2400 need magnum sparks?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jim Watson said:
I fail to see the problem.
We are regularly reminded that single actions are being regularly produced with both .45 Colt and .45 ACP cylinders, therefore it must be OK to load .45 Colt up to ACP pressure of 18,000 CUP or even to +P which lacks a CUP standard but is about 10% greater in ppsi.
Click to expand...

Are they the same? One of the things these simple comparisons assume, is that everything is the same. I am going to say that the unknown unknowns are greater than the known unknowns.

Some known unknowns:

  • What are the steels used?

  • What are heat treatments?

  • What are the forcing cone angles?. I learned this from a S&W customer rep, that the 44 Mag had a different cone angle than the 44 Spl. Somehow that makes a difference, but I don't remember if the cone difference is due to pressure considerations or not.

  • How many over pressure rounds will these take till the cylinder ruptures from metal fatigue?

This post, on another forum, it is worth looking at the fatigue curve, and the blown up Ruger pistol.

Fatigue Life of 4140 steel


http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?150409-Ruger-om-44-convertible&highlight=convertible

Just a few thoughts on this. For Background I am a mechanical engineer with a heavy background in failure and fatigue.
I wonder if I could request a high quality photo of the fracture zone of the cylinder? I am specifically interested in the grain structure of the bolt notches.

I put fort the following.

1) Firearms in general (the type we plebeians can get our mits one) are not designed for infinite fatigue life.
2) The Factors of safety used in firearms design are in line with low end of fatigue requirements (usually less than 10,000 cycles).
3) One of the funny things about fatigue is that each time you push the material past its original design point, you lower its expected life.
4) I am looking at this as an older gun with an unknown number of rounds through it. but based on its age a substantial round count seems likely.
5) When these firearms are designed it is generally preferable for something else to go before the cylinder lets go and takes the top strap. Generally this takes the form of the gun wearing loose or the barrel wearing out. But they are designed to handle X rounds at standard pressures.
6) I see alot of folks calculate the strengths of Rugers, but these calculations are only ever performing an evaluation on a straight static pressure basis. This is wrong when trying to determine if a load is safe.

I attached a couple of marked up figures for your perusal
Click to expand...

What this guy showed in his post that you could expect to blew the cylinder of a Ruger Blackhawk in 650 rounds with overpressure loads. You can look at the curve and decide for yourself if the over pressure loads are all that over pressure.

More known unknowns:

  • What are the design limits of these pistols, or any pistols for that matter?
Today with CAD programs engineers could draft up a dimensional model and see the hoop stresses in the cylinders, and the stress concentrations at the cylinder notches, and make good estimates as to the strength and fatigue lifetimes. I would love to see something like that. But, I don't have that and neither does anyone I have ever read advocating hot loads.

I really think the unknown unknowns out number the known unknowns, but since I don't know what they are, I can't be certain. :confused:

Now, if someone will take one of these things, load up 250 L bullets with 17.5 grs 2400 and fire 5000 rounds without a failure, I would then have great confidence in the ability of the pistol series to withstand that pressure. Making lifetime endurance conclusions on 500 over pressure rounds is insufficient for me to copy the behavior.

I remember the in print Gunwriter George Nonte evaluating the first issue of the Charter Arms Bulldog. George measured cylinder thickness, compared against other pistols, made conclusions that the Bulldog would handle Keith loads just fine. His analysis was fallacious and it shows how little he knew about his subject matter. He did not know the materials or heat treatment in the other pistols, he did not know the materials and heat treatment of the Bulldog, and he did not know the design margins of the Bulldog. When I called Charter Arms, they had seen lots of blown cylinders from owners who had copied Keith loads.

Pushing the boundaries may result in nothing, or it may result in something. Acting out of ignorance and pushing the boundaries is far more risky than being ignorant and not pushing the boundaries.

And really, does more mean more? What exactly are you getting when you bump up pressures above that of the standard cartridge. Does the wound channel get larger and deeper? By how much?
 
Slamfire said:
Are they the same? One of the things these simple comparisons assume, is that everything is the same. I am going to say that the unknown unknowns are greater than the known unknowns.

Some known unknowns:

  • What are the steels used?

  • What are heat treatments?

  • What are the forcing cone angles?. I learned this from a S&W customer rep, that the 44 Mag had a different cone angle than the 44 Spl. Somehow that makes a difference, but I don't remember if the cone difference is due to pressure considerations or not.

  • How many over pressure rounds will these take till the cylinder ruptures from metal fatigue?

This post, on another forum, it is worth looking at the fatigue curve, and the blown up Ruger pistol.

Fatigue Life of 4140 steel


http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?150409-Ruger-om-44-convertible&highlight=convertible



What this guy showed in his post that you could expect to blew the cylinder of a Ruger Blackhawk in 650 rounds with overpressure loads. You can look at the curve and decide for yourself if the over pressure loads are all that over pressure.

More known unknowns:

  • What are the design limits of these pistols, or any pistols for that matter?
Today with CAD programs engineers could draft up a dimensional model and see the hoop stresses in the cylinders, and the stress concentrations at the cylinder notches, and make good estimates as to the strength and fatigue lifetimes. I would love to see something like that. But, I don't have that and neither does anyone I have ever read advocating hot loads.

I really think the unknown unknowns out number the known unknowns, but since I don't know what they are, I can't be certain. :confused:

Now, if someone will take one of these things, load up 250 L bullets with 17.5 grs 2400 and fire 5000 rounds without a failure, I would then have great confidence in the ability of the pistol series to withstand that pressure. Making lifetime endurance conclusions on 500 over pressure rounds is insufficient for me to copy the behavior.

I remember the in print Gunwriter George Nonte evaluating the first issue of the Charter Arms Bulldog. George measured cylinder thickness, compared against other pistols, made conclusions that the Bulldog would handle Keith loads just fine. His analysis was fallacious and it shows how little he knew about his subject matter. He did not know the materials or heat treatment in the other pistols, he did not know the materials and heat treatment of the Bulldog, and he did not know the design margins of the Bulldog. When I called Charter Arms, they had seen lots of blown cylinders from owners who had copied Keith loads.

Pushing the boundaries may result in nothing, or it may result in something. Acting out of ignorance and pushing the boundaries is far more risky than being ignorant and not pushing the boundaries.

And really, does more mean more? What exactly are you getting when you bump up pressures above that of the standard cartridge. Does the wound channel get larger and deeper? By how much?
Click to expand...

I had forgotten George Nonte, now there is a blast from the past gun writer. You are absolutely correct in that material dimension of a cylinder for instance, is but one of a myriad of variables that affect reloading safety. I'm surprised Mr. Nonte did not realize that.

And it's not just examples such as his. On another forum I was on years ago one of the members posted that it's perfectly safe to use .45 Colt +P loads in S&W 25-5 revolvers, because it shares the same frame size as the .44 Magnum model 29. That's just not true.

S&W applies additional heat treatment processes to the steel of the model 29 to enable it to better withstand the pounding of its .44 Magnum chambering. It is reasonable to expect they would not do this with revolvers that are chambered for factory loadings that produce much lower pressure.
 
Col. Harrumph said:
I used Winchester WLP spark plugs. I think that was a mistake. The box says, "for standard or magnum loads"... which is an odd thing to say, IMHO
Click to expand...
WLP work with harder to light ball powders. Should not be a problem. I use WLPs in 45 acp target loads to full loads of 296 in 44 mag.

Make sure bullets have enough neck tension to keep the bullets from moving to soon, when the primer fires.

I control soot left from 2400 by ejecting the fired shells with the muzzle pointing up.

As many others have said, there are better powders available.
 
2400 is a full power magnum powder, I like Blue Dot for medium magnum loads very clean burning hdbiker
 
Do you NEED to use a magnum primer?

What does the data use?
Many of the cartridges that are labelled
"Magnum" like 357 mag,or 300Win Mag are developed using a magnum primer.
According to Hodgdon they used mag, not because it was needed,
but because they thought that's what reloaders would use.

Just stick to the data, it'll tell you if you need a mag primer or not.
 
As I recall, there was an article recently discussing the fact that Alliant is reshooting data and recommending standard primers with 2400 instead of magnum.
 
2400 need magnum sparks?

Col. Harrumph said:
I experimented with 2400 in .44 Special today and found unburned powder spread everywhere, even with loads approaching the book maximum.

I used Winchester WLP spark plugs. I think that was a mistake. The box says, "for standard or magnum loads"... which is an odd thing to say, IMHO.

(No other issues. Cast 255 grainers, sized .431", good solid crimp, clean pockets, etc.)
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on what we read. The Speer Reloading Manual #12 calls for a magnum primer with all 2400 powder loads. However, that same manual calls for a magnum primer anytime a spherical or flake powder is used. Just for an example powders like H110, 296, IMR4227, Blue Dot, AA7, Unique, HS7 and 231. Now if we fast forward to for example The Hornady 9th Edition they simply call for a WLP (Winchester Large Pistol) primer and those boxes are clearly labeled Large Pistol for Standard or Magnum pistol loads.

In my own experience loading 44 Magnum for a S&W Model 29 and a Ruger Super Blackhawk with a Ruger 44 Carbine tossed in and mostly 240 grain bullets is that with a good roll crimp the WLP primers have worked just fine and been hot enough to give me good results with 2400 powder as well as several others I mentioned. Yes, occasionally with 2400 I would get some flakes of unburned powder but very seldom and my normal go to primer is normally a CCI 350 Large Pistol Magnum. My best conclusion is anytime you load a slow burning powder really good neck tension is an absolute must. My own experiences with unburned powder were likely a result of a poor crimp on my part and not a failure of the primer to afford good ignition.

Just My Take....
Ron
 
Alliant 2400 is a double base propellant made with nitro cellulose and nitro glycerin. It lights off easily compared to ball powder and doesn't require a magnum primer. Speer has revised its No. 13 manuals loading data in the .357 mag using standard primers and claim better performance than with magnum primers which can produce erratic pressure spikes. I have experienced this when using mag primers with 2400.

Like with any of the slower burn rate powders you need a heavy crimp to help with complete burn of the powder. A small amount of remnants or skeletons isn't unusual with 2400 but light crimps and low pressure loads will increase them. It isn't so much unburned powder but residue that's left over from any combustion process.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
2400 and the 357 Mag
Replies
15
Views
2K
MCNETT
M
PCCUSNRET
  • Locked
44 Magnum Hercules 2400 Test Rounds
Replies
22
Views
4K
moxie
M
roo_ster
  • Locked
.357mag, 2400, 158gr Cast SWC
Replies
10
Views
1K
Ben Shepherd
B
D
  • Locked
44 magnum load question
Replies
8
Views
700
James Thomson
J
S
  • Locked
44 Magnum - 200 gr RNFP and 2400
Replies
0
Views
480
Shrinkmd
S
Back
Top