Do slower powders shoot softer in full house magnum loads?

[John C]

I've read that slower powders shoot softer than faster powders. But what about slow powders versus slower powders? Specifically, would H110/296 have a "softer", more gradual recoil than 2400 in maximum .44 magnum loads? Or is the difference too small to notice?

Thanks,

-John

 

[gamestalker]

Slower burnng powders are geared toward producing higher velocities and are often considered magnum only powders. 2400 can be manipulated or reduced enough to produce noticably lighter recoiling loads, not by much, but some. As for recoil, I don't know much about powder mass of the larger slow burning powder charges v.s. the lighter weight charge of a fast burning powder and how it effects felt recoil. I read something here on THR from one the more informed guys describing the physics involved, but I don't recall the details. I can tell you this much, my H110 / 296 loads for .357 mag and other magnum wheel gun cartridges will give me a sore wrist in a hurry, and are by no means comfortable to shoot.

GS

 

[savanahsdad]

no full house (max load) is just that, if you want less recoil shoot lighter bullets and if you run them at max you will have less felt recoil and the lighter bullet will be going faster,

as a side note, I like H110 over 2400 as H110 is cleaner, not that 2400 is real dirty just that H110 is cleaner great for auto loaders in 44 mag

 

[John C]

Thanks, gentlemen, for the replies.

I'm not talking about less recoil per se, but a slower push versus a sharp smack. I've heard that the slower powders produce the slower push. Is that detectable between H110/296 versus 2400, or is it pretty much the same?

Thanks,

-John

 

[joneb]

I've read that slower powders shoot softer than faster powders.

I feel the slower powder can have a slower or softer recoil, even though it may give a higher velocity.

 

[USSR]

One thing to remember about powder is, the weight of the powder charge is added to the projectile weight when calculating recoil. So, with 2 rifle loads achieving the same velocity with the same weight bullet, one with a 50gr load with a fast powder, and one with a 60gr load with a slow powder, the 60gr load will recoil more.

Don

 

[Walkalong]

I've read that slower powders shoot softer than faster powders

It can, but not always.

 

[ranger335v]

"I've read that slower powders shoot softer than faster powders."

I've read that too, for several decades, but I firmly believe it's BS.

The difference in time to peak pressure between the fasted and slowest pressure is microseconds and I have never felt any difference in recoil with any powder that produced the same speed with the same weight bullet. If you want reduced recoil, reduce the velocity.

 

[rcmodel]

Is that detectable between H110/296 versus 2400, or is it pretty much the same?

No, not with max loads of each.

Any difference would be, H110/W296 will give maybe 100 FPS higher velocity.
And burn about 4.0 grains more powder doing it.

Since the powder gas is part of the ejecta adding to recoil, the heavier charge at higher velocity will kick harder.

But probably not enough anyone could notice it.

A Max charge of 2400, or H110/W296 will get your attention regardless.

rc

 

[targetshooter22]

Once theory is applied to reality, it's been my experience there is no free lunch. If you want fast and heavy weight, you get more recoil. If you want slow and light, you get less recoil. If your gun weighs less, it recoils more. If you run the calculations, I'm sure there will be different results, but I very much doubt you would tell much of a difference in a double blind study on the matter (although that would be fun).

 

[ljnowell]

as a side note, I like H110 over 2400 as H110 is cleaner, not that 2400 is real dirty just that H110 is cleaner great for auto loaders in 44 mag

I have read that for many years, though I dont believe it to be fact, but I do believe it to be possible, lol. For example, when you load up to max or near max 2400 burns pretty darned clean. As clean as anything, in my opinion. People do tend to load 2400 down though, the way they wont 286/110. I have done it myself. In 45 colt, the 2400 load data, at max, is filthy burning. The pressure limits of standard 45 colt is not within the operating range of the powder, to be quite honest. Now, step those loads up to 30kpsi or even 25kpsi, and they get rip snortin mean and burn real clean.

 

[savanahsdad]

I have read that for many years, though I dont believe it to be fact, but I do believe it to be possible, lol. For example, when you load up to max or near max 2400 burns pretty darned clean. As clean as anything, in my opinion. People do tend to load 2400 down though, the way they wont 286/110. I have done it myself. In 45 colt, the 2400 load data, at max, is filthy burning. The pressure limits of standard 45 colt is not within the operating range of the powder, to be quite honest. Now, step those loads up to 30kpsi or even 25kpsi, and they get rip snortin mean and burn real clean.

I agree , 2400 dose burn cleaner when loaded hot , however my auto's (Ruger Carbine & Ruger DeerField) run longer without needing the gas port claened out with H110 , I still use 2400 in my BlackHawk and mt 1894, I stopted useing 2400 in my Auto's after getting some jams in my Carbine , after I tore it apart for a good cleaning and found it to be all black and gummed up , I was told the same thing "run it hotter " however I was at max rifle loads, with H110 I can run max or back off , and thease guns are a bit touchy, I saw a DeerField at a pin shoot that would not run with fac. 240 PMC,, to bad that stuff is real clean,
anyway , back to the OP, I can't tell from one to the other, and I use about 6 powders and even more primers in my 44 mags the only time I feel less recoil is with lighter bullets

 

[Walkalong]

Specifically, would H110/296 have a "softer", more gradual recoil than 2400 in maximum .44 magnum loads? Or is the difference too small to notice?

Missed that part. No, too small a difference.

 

[sage5907]

This is getting away from the 44 magnum discussion but I have noticed on my 30-06's that with a 150 grain bullet and near maximum velocity felt recoil is actually less with IMR 4064 than it is with IMR 4895 or IMR 4350. IMR 4064 and IMR 4350 velocities are similar and IMR 4895 is slightly slower. I have never been able to understand this comparison?

 

[joneb]

I think this is a matter of actual recoil and perceived recoil. Much like a muzzle brake it slows down the recoil, the recoil energy maybe the same but the way you feel it maybe different.

 

[TooManyToys]

Years ago I used to shoot a friends hot .44 mag & .45 LC reloads.
He used many different powders, bullets & loads, but of all these it seemed that IMR 4227 had the softest felt recoil.
Much more of a BIG THUMP vs a SHARP SMACKING feeling all the while still cranking out some impressing bullet speeds.
The big thump also felt like it was much easier & less abusive on the gun too.

 

[1911Tuner]

Either powder type can produce sharp or "soft" recoil. It depends...and it doesn't depend on muzzle velocity.

Recoil is nothing more than backward acceleration in response to an applied force. With a given weight/mass, the faster the rate of acceleration desired or required, the higher the level of force that's required...and as that unwritten and often not considered part of Newton 3 states...Force forward is force backward. Muzzle velocity, while related, isn't the sole determining factor in the rate of backward acceleration...aka recoil.

Let's do a hypothetical.

As with most hypotheticals, we'll have to assume a few things that probably won't or can't happen in the real world.

We have two .44 Magnum revolvers. These revolvers are identical in every way except for the barrel lengths. One has a 10-inch barrel, and the other is a stubby 2-incher. Both these revolvers weigh exactly 45 ounces...or about the weight of a 4-inch Model 29 Smith. (Hypothetical...remember?)

Both these revolvers will fire 240-grain bullets. The cartridge in the 10-inch gun will be loaded with Grievous SlowPowder and shorty will be firing one loaded with Grievous QuickPowder...the two extreme numbers in the Grievous powder lineup. (Think Bullseye vs 2400)

Both guns produce identical 1200 fps muzzle velocities.

We have to assume that QuickPowder doesn't blow up the gun.

For simplicity, we'll assume that the rate of acceleration is linear.

The rate of acceleration in the 10-inch barrel is 120 fps per inch...and in order for the 2-inch gun to match the 1200 fps muzzle velocity...the rate of acceleration is 600 fps per inch. The force requirement for that to happen will necessarily be off the scale.

In this hypothetical...which revolver will be reasonably pleasant to shoot...and which one will wreck your wrist in short order?

Just listen to the wheels turn!

 

[blarby]

Come on now 'tuner, you know reloaders and math.......

In any event- at full charge, you aren't likely going to notice a big difference.

I notice a difference between full charges of H110 and Unique... that has little to do with the speed of the powder.

Using a lower bullet weight will allow you to reach terminally effective hollowpoint deployment speeds without snapping your wrist off.

I suppose you could go lower than me in the 200-215 range , to the 185's if you wanted to... I'm pretty sure you could get those up to ICBM speeds.

But at the end of the graph, you start to see both sides of the energy equation. I like the speeds of super light bullets- but there is a point where energy gained = bullet destroyed, and thats no good either.

In direct response to your question :

Specifically, would H110/296 have a "softer", more gradual recoil than 2400 in maximum .44 magnum loads?

Warning- duplicating the following could put your eye out...don't.

The max I have ever charged a 44 mag load is 29grs of h110 with a 200 gr bullet, and 25grs with a 240.

There was absolutely nothing soft about it.

I have regularly loaded to 28 grs behind a 200, and 23 grs behind a 240.

There was absolutely nothing soft about that either.

I now regularly load 215 grs with about 9 grs of unique during my current test cycle. 8grs was softer- 9 is still plenty soft.

Do the math. Man or beast- on the business end, you'd still be about double as dead as you would with a 45ACP round, and thats good enough for me.

I've shot max loads of 2400, HS-6, and AA9- there was nothing noticeably mild about any of them. I realized the hs-6 was softer for a bit- then relized I wasn't using magnum primers, and found out why......... once it was all burning, it felt just the same.

 

[Slamfire]

This sort of falls into the same sort of silliness when people have asked wounded Veterans “if the bullet hurt more going in or coming out?”.

With magnum loads all of my 44 Magnum pistols hurt.

I would think, on an absolute, scale, since Momentum = Mass times Velocity, when you add in the weight of the powder charge, that the loads that take more powder will have more recoil momentum than loads with less powder.

I do know that when I used to shoot 30-06 in Highpower, for whatever reason, the 168 grain loads with 47.0 grains IMR 4895 kicked less in rapid fire than the 168 loads with 56 grains H4350. I don’t know if it was due to the powder charge or the pressure curve or how grumpy I was that day. The velocity for each load was about the same.

Maybe it is all due to how grumpy you are that day.