Trailboss loading confirmation, please

[Obturation]

Hey all,
I'll warn you ahead of time, this is a dumb question (maybe?).

I've used several pounds of trailboss in 45-70 and 45 colt/454 casull in the last couple years and I'm familiar with the calculation for charge weight.

I don't typically check for a published load when working with trailboss , I just hold the bullet I want to use up to the case at seating depth and put a mark on the case where the base of the bullet is, fill the case to the mark, weigh it and reduce about 15% and then work up generally to 95% fill and call it good.

So today I decided to put together some 325 grain wfn hi-tek coated MBC bullets in once fired winchester 454 casull cases for use in a SRH. Did my calculation and measurement , no problem . by my calculation about 8.5 grains was 100% fill. I reduced the charge to 8 grains and loaded 40 rounds with a rem 7 1/2 primers. No problem. I confirmed that the charge wasn't compressed by shaking a couple finished rounds to hear the powder rattling around in there and was satisfied and figured I'd test these out and adjust from there as needed. Pretty normal stuff.

My concern is that I looked at hodgdons site just to see if they recommended a charge just as an after thought. For a 325 grain lfn they show a max of 7 grains. Looked at data from lee, showing a generic 325 grain (doesn't specify bullet shape) lead bullet and they show a max charge of 7 grains as well. So I went back to the loads I just produced and gave a few a shake and sure enough, the powder is loose in the case, definitely not compressed. I'm under the impression that as long as trailboss isn't compressed it's essentially safe.

I'm just wondering if anyone else would be concerned about this? Hodgdons shows at 7 grains a pressure of 23,700 cup ( a little over 1/3 of what the max pressure rating of the cartridge is) and a SRH is a pretty stout revolver so I'm really not worried about a kaboom , just wanted to know if you guys do something differently than I do. I really don't think it's nessescary to pull these rounds down and re-do them but since I have the wealth of knowledge known as THR at my finger tips I'd see if anyone here would be concerned with the over book load I made thinking I was being conservative but actually going a full grain past listed max.

Second guessing myself isn't something I'm prone to but I just want to be safe and not tempt fate.

Any info or input is appreciated. Thanks!

 

[Olon]

I use the book loads with trailboss but if you're worried you could make a series of loads going up to 8gr. and check for pressure signs. Still don't feel good recommending somebody else go over book max though.

I'm a little wet behind the ears yet when it comes to reloading though. Just another guy who likes trailboss and overbuilt shooting irons.

 

[Obturation]

I use the book loads with trailboss but if you're worried you could make a series of loads going up to 8gr. and check for pressure signs. Still don't feel good recommending somebody else go over book max though.

I'm a little wet behind the ears yet when it comes to reloading though. Just another guy who likes trailboss and overbuilt shooting irons.

I doubt any pressure signs would be evident , even my max loads with h110 show no pressure signs and they're well over 50,000 psi, those rem 7 1/2 primers are some tough buggers and the chambers on my SRH are generous, extraction is never tight.

I do like your idea of loading a few at 7 grains and then on up to 8 and I'll probably do that. I'm not looking to try to push the limits of trailboss, not my intention at all, just want some slow heavy plinkers to punch paper and soup cans. If I would have seen the data before I would have just loaded 7 grains and been done and maybe worked up a little depending on how they shot. Overbuilt guns are great for a margin of safety, I just don't want to be knowingly unsafe (which I don't think the 8 grain load is).
Thanks

 

[PWC]

You say you don't want to second guess your self and want to be safe....

Two bullet mfgrs say 7 gr max....

You say that if you had looked at the load data before you loaded, you would probably loaded 7 gr....

Your gun probably will withstand 1 gr over max pub data, but you and the Enterprise are going where noone has gone before....at least not without work up. I wouldn't start at 1 gr over max.

 

[Mr_Flintstone]

According to Hodgdon, you’re good.

 

[DocRock]

Pull three bullets. Confirm beyond doubt that you don't have compression.. My notes for 454 Casull show a Matt's 300 grs lswc with 7.5 grs TB and the note "Max" underlined. As far as I can tell, that's from 10 years ago, so I can't recall the load today but there will have been a reason for emphasising "Max".

The Hodgdon max for 300 grs in 454 Casull is 8 grs TB, so it's almost certainly about compression. If I were certain I had no compression, I would shoot it, but it's not my risk....​

 

[Sistema1927]

I wouldn't lose one minute of sleep shooting those in a SRH.

 

[dcarr]

According to Hodgdon, you’re good.
View attachment 947569

I missed this when i was fooling about with a jug of trail boss about a year ago, this might be fun working up .45 long colt for the marlin. Bet it is a expensive pain finding a jug of this now.

 

[Obturation]

I wouldn't start at 1 gr over max.

Me either.

Pull three bullets. Confirm beyond doubt that you don't have compression.. My notes for 454 Casull show a Matt's 300 grs lswc with 7.5 grs TB and the note "Max" underlined. As far as I can tell, that's from 10 years ago, so I can't recall the load today but there will have been a reason for emphasising "Max".

Will do.
One variable is the cases came from 60 or so factory winchester 454 rounds that if I had to guess were from the late 90s, I got it late last year as part of a deal. I tossed out 6 or so of those cases due to rim thickness variation, they would bind in my FA but worked fine as loaded from the factory in my ruger. So I know the brass is inconsistent and that's the main reason I was going to just use it for low pressure plinking loads. Maybe the case volume is more than standard? Not sure how to accurately measure water volume between 2 cases but I could put the same load in a modern good quality case and see if it's compressed. -thinking out loud .... Errr.

I wouldn't lose one minute of sleep shooting those in a SRH.

Kind of my thought too but I've only been reloading a few years , I do know what I'm doing and can read and follow directions , I also know that there's little chance it's unsafe because the loading directions provided by the powder manufacturer were followed. the calculated reduced load just ended up being 1 grain over max somehow . at this point I don't really deviate from published loads, haven't needed to.





I guess the point of this thread is that I was under the impression that TB could be used safely for any cartridge that you may not have load data for as long as the directions were followed. When you follow directions , as I have other times I've used this powder , then checked against published data it's always been in the range of published charge weights. I'm going to pull a few down in the morning , I'll post a couple pictures and if it's compressed I will be very surprised but I'll show it here- good, bad or ugly. If the powder is loose in the case I guess I'll shoot them.

 

[BBarn]

If your loads are greater in OAL than the published loads, that could account for the difference in maximum Trail Boss powder charge.

 

[Obturation]

Hey,

Ok so revisiting this morning:
-shook a few, yep they rattle. Had my wife shake a few and put the mom super hearing on it, she said "yep, they rattle" , and then gave me a look.

-picked 3 cartridges at random


Pulled 3-
all 3 the same, nothing clumped or crushed (I assume that's all I was looking for)

-checked scale then charge weight

-did my best caveman method to check case capacity against a starline case by filling each with h110 and weighing it

So just .2 grains different , so the win case is larger even though it's a tad shorter
win case on left, starline right

Anything I missed as far as checking that the powder wasn't compressed? I'm not sure if the published max load is just very conservative , this is the first time my calculated load was beyond published max for TB, so just second and third guessing myself.

Really pulling and re-doing 34 rounds isn't a big deal, this has more to do with actually understanding the powder and using it properly- which in this case shows me that published TB loads (with similar but not identical components) may not match up. I guess the other variable is the projectile , if a wfn has more of its mass up front to make that big meplat I guess that makes the back shorter and leaves more case capacity - I think this is what's actually happening . thoughts or concerns with my thinking/process ?

 

[mdi]

My ears have dried after about 40 years of reloading, and I have no need to not trust manufacturer's data (Lee data is more than likely the Hodgdon data reprinted). I have never found a need to go beyond max recommended loads in any cartridge I've reloaded, even in my early 44 Magnum "Magnumitis" days where the louder, hardest kicking loads were preferred (if I wanted more power, I'd often go with a bigger, more powerful cartridge). I don't think anyone using Trail Boss in a high powered cartridge is looking for "magnum performance" high velocities, so just use data that has been pressure tested in a laboratory and is known safe. Nobody will call you a sissy for using lighter loads...

 

[PWC]

There are a great many things I do not know, and I've never used trail boss.

So, I'm surprised at the mfgr's instructions on how to use the bullet and brass to figure a load. Almost seems like using a powder horn and ramrod except no "compressed".

 

[Mr_Flintstone]

That’s a really wide flat point. It’s probably wider than the one listed, which means the bullet would be shorter. I’m betting that your bullets don’t seat as deep as the ones on Hodgdon’s site. That’s just speculation though.

 

[Obturation]

don't think anyone using Trail Boss in a high powered cartridge is looking for "magnum performance" high velocities,

Right, not my intention at all. Just wanting a heavy slow plinking (plunking) load. Not sure if this will be accurate or prove to be a good load, just don't know until it's tested, can't find anyone talking about this load specifically so I'm finding out for myself. Certainly not looking for magnum power or velocity, more like a heavy 45 colt load with a case long enough to hopefully get 700+ fps and be very pleasant but powerful. It's an experiment.

So, I'm surprised at the mfgr's instructions on how to use the bullet and brass to figure a load. Almost seems like using a powder horn and ramrod except no "compressed".

Yeah, a fairly imprecise method but an excellent powder for the cartridges I like it for - primarily 45-70.

That’s a really wide flat point. It’s probably wider than the one listed, which means the bullet would be shorter. I’m betting that your bullets don’t seat as deep as the ones on Hodgdon’s site. That’s just speculation though.

That's pretty much the conclusion I reached after examining everything this morning.

 

[.38 Special]

I have seen wild variations between TB load data and my own experience. I have had cartridges which hold far more than Hodgdon says they should, and also powder which spills out of the top of the case using Hodgdon data. So I don't bother with "book loads" for TB any more. I use their general guideline as listed in post #5 and have had no troubles.

 

[ballman6711]

I think the key is in the second paragraph "IF YOU DON'T SEE TRAILBOSS DATA".

BUT, I also agree with the others that your bullet has a very wide nose, and may be very different to the bullet they used for their data. As stated above, the bullet they used is probably seated a bit deeper than your bullets.

Since you've already pulled three, maybe load those three (one each) from 7.0gr up to about 7.8gr and give them a try.

chris

 

[Obturation]

I think the key is in the second paragraph "IF YOU DON'T SEE TRAILBOSS DATA".

BUT, I also agree with the others that your bullet has a very wide nose, and may be very different to the bullet they used for their data. As stated above, the bullet they used is probably seated a bit deeper than your bullets.

Since you've already pulled three, maybe load those three (one each) from 7.0gr up to about 7.8gr and give them a try.

chris

I have more of that brass too, I'll load some with lower charges just to do it and have a wider sample for testing . I'll be shooting Sunday so I'll know then, hopefully I can chronograph these , depends on how busy it is at the range.

 

[ballman6711]

Looking forward to a range report (thinking of starting to load 45lc and 454 myself).

chris

 

[Obturation]

Looking forward to a range report (thinking of starting to load 45lc and 454 myself).

chris

If you want to shoot 454 you really need to roll your own for intended uses. I started out trying to hotrod 45 colt at times and figured I'd just get a 454 and I could still use the components I already had and can go light to heavy without worry of a heavy load in 45 colt finding the wrong gun. Now I've got 2 454s and love the cartridge, really want a lever action 454 to pair with my SRH, my FA m83 has a 10" barrel so it's kind of a carbine on its own. I've had good luck with 250 grain rnfp in 454 cases over trailboss for plinking for a couple years and shoot a lot of those, they're going about 850 fps or a little less, very pleasant and as powerful as a 45 acp with virtually no recoil .

 

[ballman6711]

I have both a Vaquero in 45lc and a Taurus in 454. Haven't shot either in a few years, but always enjoyed both.

And I agree, no need to hotrod the 45lc as it could end up in the wrong gun.

chris

 

[DocRock]

It's smart to be careful. Looks like you are good to go. Enjoy.