Slow
February 11, 2003, 03:07 AM
I was wondering if 21.2 - 22.4 grains of WW296 would be safe in my Super Redhawk launching a 300 grain hard cast ? I have seen H110 loads listed but not sure of the WW 296? I don't want to blow up my nice gun:eek: !
Safe load for .45 Colt?
If you enjoyed reading about "Safe load for .45 Colt?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
redneck2
February 11, 2003, 04:33 AM
http://www.sixgunner.com. Article titled "Dissolving the Myth"
I've loaded in the real heavy range for my Ruger with H110 and 296. Finally figured out that it just wasn't worth taking the pounding.
There's lot of info on this back at TFL. May want to do a search.
I've loaded in the real heavy range for my Ruger with H110 and 296. Finally figured out that it just wasn't worth taking the pounding.
There's lot of info on this back at TFL. May want to do a search.
Steve Smith
February 11, 2003, 10:03 AM
ONLY A LUNATIC WOULD TAKE SOMEONE'S LOAD DATA OFF THE INTERNET, INSERT IT INTO A CARTRIDGE, AND FIRE THE ROUND!!! DONT' BE A FOOL, TEST YOUR AMMO THOROUGHLY!!!!
The load is perfectly safe in my guns...in fact it is near a "starting load" for many folks, BUT it is still a very hot load in itself, so deciding whether it is safe in your gun is up to you. I'd say start at 21 and watch for pressure signs. Do not advance past 23.5. I have and do do so, but I won't tell you that you can do that.
The load is perfectly safe in my guns...in fact it is near a "starting load" for many folks, BUT it is still a very hot load in itself, so deciding whether it is safe in your gun is up to you. I'd say start at 21 and watch for pressure signs. Do not advance past 23.5. I have and do do so, but I won't tell you that you can do that.
Slow
February 11, 2003, 01:03 PM
Thanks for the advice;)
RCL
February 11, 2003, 02:24 PM
Slow, H110 and W296 are the same powder, so any starting load for one should be safe for the other, keeping in mind lot to lot variations. Where you go with powder charges after your starting load is up to your testing.
Good shooting!
Good shooting!
SASS#23149
February 12, 2003, 12:53 AM
What the heck does
TEST YOUR AMMO THOROUGHLY!!!!
mean?? You'd have to pull the trigger on it to test it.If we're gonna be helpful,hollering bad advice isn't very helpful.
now then:
CHECK YOUR LOAD DATA THOROUGHLY!!!
I can understand.:rolleyes:
TEST YOUR AMMO THOROUGHLY!!!!
mean?? You'd have to pull the trigger on it to test it.If we're gonna be helpful,hollering bad advice isn't very helpful.
now then:
CHECK YOUR LOAD DATA THOROUGHLY!!!
I can understand.:rolleyes:
Steve Smith
February 12, 2003, 10:01 AM
Against what, oh great cowboy action shooter?
The truth is, a load book will tell you diddly squat about loads like this. If you trust a load book to tell you what is safe and what isn't, you can shoot on the far side of the range from me. The test guns that powder and bullet companies use are not the same as your gun or mine. I have this fellow a safe starting load. He must start low and observe pressure signs at each level. Personally I would use a chronograph for sanity checking and if the increments stop increasing at a large amount, I'd stop. A loading book will not tell you any of that, nor when you should stop.
The truth is, a load book will tell you diddly squat about loads like this. If you trust a load book to tell you what is safe and what isn't, you can shoot on the far side of the range from me. The test guns that powder and bullet companies use are not the same as your gun or mine. I have this fellow a safe starting load. He must start low and observe pressure signs at each level. Personally I would use a chronograph for sanity checking and if the increments stop increasing at a large amount, I'd stop. A loading book will not tell you any of that, nor when you should stop.
MCNETT
February 12, 2003, 06:03 PM
Steve is right. Each gun reacts differently when pushed. Though I have used 300XTP over 24.5gr H110, doesn't mean you should load 24.5gr. You can, though, drop the load by 2-3gr and work up .5gr at a time looking for pressure signs and stopping when you are satisfied. BTW, your SRH is VERY STRONG! The SRH and the Freedom Arms revolvers are the tops in strength.
-Mike
-Mike
Porter Rockwell
February 12, 2003, 06:10 PM
hello, can I remind everyone that all Ruger Super Redhawks with .45 calibered barrels are chambered in 454 Casull!!??
Point of fact is that you can't load enough H-110/WW-296 in the cartridge case to exceed the Ruger SRH design perameters.
Point of fact is that you can't load enough H-110/WW-296 in the cartridge case to exceed the Ruger SRH design perameters.
Frohickey
February 12, 2003, 11:45 PM
You might be able to load enough powder to exceed the 45 Colt brass though... especially if you have one of those old/rare balloon head cases, that was what Elmer Keith used when he was trying to get a souped up wheelgun.
Porter Rockwell
February 13, 2003, 03:28 AM
X-files??
I'll give you the hundred year old brass disclaimer
I say, wasn't Elmer Keith the 50s gun guru that blew off part of a finger with a heavy experimental load in .45LC? Owwwsers!
Elmer then (so I've read somewhere) went on to develop the heavy .44 Special loads.
Historically, the .45LC was the parent of Dick Casulls 454 Casull which was just a triplex load in the .45LC case, obviously not the turn of the century before last ballon cases.
I'll give you the hundred year old brass disclaimer
I say, wasn't Elmer Keith the 50s gun guru that blew off part of a finger with a heavy experimental load in .45LC? Owwwsers!
Elmer then (so I've read somewhere) went on to develop the heavy .44 Special loads.
Historically, the .45LC was the parent of Dick Casulls 454 Casull which was just a triplex load in the .45LC case, obviously not the turn of the century before last ballon cases.
Steve Smith
February 13, 2003, 10:19 AM
In all honesty, you are most likely correct, but since each gun is a law unto itself, and since we are bound bycommon sense to only provide safe loading advice, that is what you will see here.
I have spoken to John Linebaugh several times on the phone and a great length. You would not believe the things that the standard BH and RH will take...but that doesn't mean we should go doing them.
In a penetration test, 325 LBT-LFNs were fired from a BH at 1300 fps and they penetrated 42" of wet newspaper. John then tried his 5 shot gun with the same bullet at 1550 fps (still a .45 Colt). The bullets penetrated 45". His conclusion, based on this and several other caliber tests, was that the 325 at 1300 was very near its maximum efficiency. In other words, one does not need to push the .45 Colt faster...even though you can.
I have spoken to John Linebaugh several times on the phone and a great length. You would not believe the things that the standard BH and RH will take...but that doesn't mean we should go doing them.
In a penetration test, 325 LBT-LFNs were fired from a BH at 1300 fps and they penetrated 42" of wet newspaper. John then tried his 5 shot gun with the same bullet at 1550 fps (still a .45 Colt). The bullets penetrated 45". His conclusion, based on this and several other caliber tests, was that the 325 at 1300 was very near its maximum efficiency. In other words, one does not need to push the .45 Colt faster...even though you can.
Porter Rockwell
February 13, 2003, 04:05 PM
Hello Steve, thanks for the late evening yuk!
In rereading the thread today to see if the original poster had shown up, please note that your first reference in all capitols was to Linebaughs site as was your last reference.
In the first case you use words like lunatic and fool (in capitols) in direct reference to the link to sixgunner/Linebaugh which to me implied that the loads listed there were potentially dangerous?
Well then, I suppose myself as well as thousands of Linebaugh/Taffin readers are now Foolish Lunatics?
Steve, can you understand how confusing your last post is referencing Linebaughs newspaper penetration tests?
Do you consider Linebaugh/Taffin loads dangerous?
I believe that Mr Linebaugh has proven that heavy bullets penetrate better than lighter and that his particular lead formula fails at a certain velocity in wet newsprint.
Your/his example of a 325gn LBT-LFN might be considerably different if say a SSK style bullet of equal or greater weight were used, I personally believe JD Jones (SSK) has forgotten more about handgun hunting than Linebaugh/Taffin have ever known but that's really getting off the topic of Ruger SRH strength and the use of hot .45LC reloads in same.
Thanks for the response!
In rereading the thread today to see if the original poster had shown up, please note that your first reference in all capitols was to Linebaughs site as was your last reference.
In the first case you use words like lunatic and fool (in capitols) in direct reference to the link to sixgunner/Linebaugh which to me implied that the loads listed there were potentially dangerous?
Well then, I suppose myself as well as thousands of Linebaugh/Taffin readers are now Foolish Lunatics?
Steve, can you understand how confusing your last post is referencing Linebaughs newspaper penetration tests?
Do you consider Linebaugh/Taffin loads dangerous?
I believe that Mr Linebaugh has proven that heavy bullets penetrate better than lighter and that his particular lead formula fails at a certain velocity in wet newsprint.
Your/his example of a 325gn LBT-LFN might be considerably different if say a SSK style bullet of equal or greater weight were used, I personally believe JD Jones (SSK) has forgotten more about handgun hunting than Linebaugh/Taffin have ever known but that's really getting off the topic of Ruger SRH strength and the use of hot .45LC reloads in same.
Thanks for the response!
Steve Smith
February 13, 2003, 04:35 PM
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
That was just a friggin' legalese BS statement to keep people from blowing themselves up and blaming me. My "lunatic" and "fool" comments were to sarcasm directed that having to do that in the first place. Sorry you missed that.
In order to INCREASE penetration a heavier and thus larger bullet was required. The .475 L and the .500 L were the next steps. It is doubtful that ANY .45 Colt would have SIGNIFICANLTY more penetration than that of the LBT, despite its design. The LBT is purely an EXAMPLE.
Perhaps you can explain or RETRACT your "yuk" statement?!
That was just a friggin' legalese BS statement to keep people from blowing themselves up and blaming me. My "lunatic" and "fool" comments were to sarcasm directed that having to do that in the first place. Sorry you missed that.
In order to INCREASE penetration a heavier and thus larger bullet was required. The .475 L and the .500 L were the next steps. It is doubtful that ANY .45 Colt would have SIGNIFICANLTY more penetration than that of the LBT, despite its design. The LBT is purely an EXAMPLE.
Perhaps you can explain or RETRACT your "yuk" statement?!
Porter Rockwell
February 13, 2003, 04:37 PM
Hello Steve, the net is sometimes extremely entertaining and also difficult to interpet with just words and no face.
The "Yuk" was simply a belly laugh caused by the several posters missing the SRH info, it happens.
I wasn't Attacking you or anyone else, could you/would you care to continue the discussion re- my last post?
Speaking of Ruger SRH 454 Casulls, we bent a fricking ejector star Sunday when ejecting three empties that felt a little draggy but not stuck and restraightened the star with a Leatherman. BTW, the loads were 420gn@1425fps from the 4.750 shortened barrel.
Now to aquire a ejector from Ruger that's been to the hardening shop!
The "Yuk" was simply a belly laugh caused by the several posters missing the SRH info, it happens.
I wasn't Attacking you or anyone else, could you/would you care to continue the discussion re- my last post?
Speaking of Ruger SRH 454 Casulls, we bent a fricking ejector star Sunday when ejecting three empties that felt a little draggy but not stuck and restraightened the star with a Leatherman. BTW, the loads were 420gn@1425fps from the 4.750 shortened barrel.
Now to aquire a ejector from Ruger that's been to the hardening shop!
Steve Smith
February 13, 2003, 04:40 PM
I for sure would like to continue the discussion, but there is nothing more to say, is there? Contrary to most, I don't log on to argue. I have said everything that I intended to say, got dragged into defending myself, did that, and now I'm done I think.
BTW, I was playing hell with the edit function, so please refresh and re-read my last post for my final message.
Lastly, while I have not yet made it to Shootist's Holliday, I consider Linebaugh and Taffin excellent aquaintences. They are HARDLY fools! I just follow in their footsteps.
BTW, I was playing hell with the edit function, so please refresh and re-read my last post for my final message.
Lastly, while I have not yet made it to Shootist's Holliday, I consider Linebaugh and Taffin excellent aquaintences. They are HARDLY fools! I just follow in their footsteps.
Porter Rockwell
February 13, 2003, 04:55 PM
Huh?
Intelligent discussions are just a fancy way of arguing IMO.
Steve, since you raised the example of penetration using Verals flat noses I pretty much had to raise the issue of bullet design differences relative to penetration.
BTW, how the heck did we get on a penetration.....
I'll do a search for an appropriate subject already posted.
Thanks Again Steve
Intelligent discussions are just a fancy way of arguing IMO.
Steve, since you raised the example of penetration using Verals flat noses I pretty much had to raise the issue of bullet design differences relative to penetration.
BTW, how the heck did we get on a penetration.....
I'll do a search for an appropriate subject already posted.
Thanks Again Steve
Steve Smith
February 13, 2003, 05:06 PM
I am sure you have already done this but if not, you should probably polish your chamber walls.
Porter Rockwell
February 13, 2003, 06:07 PM
Hello again Steve,
yes the "project" Ruger SRH has been customized a little.
Besides the barrel being shortened and front sight resoldered, the gun was bead blasted to a #220 AO finish, an eleven degree barrel crown and forcing cone cut, cylinder chamber thoats reamed to .4525 and then polished the chambers and throats.
BTW, IME the 420gn LBTs loaded to this level are generally sticky but just shy of stuck, I'll admit to loading experimental levels where the brass was firmly stuck and a firm rap to the ejector was needed but I've never bent the doggone star before.
Thanks again Steve, it's very interesting studying the various thoughts online and in the shooting/hunting books and comparing say, the schools of thought?
Do JD Jones and Colonel Cooper participate in the Shootist Holiday?
>Insert a Huge Smiley,
Wouldn't that make the Holiday a Shottist-Shootist-Handcannon Holiday??
yes the "project" Ruger SRH has been customized a little.
Besides the barrel being shortened and front sight resoldered, the gun was bead blasted to a #220 AO finish, an eleven degree barrel crown and forcing cone cut, cylinder chamber thoats reamed to .4525 and then polished the chambers and throats.
BTW, IME the 420gn LBTs loaded to this level are generally sticky but just shy of stuck, I'll admit to loading experimental levels where the brass was firmly stuck and a firm rap to the ejector was needed but I've never bent the doggone star before.
Thanks again Steve, it's very interesting studying the various thoughts online and in the shooting/hunting books and comparing say, the schools of thought?
Do JD Jones and Colonel Cooper participate in the Shootist Holiday?
>Insert a Huge Smiley,
Wouldn't that make the Holiday a Shottist-Shootist-Handcannon Holiday??
Steve Smith
February 14, 2003, 10:01 AM
Personally I am not a fan of the .454 even though I have owned one. My next large caliber will be either a .475 or .500 built by John, which I feel are much better cartridges, expecially the .500.
I don't thin JD has ever gone to Shootists holliday, but I'm not sure if he's ever invited. I am sure that Cooper isn't interested in it. It is primarily a large bore single action get together, usually in Colorado or Wyoming. Folks like Brian Peirce, Jim Taylor, and Paco Kelly are regular attendees, in addition to John Taffin and his cronies.
BTW, sounds like you've done the same as I have to my 5.5" Bisley.
I don't thin JD has ever gone to Shootists holliday, but I'm not sure if he's ever invited. I am sure that Cooper isn't interested in it. It is primarily a large bore single action get together, usually in Colorado or Wyoming. Folks like Brian Peirce, Jim Taylor, and Paco Kelly are regular attendees, in addition to John Taffin and his cronies.
BTW, sounds like you've done the same as I have to my 5.5" Bisley.
Porter Rockwell
February 14, 2003, 06:59 PM
Hello Steve,
While I'm no fan of the single action there's no reason to disagree as to the platform since we're all shooters.
There's much division between the shooting community as is and it's troubling to me.
That's one reason why I asked you about the Holiday, Colonel Cooper has written a fair amount on handgun hunting and I recall articles including the Smith 44 Mag way back in the 60s or 70s.
JD Jones obviously has serious creds in handgunning and I wonder what/if there are unspoken disagreements between the factions that ought to be addressed?
We are living through perilous times as members of our shooting communities, the antigunners far outnumber us and the public schools and media almost compete to portray shooters in the worst possible ways.
Divided we fall, sorry for the rant Steve as I jumbled all the NRA vs GOA, Shotists vs Shootists vs HHI and then there's the high living shotgunners, into a thought and typed the thought poorly.
Speaking of single action vs DA revolvers, didn't even Elmer give up on the SA when the Century or was it the new .44 Magnum arrived?
It's a Joke!
While I'm no fan of the single action there's no reason to disagree as to the platform since we're all shooters.
There's much division between the shooting community as is and it's troubling to me.
That's one reason why I asked you about the Holiday, Colonel Cooper has written a fair amount on handgun hunting and I recall articles including the Smith 44 Mag way back in the 60s or 70s.
JD Jones obviously has serious creds in handgunning and I wonder what/if there are unspoken disagreements between the factions that ought to be addressed?
We are living through perilous times as members of our shooting communities, the antigunners far outnumber us and the public schools and media almost compete to portray shooters in the worst possible ways.
Divided we fall, sorry for the rant Steve as I jumbled all the NRA vs GOA, Shotists vs Shootists vs HHI and then there's the high living shotgunners, into a thought and typed the thought poorly.
Speaking of single action vs DA revolvers, didn't even Elmer give up on the SA when the Century or was it the new .44 Magnum arrived?
It's a Joke!
Steve Smith
February 14, 2003, 07:23 PM
When you get old, you'll do weird things too.
Doh!
Doh!
JollyWhiteGiant
March 9, 2003, 02:48 AM
W296 and H110 will let you know when you hit the optimal load for your combination. When you get to the point that you are not gaining much in the way of extra velocity with a powder increase you have hit max.
In my BH with a 300gr. XTP I loaded it to 1120fps with a 21gr. charge, when loaded to 21.5gr I only gained 18fps. (max listed is 21.3gr). I load mine with 21gr, not worth the extra wear on the gun for 18fps.
BTW, I have had best results with Winchester WLP primers with this caliber.
In my BH with a 300gr. XTP I loaded it to 1120fps with a 21gr. charge, when loaded to 21.5gr I only gained 18fps. (max listed is 21.3gr). I load mine with 21gr, not worth the extra wear on the gun for 18fps.
BTW, I have had best results with Winchester WLP primers with this caliber.
Porter Rockwell
March 9, 2003, 03:03 AM
Hope you're thick skinned!
How prey tell exactly does powder talk? Grin, in your example 21.0 seems fine yet in another platform like the SRH in the original thread title we can increase the load in the same .45LC brass you use all the way to Casull so there must be substantial gains beyond 21.0gns eh? Just NOT IN the Blackhawk or it'll blow the cylinder.
For safeties sake and the mods I won't mention how much more 296/H-110 is used to get 300s to 1700fps in a 454 Casull.
Best!
How prey tell exactly does powder talk? Grin, in your example 21.0 seems fine yet in another platform like the SRH in the original thread title we can increase the load in the same .45LC brass you use all the way to Casull so there must be substantial gains beyond 21.0gns eh? Just NOT IN the Blackhawk or it'll blow the cylinder.
For safeties sake and the mods I won't mention how much more 296/H-110 is used to get 300s to 1700fps in a 454 Casull.
Best!
Desert Dog
March 10, 2003, 02:05 PM
The only way to tell if your gun is safe is to start at the starting load, and work up from there.
Warning!!! Load data below is only safe in Ruger or Freedom Arms revolvers, or Thompson Contenders...
The starting load for .45 Colt with a 300 gr bullet using W296/H110 is 19.0 grains.
I am sure the load you requested is safe in a SRH, as long as the SRH is is good condition....
YMMV...
Mike
Warning!!! Load data below is only safe in Ruger or Freedom Arms revolvers, or Thompson Contenders...
The starting load for .45 Colt with a 300 gr bullet using W296/H110 is 19.0 grains.
I am sure the load you requested is safe in a SRH, as long as the SRH is is good condition....
YMMV...
Mike
Porter Rockwell
March 10, 2003, 02:33 PM
Hello, since it's Monday and your post doesn't mention the caliber of the load referenced!!??
You don't happen to have a loading book around that mentions the hazards of reduced loads using H-110/WW-296 do you?
I believe the books say not to reduce WW-296/H-110 loads more than 10%?
Hee's where it gets confusing eh?
The 454 Casull starting loads are what, 31.0 and your reference shows 19.0 which is likely for the .45 Colt but in the Freedom Arms(!?) and/or any gun chambered for 454 Casull we can freely use "Modern" .45 Colt brass duplicating 454 Casull data as documented now for almost 30yrs by Dick Casull, John Linebaugh and Ross Sigfried.
Best!
You don't happen to have a loading book around that mentions the hazards of reduced loads using H-110/WW-296 do you?
I believe the books say not to reduce WW-296/H-110 loads more than 10%?
Hee's where it gets confusing eh?
The 454 Casull starting loads are what, 31.0 and your reference shows 19.0 which is likely for the .45 Colt but in the Freedom Arms(!?) and/or any gun chambered for 454 Casull we can freely use "Modern" .45 Colt brass duplicating 454 Casull data as documented now for almost 30yrs by Dick Casull, John Linebaugh and Ross Sigfried.
Best!
Desert Dog
March 10, 2003, 02:39 PM
I believe the title of this thread is "Safe load for .45 Colt?"....
Only later with all the growling and scratching did the SRH come up and someone spoke of .454 Casull....
The original question queried about .45 Colt, and I gave them an answer...
JEEZ, it MUST be Monday morning...
Only later with all the growling and scratching did the SRH come up and someone spoke of .454 Casull....
The original question queried about .45 Colt, and I gave them an answer...
JEEZ, it MUST be Monday morning...
Porter Rockwell
March 10, 2003, 03:16 PM
The original question refered to both the platform (SRH=454 Casull) and the use of .45 Colt loads in said platform.
Now, about the common reduced loads warnings?
>SMILE<
Now, about the common reduced loads warnings?
>SMILE<
JollyWhiteGiant
March 11, 2003, 12:25 AM
Porter, running it up to 21.5 in my BH with a 4 5/8" barrel doesn't give me much more in the way of velocity but increases my muzzle flash and recoil. I never said that a hotter load would be unsafe just that this is the optimal load in my particular gun without the cons outwieghing the pros with a heavier load. I have heard of others finding the same thing happening to them with these powders. Give it a try sometime.
WESHOOT2
March 11, 2003, 10:36 PM
Original question was "Is it safe...?"
Yes, but......
I easily acheive 1309fps using a 300g XTP and W296 from my 5.5" Redhawk; more available.
My gun.
YOUR gun may like something a wee bit different, but IMNSLE you will be safe with your stated parameters.
Just STOP! if anything anything AT ALL suggests/hints/whispers 'something isn't quite right'.
All that said, e-mail direct for some 45 Colt data, 'cause I got some, and strong (tested) opinion behind it.
Yes, but......
I easily acheive 1309fps using a 300g XTP and W296 from my 5.5" Redhawk; more available.
My gun.
YOUR gun may like something a wee bit different, but IMNSLE you will be safe with your stated parameters.
Just STOP! if anything anything AT ALL suggests/hints/whispers 'something isn't quite right'.
All that said, e-mail direct for some 45 Colt data, 'cause I got some, and strong (tested) opinion behind it.
If you enjoyed reading about "Safe load for .45 Colt?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.