.44 Magnum load data

[MovedWest]

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]

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]

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]

2400. I like the grass scorching possibilities

Kill it, and cook it, in one step.

 

[Ben Shepherd]

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]

At those velocities non-gas-checked bullets would be liquefied before leaving the chamber.

lol, No.

 

[Ben Shepherd]

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]

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]

Use magnum primers and a firm crimp with the H110, jrop11.

 

[jrop11]

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]

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]

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]

Thanks for the correction Ben. I completely understand and agree. Don't know what I was thinking.

 

[jrop11]

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]

My take on the 44 Mag

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]

PS

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]

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]

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]

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]

Yikes! I didn't mean to start a fight break it up fellas

 

[ArchAngelCD]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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 !