and decided to look for reload data for the two bullets I have. Interestingly, this is the same combination I was looking for because I have no idea where I got the combination. The last 44 mag reloads I did were Speer 240 gr JSP with 20.0 gr of #296. I only rolled 50 rounds, and looking through my boxes, I shot off 20 of them (without any issues), but I have absolutely no idea where I came up with that combination. Everything I've seen tells me not to use anything less than 23 gr of #296. I have another 100 brass ready to go, so I'll bump the charge up.

Originally, I was using #231 with a 240 gr LSWC with charges of 7.7 gr and 8.2 gr, but they were really smokey. I switched to the 296 to get rid of the smoke issue, but I have no idea where I read to use only 20.0 gr of #296....maybe I confused two tables or something. I have no idea since I loaded those back in June of 2006.

RB98SS
December 26, 2009, 03:22 PM
be interested to hear if anyone else has a recipe with a bit more punch.

Don't overlook IMR 4227 for use in .44 mag with a 240gr bullet. I use it with Missouri hardcast 240gr TCFP bullets and it has just the right amount accuracy and velocity I want with less of the flash , bang, and boom that you'll get from H110, W296, and 2400.

hydraulicman
December 26, 2009, 04:54 PM
i have had a similar experiance with the 357 mag. I switched to 2400 and 296 and never looked back. woo hoo

hossfly
December 26, 2009, 05:23 PM
Do what the manuals recommend. If you're going to use 296 or 110 don't try to download, use a heavy crimp, and use magnum primers as the manuals tell you to. I worry a bit sometimes by folks recommending people to do things the manuals say not to do.

Ret.CWO
December 26, 2009, 05:47 PM
My best loading for 44 Mag. for both Ruger and Winchester Lever action is 240 Gr. SWC, Mag. Win. Primer with 25 Gr. of W296 not for the faint. This is a MAXIUM load. I've been told the H110 is the same as W296 don't know. You can't go below the 25 Gr. or over it. has to be exact done with a dillon digital scale. I've been shooting this load for close to ten years. My 40 year old son will not shoot the load say's it's just a tad to much for him.

OrangePwrx9
December 26, 2009, 07:00 PM
I try to tailor powder to barrel length. IMHO 23-25 grs. of W296 or H110 out of a 4" barrel would be a bit much. More of the powder would be burned outside the barrel than inside. Though spectacular, it wouldn't do much for performance. Plus Winchester and Hodgdon advise against reduced loads with those powders.

Blue Dot might be worth a try. It's faster than 296 or 110 but slower than Unique. You can download it for reduced fireworks. It'll work for both .44 Special and .44 Mag. loads. Max load for .44 Mag. 240 gr. JHP is 13.7 grs. in the latest Speer manual and should give around 1285 fps. Starting load for a .44 Special using the same bullet is 9.2 grs. for 775 fps. Looks like you could pick anything between 9.2 and 13.7 grs. and be safe enough. Should be something in there that'll keep you out of flame-thrower territory. Plus, with those low charge weights, a pound of powder will last a while longer.

Franco
December 27, 2009, 08:57 AM
RB98SS has a good point. I use 22-24 gr of H110 or W296 (with a CCI mag large pistol primer -- 350 I think) pushing 240gr Speer unicore soft pts out of my S&W 629 6" (22 for fun, 24 for hunting) but I've moved to IMR 4227 when loading for my 44 mag marlin 1894 lever. Gives very good velocities, less muzzle blast and I think it's likely more temperature tolerant than 110 or 296 (i.e. may perform more consistently in temperature extremes).

villemur
December 27, 2009, 10:34 AM
The .44 Mag is one of my favorite cartridges. I like to use Winchester Large Pistol Primers, because they are good for both standard and magnum loads. For an everyday target / plinking load I like 10 grains of Unique and a 240 grain LSWC bullet. 9.8 grains of Universal also works well. The Unique is sooty, but it cleans up easy enough and doesn't cause any problems.

For higher power loads I had done a lot of experimentation with H110 and Lil' Gun. The velocities were impressive, the the recoil and muzzle blast were oppressive.

I ended up with 20.5 grains of 2400 under a jacketed 240 grain bullet, and I like this a lot. As others have said, you can work this up to 21.0 grains, but 20.5 is pretty good as it is.

Franco
December 28, 2009, 08:34 AM
Just a note to Villemur's post. Hodgdon does suggest a magnum large pistol primer for H110 and W296.

villemur
December 28, 2009, 10:30 AM
Just a note to Villemur's post. Hodgdon does suggest a magnum large pistol primer for H110 and W296.
I should have been clearer, Winchester Large Pistol primers are rated for both standard and magnum loads - they are multi-purpose primers. I've used them successfully with magnum loads. However, I haven't been able to find them lately, so when I load up some full-power .44 Mag loads this week I'll be using CCI magnum primers.

Jumping Frog
December 28, 2009, 10:50 AM
I actually thing that Hodgdon should have a warning or specify that one or the other are "new" powders or say that there can be at lest 4,000 CUP differances in lot to lot containers of powder. Check Lymans pistol manual on 44 Mag. Light as opposed to heavier bullets using the same charges and componants
Actually there is a warning in every reloading manual to reduce the max charge by 5%-10% to start. Hodgdon themself recommend the 10% figure in their 2008 data book in the intro to their reloading data on pg 14. I believe this is to accomodate the variation in burn commonly found in smokeless powders.
That is accurate for other powders, but Hodgdon warns that H110/W296 should be reduced no more than 3%. This notice is at the bottom of the warning page before you enter the Hodgdon Data Reloading Center (the page where you have to click "I Agree").

http://data.hodgdon.com/main_menu.asp


For those loads listed where a starting load is not shown, start 10% below the suggested maximum load and then approach maximums carefully, watching for any sign of pressure (difficult extraction, cratered and flattened or blown primers, and unusual recoil). H110 and Winchester 296 loads should not be reduced more than 3%.

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%.

If you enjoyed reading about ".44 Magnum load data" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!