460 Rowland Blackhawk chrony

[reflex264]

460 Rowland
First trip over the chrony.
240gr XTP Mag: 1377fps
250gr XTP 1217fps
Single digit extreme spread.
250gr Speer I ran into a problem with seating depth. Back to the drawing board on it.
No pressure signs. These loads are not max.
My goal was to launch 240 to 260 grain bullets between 1275 and 1425. I will work on the 250XTP some more. Plenty of room left. The 240 is good right where it is.

[Encore64]

Can you share load data? Interesting stuff....

[reflex264]

Aug 31, 2020 15:28:12 GMT -5 Encore64 said:

Can you share load data? Interesting stuff....

I will be happy to share when I get it all done.

[Encore64]

I'm using Longshot Powder for such loads. I have a 45 ACP TC Contender Barrel that'll handle those loads easily.

[cmillard]

Huey, I too am using Longshot out of my longslide Rowland. Currently shooting 230 xtp with decent groups. My best groups to date with it have been with Longshot and 225 grain rimrock cast HP gas check. 1" at 25 yards. Don't know velocity on any of my loads with that pistol as I was going for pure accuracy, however I am kinda curious and may have to break out my chronograph

[reflex264]

I finally got around to putting a SBH hammer in it. I chronied 230gr XTPs out of it. They were in the 1390s.
Still working out the loads. I will have some details along with seating length shortly. Pretty fun gun.

[taffin]

NO PRESSURE SIGNS?? OR NO HIGH PRESSURE SIGNS?

[450ak]

So a Ruger 45 colt factory cylinder is rated to the mid 30k psi. These loads in 460 Rowland are most likely above that level I would guess.
Does anyone besides me wonder if we can run the 45 Colt to the same pressure as the Rowland? After many years of using a 310 Keith at 1200, I’m pretty sure we don’t need more speed. Bigger diameter is certainly a better way to go.

[buckelliott]

By the time you see conventionalnal "Hugh pressure" signs with such a combination, you will have already crossed that line, depending on the firearm used..

[reflex264]

I am not loading this to the levels I load my G21 to. It isn't necessary.
The whole ideal is to get the bullets in the 230 to 260 grain range out faster than
the Ruger level loads in the .45 Colt 4 5/8" barrel. The chrony doesn't lie. What I have found is that
even with the hottest listed loads which were developed in a 7.25" barrel the 4 5/8" guns aren't even close to
the velocities in the manual.

The 240gr Sierra JHC listed in Hodgdon's manual shows 1532fps at 30,000 CUP but was developed in a 7.25" unvented test barrel.
In reality that load shoots a fireball half way across the county and sounds like the end of the world and has never broke 1200fps
from my 4 5/8" gun that breaks 1200fps with the 300grs. Matter of fact it only runs a bit over 1100fps. I found some data for that bullet with unique and got the same velocity without the flame thrower effect. Simple summation is that in the short barrel a faster burning powder
would possibly get the desired results if fired in a smaller case hence the .460 Rowland. After doing some digging and talking to Clark's
I figured it was worth a try. I never intended the Ruger to take the loads I shoot in the Glock. So far it has proved out. The loads that were pressure tested to 36,000psi in the .460 backed down considerably are achieving my goal with zero pressure issues. As a matter of fact you don't even have to use the ejector most of the time. Open the gate and tilt the gun back and they will fall out. I am not going to find out what the 40,000PSI loads do to the gun. Not needed and no reason to risk it. I have it doing what I want and zero pressure signs. I have read that some of the people that had cylinders converted are shooting the 40,000PSI Underwood and Buffalo bore loads and claim they haven't had a problem.

[45bbh]

Cool, I was getting similar numbers running 45 Super in a Glock 21 Gen4 with KKM 4 port barrel, it's a beast.

[reflex264]

It might be a good time for a disclaimer.
I knew going into this project exactly what I was dealing with and have absolutely no intention of ever sticking 40,000PSI
Rowland loads in this gun. Yes you can read all over the internet about people getting those cylinders done by Clark and immediately sticking Buffalo Bore or Underwood ammo in them. If you had a .460 Rowland cylinder made out of carpenter steel I would say have at it. These are Ruger cylinders that were originally chambered in 45 ACP. I know what you are thinking. Why not load hotter loads in ACP cases? I did this to eliminate the possibility of putting a 33,000 load in a 45 ACP gun. All loads for the Blackhawk are kept completely away from the full power Rowland loads for the G21. I have always preached if you err do it on the side of safety.

[bradshaw]

Oct 15, 2020 18:52:56 GMT -5 reflex264 said:

I am not loading this to the levels I load my G21 to. It isn't necessary.
The whole ideal is to get the bullets in the 230 to 260 grain range out faster than
the Ruger level loads in the .45 Colt 4 5/8" barrel. The chrony doesn't lie. What I have found is that
even with the hottest listed loads which were developed in a 7.25" barrel the 4 5/8" guns aren't even close to
the velocities in the manual.

The 240gr Sierra JHC listed in Hodgdon's manual shows 1532fps at 30,000 CUP but was developed in a 7.25" unvented test barrel.
In reality that load shoots a fireball half way across the county and sounds like the end of the world and has never broke 1200fps
from my 4 5/8" gun that breaks 1200fps with the 300grs. Matter of fact it only runs a bit over 1100fps. I found some data for that bullet with unique and got the same velocity without the flame thrower effect. Simple summation is that in the short barrel a faster burning powder
would possibly get the desired results if fired in a smaller case hence the .460 Rowland. After doing some digging and talking to Clark's
I figured it was worth a try. I never intended the Ruger to take the loads I shoot in the Glock. So far it has proved out. The loads that were pressure tested to 36,000psi in the .460 backed down considerably are achieving my goal with zero pressure issues. As a matter of fact you don't even have to use the ejector most of the time. Open the gate and tilt the gun back and they will fall out. I am not going to find out what the 40,000PSI loads do to the gun. Not needed and no reason to risk it. I have it doing what I want and zero pressure signs. I have read that some of the people that had cylinders converted are shooting the 40,000PSI Underwood and Buffalo bore loads and claim they haven't had a problem.

*****

A technical report on handloads requires LOAD DATA. Load data starts with firearm used, cartridge chambered, barrel length. Load data continues with bullet, powder, POWDER CHARGE, case, primer. For hand loaded ammunition, shots fired, Velocity, Extreme Spread, Standard Deviation are meaningless without firearm and load data. This is true whether the goalie accuracy or velocity, velocity with accuracy, or accuracy with velocity.

To present a velocity pursuit without exact load data to----three names immediately come to mind: Bill Ruger, chronograph maestro Ken Oehler, and ballistician Ron Reiber----would be treated as the worst sort of amateur act.

And, since there are no pressure signs and brass falls out of the chamber, shall I expect infinite reloading life for the brass? Hell, I get split .45 ACP cases in Kart 1911 barrels and Blackhawk chambers from perfectly respectable loads; nothing close to reloading life of .44 Mag brass, to name one rimmed case.

I’m willing to learn something here, but I’ve never seen a Glock in the field come remotely close to the reliability of my Smith & Wesson and Ruger sixguns day in, day out, fair weather and foul, swamp to mountaintop. On top of that, I’ve seen a few Glocks blown up by adventurers. And when they come apart, the shooting hand is more exposed to shrapnel than from a departing revolver cylinder.

I’m ready to learn, but not without information.
David Bradshaw

[reflex264]

Oct 20, 2020 9:45:34 GMT -5 bradshaw said:

Oct 15, 2020 18:52:56 GMT -5 reflex264 said:

I am not loading this to the levels I load my G21 to. It isn't necessary.
The whole ideal is to get the bullets in the 230 to 260 grain range out faster than
the Ruger level loads in the .45 Colt 4 5/8" barrel. The chrony doesn't lie. What I have found is that
even with the hottest listed loads which were developed in a 7.25" barrel the 4 5/8" guns aren't even close to
the velocities in the manual.

The 240gr Sierra JHC listed in Hodgdon's manual shows 1532fps at 30,000 CUP but was developed in a 7.25" unvented test barrel.
In reality that load shoots a fireball half way across the county and sounds like the end of the world and has never broke 1200fps
from my 4 5/8" gun that breaks 1200fps with the 300grs. Matter of fact it only runs a bit over 1100fps. I found some data for that bullet with unique and got the same velocity without the flame thrower effect. Simple summation is that in the short barrel a faster burning powder
would possibly get the desired results if fired in a smaller case hence the .460 Rowland. After doing some digging and talking to Clark's
I figured it was worth a try. I never intended the Ruger to take the loads I shoot in the Glock. So far it has proved out. The loads that were pressure tested to 36,000psi in the .460 backed down considerably are achieving my goal with zero pressure issues. As a matter of fact you don't even have to use the ejector most of the time. Open the gate and tilt the gun back and they will fall out. I am not going to find out what the 40,000PSI loads do to the gun. Not needed and no reason to risk it. I have it doing what I want and zero pressure signs. I have read that some of the people that had cylinders converted are shooting the 40,000PSI Underwood and Buffalo bore loads and claim they haven't had a problem.

*****

A technical report on handloads requires LOAD DATA. Load data starts with firearm used, cartridge chambered, barrel length. Load data continues with bullet, powder, POWDER CHARGE, case, primer. For hand loaded ammunition, shots fired, Velocity, Extreme Spread, Standard Deviation are meaningless without firearm and load data. This is true whether the goalie accuracy or velocity, velocity with accuracy, or accuracy with velocity.

To present a velocity pursuit without exact load data to----three names immediately come to mind: Bill Ruger, chronograph maestro Ken Oehler, and ballistician Ron Reiber----would be treated as the worst sort of amateur act.

And, since there are no pressure signs and brass falls out of the chamber, shall I expect infinite reloading life for the brass? Hell, I get split .45 ACP cases in Kart 1911 barrels and Blackhawk chambers from perfectly respectable loads; nothing close to reloading life of .44 Mag brass, to name one rimmed case.

I’m willing to learn something here, but I’ve never seen a Glock in the field come remotely close to the reliability of my Smith & Wesson and Ruger sixguns day in, day out, fair weather and foul, swamp to mountaintop. On top of that, I’ve seen a few Glocks blown up by adventurers. And when they come apart, the shooting hand is more exposed to shrapnel than from a departing revolver cylinder.

I’m ready to learn, but not without information.
David Bradshaw

Sorry to sound so vague and for that I apologize. Absolutely no disrespect meant. I have data. Loads of it. The pressure data I am using stopped at 36,000PSI and the starting loads were 24,000psi.The reference to the cases falling out of the chambers was in correlation to the "conventional pressure signs". I have the utmost respect for Mr. Reiber and Mr. Weber at Hodgdon.Both worked with me extensively during development of heavy bullet data for the .450 Marlin. They handled my .450 pressure tests as well as 45-70 pressure testing. Dr. Oehler was a constant help as well sorting out the pressure issues with the long throat on the Marlin 45-70 chambers and Hornady recommending the same load data for the 350gr flat nose and round nose bullets. Dr. Oehler was unbelievably helpful. A fine gentleman. I never dealt with Bill Ruger. I will provide further information when I get totally done. To make a long story short Hornady worked up their data using a Marlin 1895 with pressure trace equipment and even though they listed the pressure in CUP it was actually PSI and the diameter of the original FN bullet was .4575" in front of the cannelure. When Mr. Reiber's tech stuck the ammo in the test breech they had to force it shut. The particular rig is a copper crusher but that is a whole other matter. I highly respect these men. They are the best.

The Hodgdon .460 Rowland data was actually not 460 Rowland at all. If you look at the manual is shows Winchester brass. Of course Winchester never manufactured Rowland brass. I know it has been debated before about the length and head stamp being the only difference in the brass but I actually sectioned a Winchester case and a Starline Rowland case. The Rowland I sliced definitely had a thicker case head. Thicker head= less capacity which in every test I ever did meant more pressure.

Thankfully several gents have went to the expense of developing real .460 Rowland data. As you well know it gets expensive.

The Glock I refer to is a G21 with one of the real .460 Rowland barrels which have been tested to over 40,000psi without failure. Even though I know it will take it the loads I am using in it run in the 32,000 to 35,000 range. I probably have a 1/2 dozen Glocks set up to hunt and absolutely don't use +P in any of them without aftermarket fully supported barrels even though Glock says +P in all new Glock guns is fine. No issues. The only problem I ever had was with a fluted aftermarket barrel.

When I get done, I can provide more info and will be happy to do so.

[bradshaw]

reflex264.... now we’r gettin somewhere. Appreciate your response. Please continue.
David Bradshaw