|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 10, 2008, 12:20 AM | #26 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 20, 2005
Location: Washington State
Posts: 164
|
Quote:
As always, start low and work up, but . . . . . In the August 2007 Handloader Magazine pg 84 has an article by Brian Pearce about this very issue. I'll quote Brian. This is about 44 Mag loads in the lower cannelure. Starline Cases CCI 350 Large Pistol Magnum primers. 25.0 gr Hodgdon H110 Hornady 300 gr JHP (Use lower cannelure) 1,366 FPS From a Ruger 5 1/2" Redhawk He states, and I quote "Load exceeds current SAAMI recommended pressure limits for the 44 Magnum of of 36,000 psi by 10,000 psi, but are absolutely safe in the Redhawk, as well as the Freedom Arms Model 83. NOTE: I do not suggest their use in ANY other revolvers in production at this time, so be certain loads are carefully labeled to prevent them from being used in guns of less strength. You would have to read the whole article. He explaind how using the lover groove lowers pressure, etc. etc. I did notice you asked about a diffrent bullet wt, but was just sharing my experience with the lower cannelure, in the 300 gr weight. Sorry, I dont have data for the lighter bullets. |
|
April 10, 2008, 08:05 AM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 8, 2007
Posts: 2,001
|
Imdarren,
I subscribe to "Handloader" and had seen that article on the 300 gr XTP loaded to the bottom cannelure. Before seeing that article, I had worked up a load using the pressure-ring measurement method. I was pleased to see that I had succeeded in stopping at a point a little less than Pearce's load. I was aiming for about 43,000 CUP which is the old pressure standard. Pearce seems to think he is getting about 46,000 psi. Neither Pearce's load nor mine was pressure tested. But, I note that the latest Speer manual lists loads for THEIR 300 gr bullet in ITS lower cannelure that are just a litte less than what I ended up with, and they are working to 36,000 psi. With respect to my old 265 grain bullets, I already have data for them from a contemporary Hornady manual. That manual illustration shows a bullet with ony one cannelure. But, there seems to be a typo for the COAL in that manual, because it lists two different COALs for the same bullet in differrent sections of the manual. Strangely, the COAL in the rifle section is longer than the COAL in the pistol section. But, it looks like they just accidentally listed the same COAL as the 240 gr XTPs in the pistol section. As I wrote previously, that COAL puts the only cannelure on my bullets totally inside a trimmed case. So, I think that it is a typo in the pistol section. I have loaded these old 265s to the old manual max with no issues, so this is just a curiousity question from me. SL1 SL1 |
April 12, 2008, 07:47 AM | #28 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 20, 1999
Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country)
Posts: 14,324
|
Both.
I, in fact, always find it a disservice when any incorrect statement is made an absolute. Always; without exception; know what I mean? Perhaps a more comprehensive statement would read: "In virtually all examples lengthening a cartridge decreases its internal pressure, but not always. As yet, I can offer no examples of it not decreasing, but I cannot state so as fact". Yeah, like he said....
__________________
. "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo" |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|