|
Post by webber on Dec 31, 2017 20:31:18 GMT -5
Thanks.
It sounds like a load I would like to try in my 2.75 inch M69. Right now I have fired a few jacketed but mostly cast.
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Dec 31, 2017 21:44:42 GMT -5
webber.... while we’re at it, self-same .44 Mag load of Sierra 210 JHC over 22.5/296 ignites flawless 20 degrees below ZERO. Yes, we are locked in cold. Gun doesn’t care. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Dec 31, 2017 22:42:41 GMT -5
Webber.... congratulations on the snub nose M-69. I’d automatically reach for 2400, or something on the slow end of the medium zone (2400 is on the fast end of the slow zone), but this much is certain: if the gun is a shooter, accuracy obtains even in the short barrel.
The deal is is to shoot. Burn powder like each shot is the only one you have.
To continue with the slow powder mythology: some believe you can keep piling on slow powder without building pressure. Bullroar. The Smith & Wesson M-29 proves the ability of 296/H110 to stretch velocity with more powder. Eventually, durability pays. The S&W M-29 is stronger than it is durable. Yet, our concern here is under loading 296/H110. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by webber on Dec 31, 2017 22:59:45 GMT -5
Actually 2400 is my most favorite powder when loading bullets 275 grains and less. Standard primers work very well and 2400 is more forgiving than the slow ball powders can be even with Mag primers. The M69 is a gem and I carry it ocassionally. But not with full loads. But loads still with much authority.
Let me ask this. Knowing that all firearms, handguns, rifles and shotguns are individuals, and that we must find the particular load each one likes, is a there a 44 Magnum load that you have ran across that will perform well in various brands and barrel lengths? Not the best performance from them but a load that when fired in said gun will generally do well in 4 inches to 7.5 inches and S&W and Rugers? If you have what brand bullet, weight, powder and charge weight and primer? Do you have a favorite primer? As I said I know there is no one load that will deliver top accuracy in all revolvers. But is there one that will do well in most barrel lengths and brands?
Thanks
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Jan 2, 2018 0:28:22 GMT -5
"Knowing that all firearms, handguns, rifles and shotguns are individuals, and that we must find the particular load each one likes, is a there a 44 Magnum load that you have ran across that will perform well in various brands and barrel lengths?” ----webber
*****
The .44 Magnum produces superior accuracy from many loads. Back in the silhouette days, I told manufacturers to test accuracy of their .44s with Federal 44A 240 JHP. When it became available, I extended the same invite to include Federal 44C, loaded with the Sierra 220 FPJ (Full Profile Jacket).
Accuracy handholds include but are by no means limited to: * Sierra 240 JHC; 21/2400, mag primer. * Sierra 240 JHC 23 to 24/296 or H110, mag primer. * Sierra 240 JHC 23/IMR or H4227, mag primer. * Sierra 210 JC, 220 FPJ, 240 JHC, and 250 FPJ. * Nosler 300 JHP. * Hornady 265 FP, 23.2/H110, mag primer. * Hornady 240 XTP, 23 to 24 296 or H110, mag primer.
Specifically mentioned loads are silhouette proven.
Cast bullets vary greatly by alloy, dimensions, sizing, etc., and are more sensitive to groove diameter than jacketed. No bullet, no matter how good it looks will fly straight if it is out of balance or does not fit the groove.
Like its parent .44 Special, the .44 Mag is an intrinsically ;accurate cartridge. Revolver makers, beginning with Smith & Wesson and Ruger, held well to a reasonably firm specification package. Contrast with the .45 Colt, born of black powder very early in the self-contained cartridge era. The .45 Colt suffered dimensional ambiguities which span heavy-fouling black powder to smokeless, with unexplained excursions which continue to today. The .45 Colt may be convenient whipping boy for the myth that accuracy must always be tailored to the revolver. Loads mentioned above are accurate in any dimensionally correct .44 Mag revolver.
A .44 Magnum which doesn’t shoot straight very likely has one or more of the following: * Eccentric, rough, or excessive forcing cone. * Oversize groove diameter. * Excessive chamber-to-bore misalignment. Oversize chamber exits are a real rarity on .44 Mags from our better makers. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by webber on Jan 2, 2018 13:48:14 GMT -5
Mr Bradshaw,
Glad you posted the loads for the 44 Magnum. I have read where one shouldn't use Magnum primers with 2400. What is the real deal on this? I have a buddy that used them years ago and never had any trouble at all and they weren't backed off loads either. What is the real deal on them with 2400? If one were try to duplicate the Federal 240 gr load you mentioned what would you recommend? I have Sierra 240 gr JHC bullets. Could a,person even duplicate them with what we have now? What was the loaded you used the most in IHMSA shooting when shooting the rams? Thanks for your time.
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Jan 2, 2018 14:47:44 GMT -5
Mr Bradshaw, Glad you posted the loads for the 44 Magnum. I have read where one shouldn't use Magnum primers with 2400. What is the real deal on this? I have a buddy that used them years ago and never had any trouble at all and they weren't backed off loads either. What is the real deal on them with 2400? I settled on the Sierra .44 240 JHC after the first (1977) IHMSA championship. Loading extensively with Hercules 2400, IMR 4227, H4227, Win 296, and H110. All with large pistol magnum primers, mostly CCI 350. 1977 was my first year and up through the world championship, my Smith & Wesson .44s were loaded with the Hornady 240 JHP, predecessor of the XTP, fine accuracy and in every way a whitetail thumper. Loaded the same Hornady 240 JHP in my brass grip-frame Super Blackhawk for chickens, pigs, and turkeys. For rams in the SBH, the Hornady 265 Flat Point over 23.2 or .23.3/H110, also mag primer. A lot of dwell time in that bullet. I did nnoyt want to subject the Smiths to the 265 FP. If one were try to duplicate the Federal 240 gr load you mentioned what would you recommend? I have Sierra 240 gr JHC bullets. Sierra 240 JHC. I believe, without confirmation, Federal copied the Sierra profile. Sierra uses a bit of antimony. Not sure, but the Federal look-alike may have a pure lead core. Both perform very well on deer. I’ve watched Federal make their own 240 JHP. Both exact spectacular accuracy @ 200 meters and beyond----far beyond. To duplicate the Federal #44A load, seat Sierra 240 JHC over: * 21/2400. * 23/4227. * 23 to 24/296. * 23 to 24/H110. Each of these loads is good for 5x5=2” @ 100 yards, and 5x5=sub-5” @ 200 meters. If you revolver won’t print these loads, do something about the gun. Beyond doubt, these are gun-testing rounds.Could a,person even duplicate them with what we have now? Yes, see above. What was the loaded you used the most in IHMSA shooting when shooting the rams? Sierra .44 240 JHC. Around 1978, we adopted a rule for the ram’s feet to overhang the rail. This was to curb the loading of Rocks & Dynamite “ram loads.” IHMSA Silhouette actually reigned in firewall loading, then rampant in the exploding popularity of magnum handgunning. Silhouette brought discipline to the magnum scene by focussing on ACCURACY and SHARPSHOOTING. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by webber on Jan 2, 2018 19:44:58 GMT -5
Mr Bradshaw,
Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. Have you ever did a test comparing barrel length s as far as accuracy? Say 4, 6.5 and 8.375" guns with the aforementioned loads? Is there really any worthwhile difference as long as the shooter is doing their part?
Thanks
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Jan 2, 2018 22:43:42 GMT -5
“... ever did a test comparing barrel length as far as accuracy? Say 4, 6.5 and 8.375" guns with the aforementioned loads?” ----- webber
S&W M-29 with 4”, 6-1/2”, and 8-3/8” barrels? Not at the same time on the same range on the same targets. For experiential accuracy, the answer is Yes. I have huge respect for the accuracy of each. Mechanically, barrel length seems to have little influence on accuracy. Top rounds in top revolvers are amazing, and the above loads will prove it from the respective barrels.
“Is there really any worthwhile difference as long as the shooter is doing their part?"
What a loaded question! The shooter should always be the weak link. And then the shooter should do his or her very best to outshoot gun and ammo. PERFORMANCE is putting it all together. Long barrels often have less recoil than short barrels, even while generating more velocity. Long barrels always have a longer SIGHT RADIUS, which generally affords more precise SIGHT ALIGNMENT. The human factor is huge, cannot be eliminated from the field. So we live with it... borderline refuse to live with it, refining our technique to do better. "Don’t carry any gun you can’t shoot” is the way I look at it. Never stop competing with yourself.
Sometimes the long barrel whips higher in recoil, directing less shock into hands, wrists, elbow. On sight radius alone, the short barrel has less chance in silhouette, where consistency counts big time. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by webber on Jan 5, 2018 11:10:12 GMT -5
Mr. Bradshaw,
I noticed the Sierra bullets have a very shallow crimp groove. Did you ever have any trouble with bullets pulling under recoil?
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Jan 5, 2018 11:44:32 GMT -5
Mr. Bradshaw, I noticed the Sierra bullets have a very shallow crimp groove. Did you ever have any trouble with bullets pulling under recoil? ***** No. And this applies to Sierra .41, .44, and .45. Really, when it comes to silhouette accuracy, we split hairs. Hornady makes great bullets. Hornady cannot be eliminated from the accuracy equation. I have seen phenomenal accuracy from Hornady .41 and .44 JHPs from revolvers. Guess I shot pretty hard, fore by 1978 I settled on the Sierra 240 JHC for the Model 29 and Super Blackhawk. Veered now and then but, always came back. The Federal 44A 240 JHP stunned me, a factory load the equal of any handload. Work with Federal resulted in the Federal 44C, the Sierra 220 Full Profile Jacket factory load. Same accuracy. Play with people don’t give an inch you can’t afford a flier. When Lee Martin and I discuss the 3-legged stool we call ACCURACY, he keeps reminding me of the third leg----the shooter. I try to focus as though it’s a 2-legged stool----GUN & LOAD. Reckon the presumption there is, the SHOOTER is ALWAYS ON BOARD. Anyways, don’t sweat Sierra’s crimp cannelure. Look at it this way: to roll on a crimp cannelure adds another step in making the bullet. A step which may distort an otherwise finished bullet. Perhaps Sierra figured years ago that less is more when it comes to cannelures and accuracy. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by bigmuddy on Jan 5, 2018 15:44:11 GMT -5
I just finished loading a few of the 22.5gr. H110/Sierra 210's. This does fly in the face of all I have read for years about going lighter with H110. I never challenged it, because I "read" it. I never could understand the logic however. Seeing someone with David's experience using that load gave me the nudge I needed. I fired a couple rounds out the back door just to see what happened, and it was very comfortable in my 4" 29-2. Hit what I aimed at and I DIDN'T BLOW UP! I do agree with David's assessment of Sierra bullets as well. They have always been my go to accuracy standard in 44's and 41's. I did load a few Gold Dot 210's with the H110 as well, just for a comparison. We'll see now how they shoot! I hope we all know how fortunate we are to have someone like Mr. Bradshaw lending guidance on this forum. Dan
|
|
|
Post by jfs on Jan 5, 2018 18:03:08 GMT -5
***** Hornady cannot be eliminated from the accuracy equation. I have seen phenomenal accuracy from Hornady .41 and .44 JHPs from revolvers. David Bradshaw I could never again duplicate this three shot 100 yard group from the bench but it shows the accuracy the XTP is capable of when shot from a good gun... 210gr XTP from 10" FA`s model 83 in .41 mag pushed by some AA#9..........
|
|
|
Post by webber on Jan 6, 2018 13:16:48 GMT -5
Mr Bradshaw,
If you were going to try a S&W M69 for accuracy what load would you choose? The guns are an L frame. I wouldn't fire a lot of the load but would especially like to try it just for accuracy. Don't want to shake the gun to pieces.
Thanks
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Jan 6, 2018 13:51:11 GMT -5
Mr Bradshaw, If you were going to try a S&W M69 for accuracy what load would you choose? The guns are an L frame. I wouldn't fire a lot of the load but would especially like to try it just for accuracy. Don't want to shake the gun to pieces. Thanks ***** Webber, we’re locked in a hard cold these past weeks. Fortunately, 18” snow the night before last, great insulation for game, partridge, etc. Imagine turkey mortality will jump all up the Atlantic zone. My 4” M-29 vies with the Ruger 03 for frostbitten gunsmoke. Were I to target mild loads in the Model 69, I’d reach for: 1) Cast 240 SWC, DEEP SEATED over 5.5 HP-38 or Win 231 (both are Winchester 213 ball powder); standard large pistol primer; .44 Mag case. Roll crimp so front band is .020 to .040-inch below case mouth. Around 800 fps, depending on gun. Groups 5x5 around 4-inches @ 100 yards. 2) Cast 240 SWC, DEEP SEATED over 10.6/HS-6; standard large pistol primer; .44 Mag case. Roll crimp .020 to .040” above front band. Around 1,000 fps, depending one gun. Groups 5x5 around 5" to 6” @ 100 yards. Note: the above groups from bevel base commercial SWC. Slightly better accuracy from low velocity probably attributable to pressure sensitivity of the lead bevel base. Accuracy differential increases with range, with the 800 fps load holding well @ 200 yards and more. These light loads will give you a feel for the revolver. As BigMuddy found, the Sierra 210 over 22.5/H110 is a tractable load in his M-29 4-inch. Another moderate load of high accuracy: Hornady 200 JHP or XTP over 22/2400 in .44 Mag case with mag primer. A revolver is a machine which must be driven. To drive it you must be in control. Start in control and continue in control. Always better to work up than to work down. David Bradshaw
|
|