Why don't they just use "PSI", which would allow a sensible Pilgrim to get a Handle on it?
Anyway...
Other sources list .38 Long Colt as normally 12,000 "CUP" for Pete's sake.
Oye...
Seems like the Manufacturer's Loading Data is very 'Light', with no 'spread' for deferring to various strength Arms, or intentions, while they make a big deal about 'Do Not Exceed!!"
In a Model 10 S&W, is there any reason why "777" may not be used to fill the Case to where the Bullet Base is merely 'on' the Powder, and, no 'compression'?
This would be around 19-ish Grains I expect...18-ish, if a thin Grease-Wafer were in-between.
Are Wax-based Grease-Wafers alright to use with "777"?
Various .38 Special non +P Loadings for 'Bullseye' include mention ranges of 11,000 to 16,800 'CUP'.
So...
Are there any genuinely USEFUL '777' Tables ?
If you enjoyed reading about "'Triple 7' for .38 Special (aka: 9x29mmR )" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Oyeboten
November 1, 2009, 01:24 AM
Ohhhhhhhhh...never mind...
Bottle, and, Web-Site say -
"Use equivelent Volume to 3F BP"
So...the Tables I guess are quoting 'Grains' as 'weight'...which they reasonably should...
But, I'd got used to equating BP 'Grains' as Volume, in practical terms.
Hellgate
November 1, 2009, 01:32 AM
I load 777 as if it were black power by volume. For the .357 magnum 15grs with an OAL of 1.55-1.62 (depending on bullet shape) is what I use for various bullets. In the 38SPL I use about 11-12grs by volume. However one can seat the bullet out to .357 length and load the 15gr load and shoot iti n a .357 gun using the 38SPL case.
BHP FAN
November 1, 2009, 01:42 AM
I use 158 gr.Aloxed home cast over 16 gr. fff Triple Seven. Stout loads.
Oyeboten
November 1, 2009, 01:21 AM
Thank you...
This will be ".38 Special" Cartridge, for a latter 1960s S&W Model 10-6...and not for my 'oldies'...
Just so we're clear on application.
I do not have a Scale yet...but I can easily work out a Volumetric to Grains-weight ratio.
And, or...if "777" is fine, 'Volume-for-Volume' to 3F 'BP', though with no compression...then, I'm good-to-go, as for Loading for the base of the 158 Grain Bullet to just 'touch' the Powder in normal Seating-depth, no compression of Powder...since I can do this empirically.
Old Fuff
November 1, 2009, 07:56 AM
In any recent S&W hand ejector ("recent" meaning after serial number 316,648 or mid-1920's) you can use all the powder the case will hold with a compressed charge. Be careful to not leave any air space between the powder and bullet!
What the powder manufacturers worry about is original or copies of Colt 1851/1861 Navies that are held together with nothing but a key through a slot in the cylinder basepin. Your S&W is entirely different.
Incidentally, the original .38 Special load consisted of 22 grains of FFF black powder behind a 158 grain hollow base bullet. You can't duplicate that because they used balloon-head cases. However if you use Triple 7 in place of black powder you'll come very close, or maybe a bit better... :)
Hellgate
November 1, 2009, 10:35 AM
I usually have about 1/10" of compression when seating the bullet. You'll get about 11-12grs (vol) by looking. For years I used powder scoops made by trimming cases to length of charge and then soldering on a big 10-12 penny nail onto the side of the case as a handle for the powder scoop/measure. I had already worked up my loads and THEN found you were not supposed to use 3F 777 for cartridges. This was for use in a .357mag rifle. I figured the .357mag could handle whatever pressure there was between 3F & 2F so that is what I use. It meters real well. I would expect there would be significant pressure differences between 3F & 2F in a large capacity case like the 44-40 & 45LC. When I was working up my loads for accuracy I noticed that as the compression went up the accuracy went down. I have heard that heavily compressed APP can spike pressures pretty high.
Oyeboten
November 1, 2009, 07:14 PM
Hi Old Fuff, Hellgate,
Thank you...
Learning to Load/re/load, I am interested to try various things.
I did load up 50 Rounds of 3F BP .38 Specials, and, I used the 1.3 cc Lyman Scoop, who's Volume supposedly ends up being 20.7 Grains-Weight for 3F BP...and, that is the Loading I used and tried out at the Range, a few days ago.
Absolutely wonderful Cartridge!
Powerful, good recoil, deep Report...
I compressed each Round definitely.
I believe one could use 21-1/2 or 22 Grains-Weight of 3F 'BP', if having the (in my instance,) 158 Grain Bullet stick out a little farther than usual, and, I will try a few like this once I have a Powder Scale.
Anyway...I made a nice little Scoop for Charging with the "777" but is is slightly too little Volume...so...I'll try again...
I want the Case to have enough "777" for a thin (.040-ish thick) Grease-Wafer, and, in an un-re-sized 'Test' Case, for me to thumb in the Bullet and have it bottom out on the Powder/Wafer with no danger of Compression, at the right depth for a good proper Crimp.
That Volume then, I would figure to Load on the Press.
That ought to be alright then...yes?
Sound good?
Hellgate
November 1, 2009, 10:15 PM
If you are going to shoot the 38s in a rifle then the OAL is important for reliable feeding. I always establish the best OAL for reliability THEN I work up the powder charge. If you are just going to shoot them in a revolver then any OAL that lets you get them into the chambers is OK.
Dunno what it Holds Grain-Weight wise for "777"...but Volume wise, it Charges to where with a thin Grease Wad, the 158 Grain Hollow-Nose, Semi-Wadcutter Waffle-Side, when Thumbed in to a non-re-sized Shell, sees the Bullet seat thusly -
And...looking forward to trying these soon as I can get out to the Range again...
Old Fuff
November 2, 2009, 08:34 AM
When using a cast bullet it is best to roll-crimp into the crimping groove, as apparently you did. On the other hand, if using a swaged bullet with no crimping groove, seat the bullet to wherever you want so long as in will chamber in your revolver or feed in a rifle, and use a taper crimp. Because black powder or substitutes burn relatively slowly a firm crimp is necessary for best performance.
Oyeboten
November 2, 2009, 04:30 PM
Hi Old Fuff,
Till more Bullets arrive, or, till I begin Casting my own...these 'Waffle-Babys' are all I have.
Cases are all Uniform...and, I gave every one a Healthy Crimp, ending up about where a usual OAL would have been, if their Noses were fully 'round'.
My only Crimp style option, is what the '310' Dies do on my Lyman 'Tru-Line Jr' Press.
Indeed..!These Bullets could be good candidates for a 22 Grain BP Loading, since they nor I care if they stick out a little farther then usual...and, my Revolvers won't mind either.
Old Fuff
November 2, 2009, 07:18 PM
My only Crimp style option, is what the '310' Dies do on my Lyman 'Tru-Line Jr' Press.
Been there, done that... 310 dies work fine. :)
Indeed..!These Bullets could be good candidates for a 22 Grain BP Loading, since they nor I care if they stick out a little farther then usual...and, my Revolvers won't mind either.
So long as the bullet doesn't stick out in front of the cylinder you're good to go. You may even get a slight advantage as the bullet is centered in the chamber's throat. ;)
Oyeboten
November 2, 2009, 10:00 PM
Yes indeedy!
Will make up Dozen or so (22 grn 3f 'BP', stick-outs) later to-night...and...if I can, foray to the Range to-morrow and try 'em..!
Oyeboten
November 6, 2009, 10:07 PM
Having loaded a Box of 'Fifty' .38 Special, 158 Grain, waffle-sided, Hollow-Point, Semi-Wadcutters using about 15.75 Grains each, of the famous "777" Propellent...
Went to the Range today, and, used a Chronograph for comparing several various Cartridge Loadings.
Though I was very conscientious in my loadings, (.040 Paper-Towel based Bee's Wax and Olive Oil Wax Grease Wad...even seat, with no Air, no Compression...good Crimp) the performance seems inconsistent -
Maybe this Propellent does not like 'Grease wads'?
String of Six, fired from 10 yards...Revolver is 3 inch Model 10, S&W
FPS as
722
751
786
773
807
767
Why such variations?
Hellgate
November 6, 2009, 11:41 PM
Is your 777 charge by weight or by (BP equivalent) volume? If there is no compression then you might get the inconsistency. I don't think your lube wad is the cause unless the rounds got so hot in the sun that the oil/wax leached into the powder. My 38SPL load was/is about 11-12grs by measured weight of 777. A 15.75 gr weight would have the bullet seated out to .357mag OAL (1.53-1.62"). If you are loading the 777 by volume (the volume being a BP equivalent volume) then you are probably getting less than 15grs measured/weighed into the 38s. 15.75grs (weighed) is my 357 load in a 357 case. If that is what your are loading (weighed charges) I don't see how you can be getting that much powder into the case without seating the bullet way out. If so, then put another grain or two into the case to create a little compression and I'll bet the variation in MV will reduce.
BHP FAN
November 6, 2009, 11:42 PM
Those are actually pretty standard deviations, for smokeless.Even for B.P.
Oyeboten
November 7, 2009, 12:15 AM
Posts #11, and, #12, show the details of these Cartridges.
I bought a Powder Scale last week...should be here soon.
My 'BP' loads were entirely consistant...same FPS every round.
I did not know that was even possible!
See my other Thread on the BP 38 Special Range Report.
BHP FAN
November 7, 2009, 02:56 AM
You're right bp is more consistant, but your SD still isn't bad.At 25 yards or less about 70 fps [less than 1/4 of a bb gun's worth of difference] shouldn't have made a difference in your point of impact.
Oyeboten
November 7, 2009, 03:20 AM
Hi BHP FAN,
Oh yeah...10 percent variation in a 700-800 FPS Loading is not going to matter for close POA.
But...I'm learning to Load/re-Load, and, so, if I get weird or inconsistent FPS, I'd like to know why, and, to iron-it-out so there are only very small variations.
It may be that "777" has it's quirks...too...
I LOVE Black Powder...especilly the "DUPONT"...
sourdough44
November 7, 2009, 07:36 AM
With corrosion issues why use 777 in a gun where you can use smokeless powder? Are you looking for 'cowboy action smoke'? I'm not trying to be sassy, just asking.
Das Jaeger
November 7, 2009, 07:43 AM
but if you have to ask , you'll never understand anyway :D
Das Jaeger
Jim Watson
November 7, 2009, 03:08 PM
Hodgdon recommends 777 be loaded without airspace but very little compression.
In a 7 1/2" .44-40 a 200 gr truncated cone with regular hard blue wax smokeless lube and 21.5 grains by weight of 777 gave me 873 fps with standard deviation of 5 fps and spread of 10. This is comparable to real black.
In the same gun with its 44 Special cylinder, a 240 gr SWC and 16 grains by weight gave 745 fps with sd 12 and spread of 25. That is comparable to smokeless powder uniformity but plenty good for anything I am doing with a SAA in CAS.
Try some weighed loads when you get your scale, I bet business will pick right up.
The Sharps Rifle Company, circa 1878, said "For fine shooting, powder should be weighed on a scale."
Hodgdon says 777 is good with hard wax smokeless lube. I'd try a batch without the grease wad and see if the lube on those "waffle weave" Hornadys is adequate.
Oyeboten
November 7, 2009, 04:51 PM
Hi Jim Watson,
Scale should be here in a few days...(though I was consistent with my 'Scoop')
Ohhhhhh, okay, 'a little compression'...
I had 'none'...Lol...
So...'Swiss' Powder is understood to give higher FPS then 'GOEX'..?
Heck...wish I'd known!!
BHP FAN
November 7, 2009, 08:06 PM
I remain unimpressed by Swiss. I bought some on the recomendation of other BP cartridge shooters.the only way I could tell it wasn't Goex was by the deposit of unburnt powder or graphite it left in my gun.as for performance,eh...the same.
Oyeboten
November 7, 2009, 09:00 PM
Well...where can I order some more early 1960s "DUPONT" then?
(Lol...)
You'd think the idiots could make Powder now, as well as they were when Jack Kennedy was waving to the crowds for Pete's sake...
Yeeeeeeeesh...
I'll probably end up following Old Fuff's example, and, learn how to make my own.
It'd sure save on those BS jive 'hazmat' fees...
At least, with a Chronograph, any boy or girl can tell what's what in the FPS department, and, thusly, gauge the merit of their Powder.
Goex-schmoex...
Oyeboten
November 7, 2009, 09:02 PM
Hi BHP FAN,
Ye'd said-
I remain unimpressed by Swiss. I bought some on the recomendation of other BP cartridge shooters.the only way I could tell it wasn't Goex was by the deposit of unburnt powder or graphite it left in my gun.as for performance,eh...the same.
What Arm?
What Loading/Bullet? etc?
Not your 'BHP' I trust...though it'd probbly work! ( Just being playful...)
Jim Watson
November 7, 2009, 09:37 PM
I use Swiss, largely on the recommendation of shooters who got some very bad Goex in the 1998-1999 lots and have not forgiven them yet.
Goex Express is reportedly pretty good stuff, but whether Hodgdon will keep it in production remains to be seen.
There was a gunzine article about the .32 Winchester Special, the cartridge made to be factory loaded with smokeless and reloaded with black, in the early days of inconsistent quality and little experience with nitro. The author was disappointed in the performance with Goex, but found a can of pre WW I DuPont which gave higher velocity, smaller groups, and less fouling.
Oyeboten
November 7, 2009, 10:26 PM
How sad...
If you enjoyed reading about "'Triple 7' for .38 Special (aka: 9x29mmR )" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
