The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 25, 2000, 10:19 AM   #1
Sport45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 1999
Location: Too close to Houston
Posts: 4,081
I quit using #5 for my .45acp because I found it to be very dirty at the lower velocities I was loading. It did seem to be a little cleaner at the higher pressures. How does this powder work for the .44mag? It looks like I can get a respectable velocity (loading 240gr cast or jacketed) using #5 and the pressures are much higher than the acp. Have any of you used #5 in the .44mag? Care to comment on its performance? Thanks.
Sport45 is offline  
Old August 25, 2000, 11:06 AM   #2
Robert the41MagFan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 1999
Posts: 1,233
Been using Accurate #5 for 45acp 200 and 230 grain JHP's for a while now (fired from a Sig P220). I find it to be very clean burning. Have loaded boxes of ammunition for friends too and their first comments are how clean the ammo is, followed by how smooth it shoots. It is great powder for medium size gun barrels. Made some 44 Magnum bullets, 12.4 grains of Accurate #5 under a 240 grain Oregon Laser Cast LRFP, for plinking and targets. It works great out of my 4" 629 V-Comp. Liked them so much that I've been working on some hunting loads for this same gun, a 300 grain gas check LBT over 11.6 grains of #5. Have not had a chance to chronograph them yet, but they sure are extremely accurate.

Robert
Robert the41MagFan is offline  
Old August 25, 2000, 11:48 AM   #3
Watchman
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2000
Location: ARKANSAS
Posts: 484
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sport45:
I quit using #5 for my .45acp because I found it to be very dirty at the lower velocities I was loading. It did seem to be a little cleaner at the higher pressures. How does this powder work for the .44mag? It looks like I can get a respectable velocity (loading 240gr cast or jacketed) using #5 and the pressures are much higher than the acp. Have any of you used #5 in the .44mag? Care to comment on its performance? Thanks.[/quote]

Watchman is offline  
Old August 25, 2000, 11:55 AM   #4
Watchman
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2000
Location: ARKANSAS
Posts: 484
I use 10 grains of AA#5 in a 6" Colt Anaconda. Shooting a 240 g LSWC it clocks right at 1000 fps. This is a very accurate load, I can hit 6 inch plates at 100 yards just about every time with it.

I've tried more powder , but after 1000fps it seems to start leading up the barrel. It is very clean burning, more so than any other powder I've tried...and I 've tried them all at one time or another.

Anymore, I pretty much use AA#5 for all of my pistol shooting. I shoot alot of cast target loads and it's still the cleanest burning powder I have found. A while back I ran out and used Bullseye...and was soon reminded how filthy burning it was in comparison to #5 .For the hotter loads I use AA#9.

When you shoot alot, ANY powder is goin to soot up the guns. I believe ACCURATE does it less than any other I'ved tried.



[This message has been edited by Watchman (edited August 25, 2000).]
Watchman is offline  
Old August 25, 2000, 12:09 PM   #5
Sport45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 1999
Location: Too close to Houston
Posts: 4,081
Maybe I'll have to give old number 5 another chance in my 45. As I remember, I would leave the range with a filthy gun and literally "peppered" with black soot. Maybe it was the bullet lube though. I mostly shoot jacketed from http://www.montanagoldbullet.com/ now, so things might be different. Thanks for the replies. If anyone else wants to chime in, your comments will be appreciated too.

------------------
"An unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

Cesare Beccaria, the father of modern criminology

Sport45 is offline  
Old August 25, 2000, 05:53 PM   #6
Gipperdog
Member
 
Join Date: May 2, 2000
Location: Tempe, Az,, United States
Posts: 34
I haven't used #5 in my .44 but I use it exclusively for my .45 ACP in a Colt Combat Elite & a Sig 220. I use this powder to shoot at the upper end of pressures & it shoots very clean for me. For the .44, I would assume that it would make for a fine mid range load. If I wanted to push the AA powders as hard as possible, then I'd move on up to the #9 for the .44. Personally, I use H110 at 20grs. loaded under a 315 gr.,weighed, cast bullet with gascheck for a velocity of 1230 fps average. That shoots clean for me too because, as a Hodgdon guy once told me, H110 shoots clean when the pressures are near or at max.

------------------
Guard Freedom from those that "want to do it for the Children."
Gipperdog is offline  
Old August 26, 2000, 12:07 AM   #7
Clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 1999
Location: WA, the ever blue state
Posts: 3,158
I am a big fan of AA#5 and I don't care where Accurate Arms gets it, but I wouldn't put it in my 44 mag any sooner than I would put it in a rifle.

H110, W296, 2400, Blue Dot, N110
These are 44 mag poweders.

AA#5 is for 9mm and 45 Super.
Clark is offline  
Old August 27, 2000, 10:42 AM   #8
WESHOOT2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 1999
Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country)
Posts: 14,270
Tried it, lots of unburned (and very granular-feeling) residue.

Suggest Universal Clays for light-to-medium 44 loads, and W296/H110 for heavy loads.

For really light loads try Bullseye or W231.

------------------
"All my ammo is factory ammo"

WESHOOT2 is offline  
Old August 27, 2000, 11:11 AM   #9
Watchman
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2000
Location: ARKANSAS
Posts: 484
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Clark:
I am a big fan of AA#5 and I don't care where Accurate Arms gets it, but I wouldn't put it in my 44 mag any sooner than I would put it in a rifle.

H110, W296, 2400, Blue Dot, N110
These are 44 mag poweders.

AA#5 is for 9mm and 45 Super.
[/quote]

Without a doubt the powder listed above will get you better velocity. The only problem with them is you must use a full house load and reduced loads are not recommended(except for Blue Dot).
THe AA#5 will not get you max speeds, only moderate target grade speeds. That is where it beats all the others hands down.

For the smoking hunting loads I Use AA#9. In a full house load even it seems to do better than the rest.Blue Dot and 2400 are filthy burning.In my expeirience, all of the Accurate powders have less flash and are cleaner burning than all others.

Watchman is offline  
Old August 28, 2000, 10:48 AM   #10
Sgt.K
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 1999
Location: Kentucky, USA
Posts: 198
I use AA#5 in .45 ACP and .44 Rem. Mag. I've had no problems.

My .45 ACP load with a 230grn FMJ is 8.0grns.

My .44 Rem. Mag load with a 240grn SJHP is 13.9grns.

I chose this powder to eliminate the possibility of mistakes and for the economy. Why use almost double the charge to obtain the same muzzle velocity?

My firearms are a Colt Defender .45 ACP and a 10 and a half inch Ruger SuperBlackhawk in .44 Rem. Mag.

Sgt.K
Sgt.K is offline  
Old August 29, 2000, 06:32 AM   #11
Sport45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 1999
Location: Too close to Houston
Posts: 4,081
Didn't mean to start a powder war. It's just that I had #5 on the shelf and couldn't see stocking another powder for an extra 100-150 fps. I tried 13 grains under a 240 grain cast SWC Saturday afternoon. Accuracy was dismal (5" at 10 yards). Will work with it a while to see if its me, the SBH, or my load. Cleanup wasn't too bad. Thanks for your replies.
Sport45 is offline  
Old August 29, 2000, 08:23 AM   #12
Sgt.K
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 1999
Location: Kentucky, USA
Posts: 198
With the above mentioned firearm and .44 mag load I am getting about one and five eights inch groups at 25 yrs from a rest with a scope. The bullet is a cheap Star 240 gr SJHP.

I've never chrono'ed this but extrapolating gives it over 1300 fps/950 ft lbs at the muzzle. It sounds and kicks like it too.
Though its not even close the the max listed 14.4 gr in the AA data manual.

edit-BTW 13 gr is right at 10% under max. I started my load development at 13.6 grns, about 6% below max, FWIW-end

Your experience may vary

Sgt.K

[This message has been edited by Sgt.K (edited August 29, 2000).]
Sgt.K is offline  
Old August 29, 2000, 12:10 PM   #13
Robert the41MagFan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 1999
Posts: 1,233
I'll second the Sgt. Number 5 and 240 grain 44 magnum bullets are accurate.

Robert
Robert the41MagFan is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10190 seconds with 9 queries