Loading for a Smith 610, and faster not always better?

[GJgo]

Hey guys, looking for some 10mm load critiques since they are over book. NO ONE else should try these loads, they are safe in my gun, etc.. The 610 is a lot stronger than a semi-auto, same frame as the 629 44 mag.

Back when I had a bottom feeder I set up a 10mm handload using 180gr XTP, Federal large pistol magnum match primers, 14.5gr AA9, set to 1.273" OAL. I used mixed brass however in hindsight a) remington brass is too thin and b) Winchester brass has less capacity. In my Kimber Eclipse it ran 1260 fps. Skip to when I traded it off for a 6.5" 610, the same load now runs 1325 fps.

Today I shot my first loads using the 200gr XTP. I only used Starline brass, Federal LPMM primers, AA9 powder, and I put the OAL out to 1.300" as that's as long as it'll go & fit in my plastic cartridge cases. Here are the initial results. All loads below exhibited normal primer flattening, and all cases were easily extracted from the cylinder after firing. In the N frame chassis I have no reason to think that they're a problem, hence the critiquing.

12.5gr = ~1235 fps, vertical string.
13.0gr = ~1265 fps, good group.
13.5gr = ~1310 fps, vertical string.
14.0gr = ~1350 fps, good group. Since AA9 doesn't compress this is a full charge at this OAL- to get more in there I'd have to go longer.

I've shot over-pressure rounds in revolvers before, and the brass had to be "forced" out and/or the primers popped. What do you guys think? Of course this is loaded longer than book OAL & the revolver has a generous "throat" so that will affect the pressures when compared to the book.

Second question. I wanted to try the 200gr XTP as theoretically it should penetrate deeper. However, looking at the velocity range on the XTP bullet at this link it would seem that the 180gr will hold together at higher velocities. I can tell you that I dig up my bullets when I can out of my dirt backstop, and while I have not found a 180gr XTP that's come apart today I did find a few 200gr XTPs that shed their jackets & flattened dramatically. This chart shows the ceiling for the 180gr 10mm XTP to be 1450 FPS which I'm below, and the ceiling for the 200gr 10mm XTP to be 1200 FPS which I'm above. At 610 velocities is it possible that I'd actually get better penetration with the 180gr projectile? The primary purpose of this piece is a trail gun, FWIW.

I wish there was a good heavy 10mm JSP bullet available for the reloader but I haven't found anything like that. Better bear medicine.

 

[rogn]

Cant tell you much about expansion since I havnt had anything big enough to test on stop in front of me during the season. I can tell you that Starline cases, Hogdon's Longshot @ 8.5 gr and 1.270" COL Pistol seems happy, and cases are fine.will yield more than 1250 out of a 6" barreled bottom feeder. Accuracy is under an inch at 32 yd. I have not done any expansion evaluation as yet, but they do have a large cavity.

 

[ReloaderFred]

Since AA #9 doesn't require a magnum primer, you might try standard primers and see if that tightens up your groups.

In my 6.5" Model 610, I get the best accuracy with 200 gr. cast bullets, dropped from an RCBS mold, and sized .401". There is no jacket separation with a cast bullet, and it penetrates until it looses all it's steam.

Hope this helps.

Fred

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Have you seen any flame cutting with AA9?

I tend to shy away from small ball powders at high pressures because of the flame cutting issue. My 610 would never see a round of AA9 or AA7 because of that issue. I am curious because I may be a bit conservative in that rule.

 

[GJgo]

This thing only has a couple hundred rounds through it, most of them factory to collect the brass so no flame cutting yet. I haven't heard of that being a problem with AA9.

If I went to a standard primer I'd have to go longer in OAL to get more powder in there to keep my velocity up, I would assume. I'm plenty happy with the accuracy as it is.

 

[GJgo]

Fred, what velocities are you seeing with your cast boolits? I've always heard that you shouldn't shoot cast faster than 1100-ish?

 

[ReloaderFred]

GJgo,

My records show that I got the following velocities in my S&W 610 with my cast bullets:

155 gr. SWC w/Win. 571 =1245 fps
180 gr. RNFP w/Blue Dot = 1241 fps
180 gr. RNFP w/Win. 571 = 1231 fps
185 gr. RNFP w/IMR 800X = 1238 fps
205 gr. RNFP w/Win. 571 = 1140 fps

Those were the fastest velocities chronographed through my PACT Professional Chronograph, and all loads were accurate in my revolver. There were other velocities, but you asked for the top ones. All bullets tested a BHN of 12 to 13, which is pretty much plain wheelweights. There was no leading, but all bullets were sized .401" and lubed with Magma lube.

You'll get faster velocities with IMR 800X, along with lower pressures, but it meters like corn flakes and is a pain to use. I have to weigh each charge to get it accurate, using a powder trickler to get the last little bit into the scale pan for the exact weight.

Hope this helps.

Fred

 

[P-32]

A question? Why would you want to go over book on your loads on a pistol no longer made which more than likely will become highly desirable if not already at some point in time? ,Just Sayin....

 

[ReloaderFred]

P-32,

My loads were all done with published data from trusted sources, but I'm assuming your question was aimed at the OP.

Hope this helps.

Fred

 

[RandyP]

"What do you guys think?"

Since you asked.... I think purposely disregarding max load data carries the potential for a Darwin Award nomination, so I don't do that.

What level of risk others choose to accept I leave up to those 'others' and hope to crikey they are not shooting next to me at the range if something blows up because of their decisions.

 

[gamestalker]

I love large worked up charges of slw burning powder for everything I load, including shotshell. Me want more power, and me gets what me wants with safe work up procedures.

Flame cutting! It's a fact of revolver life regardless of the powder you use. So some powders may cut a little more than others, none are going to reduce my wheel guns to rubble or put them into retirement.

I'm taking a look through my Hornady, Speer, Sierra, and Nosler data right now. I also have powder data to compare with. The best looking data seems to be Speer. They list 14.0 grs. of #9 as max. and a magnum primer for the 200 gr. jacketed. If using the slow burning ball powders make sure you use the primer indicated for reliable ignition, and over all predictable performance. I'm a stickler about using prescribed primers.
GS

 

[GJgo]

Thanks Fred, I only load handgun stuff on my progressive so I'll stick with AA9. Maybe I'll keep an eye out for some hard cast.

P-32, if I were worried about future collectability I couldn't shoot anything I own. Really though, 10mm book loads are watered down to allow for the EAA Witnesses & unsupported Glock chambers of the world. The N frame is a beast around a 10mm, much the same as the "Ruger only" loads you'd see for some magnum pistol loads. If I were to worry about anything it would be the integrity of the brass so I'm keeping an eye on it while working up, and will end up with a load backed off a bit from the top end.

Randy, bit of an anecode. One time I was at the range & A guy just picked up his Ruger #1 from his smith chambered in 7mm STW. He shot it. I took a shot. He took two more shots & it blew up, injuring him. Dodged that bullet, as it were. Brass flowed all the way around the falling block & shrapneled the stock. Why? Too light a charge of real slow burning powder.

Gamestalker thanks, I'll check my Speer manual. There's so much latitude between them. I think moving my OAL out 40 thou from book helps quite a bit. I agree with you, I prefer slow powders in everything I work up. I definitely think mag primers are a good choice for #9.