Hold my beer and think about this

What are you trying to achieve? What is the OAL you plant on? Some times you have a bit of "leeway" with pressure increasing the OAL - ymmv.

I personally prefer the lighter bullets in the 44 (180gr) going real fast - over ~30ish H110. I have always stayed below 19gr with the 300's (don't shoot many of them). Also have a (Super) Redhawk 7.5"

Maybe rethink after the beer?

Trade for a 460 s&w

Ask Mr Pierce if you can borrow one of his 44 mags.

I would "love' to read the article, he has some real gems! Can't get the whole issue online.

Can you even get that much H110 in a case with a 300gr bullet?

When I want to hot rod a 44 mag a bit, I use AA4100 or (same) Ramshot Enforcer, a very heavy, dense, fine powder which allows you to do so. I have the firearms that it will not hurt one bit.

What gun is this for? I had some very hot 300 gr. XTP loads I made up for moose hunting with my Redhawk. My Dad refused to fire them in his 629. I don't remember the powder or charge, (it was 24 years ago) but they went at @1400 fps.

I also fired some of the loads my Dad made up for his Ruger .44 Carbine from that Redhawk. I had to shave the flat points down to fit the length of the cylinder in order to fire them. The Redhawk took 'em in stride. I was like this afterwards......

Reminds me of my reloading hunting and fishing friend. He saw a load in a magazine by a respected writer that was ONLY 2 grains above max published data in manuals. At the range he fired one of his magazine article loads and some shooters including me stopped to see where the extra loud boom came from. Lucky to have shot it in a pretty strong Rem 700 Action in 7MM Remington Magnum. The bolt handle wouldn't even move. Had to use sand bags and pound the bolt handle for a while before we could get the brass case out. Not saying your magazine article load will do the same but do be careful.

What is the purpose of such a load compared to a load within published guidelines? I am not a larger game hunter, will pushing it by the extra amount actually be more effective on what ever animal (say bear)

since there isn't such thing as +P in 44 mag and if I remember right he never showed the pressures either in his article I would let him shoot them. I would stick with what the reloading manuals say. the 44 mag doesn't need any help with +P loads

Yep, I have been there. Keep your teeth clinched when you shoot them, it will keep your fillings from falling out!

Lafitte

Anybody else been down this road?

Click to expand...

When I was a kid I used to load up 357 mag to 41 mag levels. Now that I am older, I take a 44 mag and down load it if I want that power level.

Put me in the get a "bigger gun" group.

44 Magnum

Bullet seated to the lower crimp groove, that should help a lot.

Let us know if they pierce the pistol primers.

Reminds me of a friend who told me "Back in the day we used to say 'fill'r up with Herco' ". Then he laughed and said that wasn't very wise and really preferred to keep his fingers as God made them.

Just because you can....

Available powder burn cavity or whatever that's called makes a huge difference. Often referred to as a "looser" chambers than those used by the reload manual publishers, it's a LOT more, starting with the actual case construction and often being MOST affected by seating depth.

That's how the IPSC crowd gets away with loading 9mm "Major" using powders of appropriate burn characteristics--most are seated 1.15" OAL or longer. They also squeeze the last little bit of velocity out by shooting 5-inch or 5.5-inch barrels, but that affects bullet speed, not peak chamber pressure.

So, Mr. Pearce says that powder charge is safe in that gun--before trying to work up to it yourself, double-check the seating spec he used AND the cases he used.

Like the cautionary tale above regarding the 7mm Mag, don't ever start out with anyone's max loads. When working up, STOP when you get within 20 fps of the velocities he did, IF you're also shooting the same barrel length--IF there's not sticky extraction or other "signs" before then.

From my studies of the books and observations of loads actually fired, it *appears* that many but not all book loads stop at about 90% of the SAAMI max chamber pressure. This is necessary to keep us out of trouble with thrown charge weight variations and other things that can push an individual cartridge above what was intended pressure-wise.

MANY times for me with pistol cartridges, I will put in my gun's chamber data and my load's seating depth and adjust powder burn rate (up OR down) to match what the chrono says I'm getting, and the 90% or 95% max pressure load estimate pops up over official pressure limits with only 0.1 gr more of powder. I prefer to use my "safety margin" from the ammo side, NOT the gun side. Plenty of guns with metals or manufacturing defects over the years have blown up with perfectly safe factory loads and perfectly safe reloads, and NONE of them I am aware of blew on the first or the fifth shot. IMO, a gun safely firing 100 loads does not prove for certain that the load is safe in any gun, if that load is outside pressure specs.

I went down this road some time back. I think that the only thing seating longer does is allow you to use more powder to achieve the same velocity you can already achieve with the standard (shorter OAL). From what I gather, only the super redhawk has chambers long enough to use the longer OAL.

What was always of interest to me is that in a rifle, you usually use an OAL that pretty much minimizes bullet jump for the sake of accuracy. Does this mean that greater accuracy can be achieved in a revolver by seating longer? Of course, it is already hard enough to shoot the bigger boomer, so does it really matter? And, would the extra 100 or so feet per second make any difference?

Grump said:

So, Mr. Pearce says that powder charge is safe in that gun--before trying to work up to it yourself, double-check the seating spec he used AND the cases he used.

.

Click to expand...

Brian Pearce is also the writer in the same magazine that spout about how to load 357 mag loads in 38 special cases due to shortage of 357 mag brass. Pretty much just reduce by 10% and only use +P brass and then throw it away after 2 loading's, like there is a difference in +p brass,?? So of course if you did that you would no longer have 38 special brass either!! Now of couse only use those loads in a 357 revolver, but I figure if it is in a 38 special case, eventually some Bubba will put one in a 38 special.

As a kid growing up I read Robert Ruark's book, "Use enough gun". I've yet to see one titled "just use more gunpowder".

24 gr of H110/W296 under a 300 grainer will not only loosen a S&W, but will also eventually loosen a Ruger, probably along with a few of your teeth. There really is no practical need for most folks with a .44 mag to do so. I shoot everything from .380 to .460 mag in handguns. I've yet to find a legitimate reason to hotrod any of them. Max accuracy very rarely accompanies max velocities in handguns. I've found that for the most part, when it comes to handguns, hittin' it good does more harm than just hittin' it hard.

No one with Quickload to run the numbers on this?

I think you're in more danger from using too little H110 than using too much (assuming a "magnum" cartridge) You're limited by the case capacity for what will fit.

That sounds to me more like a 240 grain bullet load than a 300. Are you sure it was for a .44 Magnum and not a [Ruger] .45 Colt? I shoot .41 Mag and .45 Colt but not .44M , so I don't really have a feel for it. What exactly are you trying to accomplish?