454 Casull

[Seabeeken]

Tested some loads in my Ruger Super Redhawk yesterday using Hornady 240 gr XTP Magnum bullets. All went well except 2 loads which were squib loads. Both were compressed loads and did not fully burn. Both used CCI small rifle primers

First load was 35.0 gr of Accurate 1680 which was found in a loading manual. 4 of the 5 rounds were squib loads and the bullet had to be drive from the barrel. A lump of unburned powder came out of the barrel also. It appears that only about 1/3 of the powder burned and what did burn was tan granular and wasn't completely burned. Never had this happen before. The round that did fire sounded very weak

Second load was 34.5 gr of H-110. It performed the same way except only 3 were squibs.

Ive been reloading more than 40 cartridges since 1974 and have never had this happen. They were not maximum loads but were above starting loads.
I'm sharing the information in the hope that it saves someone else the hassle of removing a stuck bullet or worse. I definitely do NOT recommend 1680 in the 454 Casull. Has anyone else had a similar problem?

BTW, the most accurate load was 25.0 gr of N-105 which shot a slightly jagged one hole group at 25 yards.
N-110, 2400 and AA #9 were also tested but weren't very impressive

 

[Grumulkin]

I believe your load is clearly too low for your gun, case, barrel, powder and bullet combination.

Just curious; how many data sources did you check and what firearm did they use for testing? If testing was done in an Encore which would have no gas leakage from the cylinder, the pressure will be lower in your Super Redhawk and that published startiing load will be too low for you.

 

[Blind Dog Jake]

CCI magnum small rifle primers in my 454 Casull. I run AA#9 at 1/2 gr. under max load shooting 300 XTP Mag's. Shoots well in 7 inch Ruger Red Hawk.

 

[gamestalker]

I don't have any experience with 1680, but I do use a lot of H110 and can tell you it doesn't run well, if at all, when reduced.

That said, your charge of 34.5 is 1.5 grs. below published start according to Hodgdon with a jacketed bullet. What you described is classic of how H110 reacts when it is loaded light, and 34.5 grs. is indeed light. Pressures were probably well below 30K psi. I'm actually surprised any of them got out of the barrel with that charge.

Thee solution, bump the charge up to 36.5 - 37.0 grains, apply a good stout roll crimp, and I'll put money on it that 454 will bark like the big dog it is known to be.

GS

 

[Seabeeken]

I took the load from Hornady's 9th edition manual which shows a starting load of 34.1 gr of H-110. Knowing that it doesn't do well with reduced charges, I bumped it up a bit. The manuals data was fired in a freedom arms revolver, not a closed action firearm.
I will try both powders again but with a larger charge. Both powders were very compressed as it was and looked like pyro des pellets when they fell out of the barrel.
The loads were shown with standard, not magnum primers, but I will use magnums on the next session.

Thanks, always great to get other opinions and facts

 

[gotboostvr]

I'd change just the primers, THEN bump up the load with the new primers.
for what is worth, I use rifle primers even with reduced unique powered loads in my 500.
I'd start With hotter primers and see where that gets you first.

 

[gamestalker]

Primers could very well produce some positive results, I had a learning curve in that area also. But specifics of the data, that being Hodgdon, indicates that SR primers were used in their data.

But if you would rather avoid having to dislodge stuck bullets from the barrel, I would try both mag. primers, and a powder charge increase to at least 36.0 grains. You won't blow anything up in a SRH, the worst that will happen is the load will produce a full house bark, which is a good / normal function when using H110.

The other thing about H110, is when using the lightest weight bullets for a given application, the powder charge is almost always a compressed charge. Because of this, it takes even more pressure and ignition heat to get it burning. But once you have it figured out and dialed in, you'll never have a repeat. I have loaded .357 mag, 44 mag., and 500 S&W magnum with not a single performance issue of any sort since my early beginnings.

But like I said, in my early days, I was apprehensive about what seemed like a scary amount of powder, even at the published minimums and decided to start below published minimums, this was in fact the cause of my first issues using it. I also encountered an issue with standard primers, but that was actually me experimenting. No squibs, but darn close, as I had lots of half burned powder every where, and the chrony numbers indicated I was on the edge and also extremely radical, no doubt I just got lucky regarding a squib.

GS

 

[Seabeeken]

Thx GS
I'll up the loads and use mag rifle primers. Used H110 for years in 44 with no issues. The casual load came from Hornadys manual but I'll look at hodgdons website for the next ones. Gonna be hard to beat that n-105 load though.

 

[TimSr]

I use H110 and W296 in my Freedom Arms .454. The charge of 34.5 was a little light but I don't think it was the problem. My cast load for 255gr SWC is 35gr. I'll have to check when I get home for my charge with 240gr XTP-MAG, which is my pet load for deer hunting. I'm using Freedom arms brass, and have only used CCI Small Rifle Magnum Primers, and have NEVER had a squib over nearly 30 years and hundreds or thousands of rounds.

I check my log for my charge, but I'm a lot more inclined to suspect that magnum rifle primers make the difference in this case.

 

[Seabeeken]

Thanks Tim
I used the same loads with CCI 450 magnum primers also and there was no difference. I emailed Western Powders about the problem with 1680 and they said their lab techs will have me an answer in the next few days.
The H-110 load was taken from the Hornady manual and was above their starting load but was on the light side as stated above according to Hodgdons site. The Hornady data did use FA hard cast bullets. I will try loads using the Hodgdon data.
I've also loaded thousands of rounds over the years and never had a squib before. I've used H110 in thousands of 44 loads without issue. I hope to post test results this week after WP completes their lab tests and I can load up a few more rounds to try.

 

[sean1129]

Your whole situation has me as interested as you are in finding out. I load 454 myself, but never with H110. I'm curious to see what the lab techs have to say.

I know this wasn't your question, but I've had a great deal of success with IMR 4227 as well, slightly less recoil, too. And as with most IMR powders, superb accuracy.

Good luck.

 

[TimSr]

I've also loaded thousands of rounds over the years and never had a squib before.

Freedom Arms starting load is 36gr of H110, which is what I'm shooting under my 240 XTP-MAGs. I can't believe its enough to make a difference, but then most data only shows a 2 or 3 grain spread from min to max. Its a variable that can easily be eliminated.

You probably have already considered all the obvious then, like media plugged flash holes, and eliminated the possiblity of bad components. You have two differnet primer types. Is it possible something was in the cases that might have contaminated the powder nearest the flashhole, such as oil, water, or case lube?

What kind of brass is that, and has it been used before? Is it possible the flash holes are smaller?

 

[Seabeeken]

The cases are Starline. Flash holes were all clean. Nothing contaminated. Should hear from techs soon.

 

[627PCFan]

I'm just throwing this out there but Accurate 1680 is a rifle powder...

 

[TimSr]

I'm not familiar with AA powders but he is getting squibs with H110 also.

 

[Seabeeken]

Yes it is and so is N-105 but the accurate reloading guide and Hornadys shows loads for the casull. Some high powered handgun rounds use fast rifle powders.

 

[savanahsdad]

just checked Hodgdon lists SRP for everything and Lyman lists SRM (CCI450), the two loads I use are SRP with 2400 and SRM with W296,

W296/H110 with CCI small rifle Magnum primers work great out of my Classic Carbine , with a 18" barrel , I had a 454 Raging Bull for about 2 months , and no squibs there either ,

I'll bet the Tech will say use Small Rifle Magnum Primers ,

 

[TimSr]

This one certainly has me stumped to the point that I have to think it's one of the variables we've already looked.

If you are getting sqibs, the primer fired but did not ignite the powder. No other possibility.

Either the primers fire was inadequate, was obstructed or too far from the powder, or the powder, at least at the flash hole area, was fouled to the point of not lighting from the primer.

Like I said, can't address the other powder but for a long time 110/296 was everybody's go to powder for this round.

 

[41 Mag]

I would go with the primers myself.

I have loaded a LOT of different loads using 296 with bullets ranging from 240 through just over 300's and never had issues with any, but I have always used SRM primers. Even with some surplus powder loaded using 296 data and being about 2grs slower they lit just fine.

My AA-9 loads have never had an issue either using all of the same components as the 296 loads.

All mine are fired from the 8.375 Raging Bull.