Mihec 434-640 in 44special

[paul105]

The lede’s (SP?), i.e. the transition from chamber to cyl throat, can be extremely abrupt in some Freedom Arms revolvers. This can cause cartridge seating problems with certain bullet nose profiles (full diameter above the crimp grove). “Bobs” reamer” referred to by 2 Dogs tapers the lede without changing the throat diameter and, unless the bullet is larger than the throat, allows the cartridge to chamber normally. It will also eliminate most of the leading that builds up in this area.

If I understand David’s comment, by seating deeper, you continue to move the full size bullet nose ogive away from the lede (bullet base deeper in the case) until nose diameter is reduced enough to allow the cartridge to seat normally. How much deeper will depend on your gun and bullet in question (trial and error here). Obviously, deep seating reduces case capacity and requires a reduction in powder charge. How much depends on how deep you seat the bullet. As mentioned above, chamfering the lede with “Bobs” reamer will eliminate this problem as long as the bullet isn’t larger than the cyl throats.

The FA97 in .44 special is a strong revolver, capable of handling ammo loaded to .44 magnum pressures (current SAAMI spec). This has been mentioned by Brian Pearce in various articles on the .44 special. Dave Clements has reamed out FA97 cyls in .44 special to .44 mag. I talked with Jack Huntington about converting mine to .44 mag and he said he’d do it. I measured the cyl walls on the new S&W M69 (a 5 shot L Frame .44 Mag) and the FA97 .44 special are thicker (bolt cuts on both are between chambers). This doesn’t mean you can go crazy loading the FA97, but you do have a substantial safety margin when developing .44 special loads (e.g. deep seating). A while back, one of the forum members talked with John at Freedom Arms and was told that, due to tight tolerances and polished chambers, you’ll blow a M97 before you see any typically accepted “pressure signs”.

FWIW,

Paul

[2 Dogs]

I took a 180 JHP to1400 fps in my FA97 44 special with no apparent pressure signs. I immediately called Bob Baker and he strongly cautioned me to back off. He told me it might stretch the frame.

I would say that while the FA97 is very strong, I am of the mind that if I need more power I would just use a different (bigger) sixgun.

[bradshaw]

Oct 30, 2016 14:36:06 GMT -5 sathington said:

So is this bullet a clone of the Lyman "Devastator" series? I'm assuming that Fryxel data is a good place to start. I was going to do 7grains of Unique, seeing as how it weighs just a touch more than the Keith SWC's I load with 7.5gr of Unique and shoot in this gun. I'll try the HS-6 as well.

Mr. Bradshaw, about the deep seating; How much reduction should I go? I estimate the front band on this bullet to be about a 1/10th of an inch. If I seat 20thousandths past the front band, how much powered should I drop? If it's 10grains of HS-6, a load from the Fryxel article (assuming this is the same bullet), should I go down to 8 grains? I'm very curious/interested in deep seating, just nervous about it.
***
***

Sathington.... boolitdesigner says this is not the bullet used by the astute Glen Fryxell. Without gun and bullet in hand, nor knowing depth to which the bullet must be seated to chamber against the firm exit holes of the Freedom Arms M97 .44 Special, make it difficult to give a starting charge of HS-6 (or other powder). Having fired numerous cast bullets which must be pressed to enter the .4515" exit holes of the Ruger 03, and shot the better ones pretty well out to 100 yards and beyond, it is evident some cast bullets take the abuse in stride. Without doubt, a bullet larger than the exit holes encourages leading, which itself degrades accuracy. Pinching the great Sierra 240 JHC in a superbly accurate Dan Wesson Arms M44 .44 Magnum still resulted in groups you could cover with your hand @ 200 meters. Such an astounding result may be impossible from a cast bullet. (The Federal 44A load (240 JHP) of the 1980s equals the Sierra.)

To judge by preceding notes, to chamber the cast bullet in question----ogive blends into “wheelbase”----bullet may require deeper seating than a SWC. If I were doing it----and I have none of the components----I would eyeball seating depth with 4.5/HS-6. And I would eyeball the .44 Special case with 12/2400----in no instance allowing a compressed charge. I would make up a couple of dummy rounds and mark the seating depth on the case with a laundry marker. I would compare seating depth with powder volume.

Intuitively, I would not consider for standard loading a 270-300 grain bullet.44 bullet which does not thumb-press through .44 Special exit holes.

There is a vogue among some shooters to shoot heavy bullets at low velocity in expectation of duplicating magnum performance. The price may be wounded game which animal escapes the hunter but does not escape death. A funeral coyotes celebrate.
David Bradshaw

[sathington]

This is all very good, thank you again gentlemen. Since the bullets sized down to .429 chamber fine, and pass through the cylinder throats with thumb pressure, I'll shoot them and see how it goes.

I'm glad the FA 97 has strength to spare. I don't intend to magnum-ize the gun, but it is nice to have some cushion when it comes to tailoring handloads. I also don't intend to shoot huge bullets very slowly. I read Ross Seyfried's article on the Ruger Bisley Flat Top 44special, and that seems about where I'd like to be. If I need more, I'll move up in caliber.