The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old November 29, 2013, 07:43 PM   #1
pathdoc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 12, 2013
Posts: 669
Combined loads for rifle and pistol - theoretical discussion

Strictly theoretical from my POV as I am several years away right now from being interested in or having the time for pistol shooting, BUT...

It occurs to me that if you're loading a cartridge (e.g. .357 Mag, .44 Mag, .45 Colt, etc.) for simultaneous use in rifle and handgun, one or the other must suffer in some way. Assuming that loading tables for the two are held to the same pressure limits (or that the handgun is sufficiently strong that it matches the rifle's limit), it seems to me that what's ideal for the one is possibly NOT the ideal for the other.

And of course if the two are NOT held to the same pressure limits - if the reloading data stress things like "THESE LOADS ARE NOT SAFE FOR USE IN REVOLVERS" or some such thing, then what does one do? Handicap the rifle, surely, is the only answer.

Things were probably easier way, way back in the day when Black Powder or bulk Smokeless was all there was - fill the case and rock on, was all you could do. But now we have so many powder choices and so many ways to optimise things for the long barrel that just won't do for the short... Or is it just a matter of the two-gun shooter loading the best they can for the handgun and accepting what the rifle coughs up (assuming of course that it's high enough to get the bullet out the barrel)?
pathdoc is offline  
Old November 29, 2013, 08:53 PM   #2
rodfac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 22, 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 3,619
I load several calibers that are used in both rifle and handgun; .44 Spl and Magnum, .44-40, and .38-40. While I have found loads too hot for the short gun, I only keep those that can be used in both. The difference is rarely over 100 fps in the longer barrels, and for that reason, makes little to no difference in either. Accuracy is generally better when the load is somewhat below maximum. It's a safety thing...I can't guarantee that my loads will not end up being used by a family member or friend, so I don't keep the hot ones around. I do keep excellent range and loading notes...Best Regards, Rod
__________________
Cherish our flag, honor it, defend it in word and deed, or get the hell out. Our Bill of Rights has been paid for by heros in uniform and shall not be diluted by misguided governmental social experiments. We owe this to our children, anything less is cowardice. USAF FAC, 5th Spl Forces, Vietnam Vet '69-'73.
rodfac is offline  
Old November 29, 2013, 09:11 PM   #3
rg1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 6, 2001
Posts: 1,125
My experience loading for a 44 mag Ruger Super Blackhawk 7" barrel and a Winchester Trapper 44 Mag 16" rifle is that loads accurate in the pistol are also accurate in the rifle. I also load the same load for a couple 357 Mag pistols and a Marlin 357 mag rifle. The loads are the same for each and shoot very well especially in the rifle. I don't want ANY loads that would be unsafe in my pistols. It would be too easy to get rounds mixed up. It just seems to me that if my loads are accurate in my pistols that I shoot them even better in the rifles. If you experimented with slower or faster powders you're not going to gain much velocity and it wouldn't be worth the hassle of trying to keep loads separate for each. Nice to know that I can grap a box of ammo, strap on my .357 pistol and carry my rifle and the loads are the same for each. If you haven't seen this site it has data for different length barrels and shows the velocity differences in short and longer barrels. It's still easier and safest to load the same recommended and most popular magnum powders for both rifle and pistol and in my experience neither suffers from velocity or accuracy. I load 44 Mag with Win 296 and 357 Mag with Accurate Arms #9, both common and popular powders. I shoot 240 gr. jacketed in 44 Mag mostly and 158 gr jacketed in 357 magnum.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/

Last edited by rg1; November 29, 2013 at 09:22 PM.
rg1 is offline  
Old November 29, 2013, 10:51 PM   #4
Misssissippi Dave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2009
Posts: 1,411
I started by loading for my 4" .357. It seems to work a little better when I use a little faster powder for the short barrel. I found AA7 works well for me. The same load also seems to work well in a 6" barrel. I have not tried it in any longer barrels for a revolver. I just don't have one. I tried this load in the 16" Rossi and have no reason to change it. It works great there. I did check the speed difference between the two and found I get nearly 200 fps more speed from the rifle over the 4" barrel.

The added speed I figure is mostly do to the barrel on the rifle allows the powder to burn completely where it isn't in the revolver. There also isn't a cylinder gap to let gasses escape either.

The speed I'm getting in the rifle is enough to use it for hunting deer at short distances. It is accurate and that is more important than in my opinion. Hit your mark and you don't need much more. My rifle has the factory iron sights on it. That tends to limit how long a shot I'm willing to make even shooting paper. One load for both guns is the best way to go for me. If it isn't too hot for the revolver it shouldn't be too hot for the rifle either.
Misssissippi Dave is offline  
Old November 30, 2013, 11:10 AM   #5
oldpapps
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 22, 2011
Location: Middle America
Posts: 518
Mississippi Dave just about hit it all.

I would like to add.
Pistol bullets, in general, are not very well shaped to hold velocity. Short, fat bullets with flat noses, just don't cut through the air very well. (Sound like me, short and fat.)
On the other side of this, commercial jacketed pistol bullets are made to expand at much lower speeds

Load with care,

OSOK
oldpapps is offline  
Old November 30, 2013, 12:17 PM   #6
Nick_C_S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2013
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,512
Quote:
. . . my 4" .357. It seems to work a little better when I use a little faster powder for the short barrel. I found AA7 works well for me. The same load also seems to work well in a 6" barrel.
Heh, it's interesting how things are relative. For me, I would consider AA7 a slow powder for a 4" barrel. And although I may use it for the heaviest bullets with full-power loads, I wouldn't use it for anything else. AA7 is however, very well suited and more versatile for a 6" 357. With a 4", I'd use AA5 for most loads (even high-power stuff); and even AA2 for a lot of the lighter duty stuff.

Personal choice is what makes loading so interesting and fun.
__________________
Gun control laws benefit only criminals and politicians - but then, I repeat myself.
Life Member, National Rifle Association
Nick_C_S is offline  
Old November 30, 2013, 12:58 PM   #7
Nick_C_S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2013
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,512
I don't own any rifles. But I do plan on getting a 44 Mag lever-action (or two) and maybe even a 357. Since I already load for both, they would seem to be the logical choice(s) for me.

If I were to do that, I would load nothing but W296 for my rifles. And I would load them with the same recipes that I use for my two 8-3/8" barreled handguns (a 686, and a 629).

Speer #14 has separate data for these cartridges in rifle; but the load data is the same. The only difference is the velocities listed. To me, that's my clue to not load for rifles with any higher pressures than for pistol.
__________________
Gun control laws benefit only criminals and politicians - but then, I repeat myself.
Life Member, National Rifle Association
Nick_C_S is offline  
Old November 30, 2013, 01:26 PM   #8
Clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 1999
Location: WA, the ever blue state
Posts: 4,678
I can't hit squat with a handgun.

But I can with a rifle.
The odd thing about the 44 mag and 45 Colt loads in a rifle is that accuracy at 50y or 100y comes with a crimp into the cannelure, not with a bullet jammed into the lands.

And that is just what the revolvers want to keep from having the bullet pull out with recoil.

I have a rifle that someone put a premium barrel on it and chambered it in 38 special that is so much tighter than SAAMI minimum that I can tell they knew what they were doing. I will start with what works in my brother's slab barreled scope Python: 148 gr hollow base wadcutter almost seated flush in RP match brass with 2.8 gr Bullseye.
__________________
The word 'forum" does not mean "not criticizing books."
"Ad hominem fallacy" is not the same as point by point criticism of books. If you bought the book, and believe it all, it may FEEL like an ad hominem attack, but you might strive to accept other points of view may exist.
Are we a nation of competing ideas, or a nation of forced conformity of thought?
Clark is offline  
Old November 30, 2013, 02:38 PM   #9
Boomer58cal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 18, 2013
Location: closer than you think
Posts: 967
I shoot the same loads in my Super Black/Red hawks as I do my 20" barreled 94 Win Saddle ring carbine. My loads are a little under max for my Rugers and I get another 350-450 fps with the 94.

180g XTP
94 win 20"- 1960 fps 1550 ft-lbs

Red Hawk 6.5"- 1540 fps 965 fps

240 LC-SWC
94 win 20"- 1810 fps 1740 ft-lbs

Red Hawk 6.5"- 1380 fps 1020 ft-lbs

For comparison...

94 win 20" 30-30

180g RN- 2050 fps 1690 ft-lbs

A 44 mag shot out of a rifle barrel is comparable to a 30-30 inside 100 yards.

Most 38/44 special loads will start losing velocity by 20 inches.

Boomer
__________________
The number one cause of death in the 20th century. 290,000,000 citizens were first disarmed and then murdered by their own governments. This number does not include those killed in war.
We're from the government, we're here to help

Last edited by Boomer58cal; November 30, 2013 at 02:57 PM.
Boomer58cal is offline  
Old November 30, 2013, 08:08 PM   #10
pathdoc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 12, 2013
Posts: 669
This is sounding a bit like what I sort of expected - load fairly high (not dangerously or unmanageably so) for the pistol and the rifle will take care of itself.

The potential for performance LOSS in the rifle with a significantly longer barrel is interesting but by no means surprising. That accuracy loads carry across well from handgun to rifle is also very interesting.

Thanks for the replies!
pathdoc is offline  
Old December 1, 2013, 11:05 AM   #11
buck460XVR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 4,341
I shoot the exact same rounds outta the 629s as I do the .44 mag lever and 77/44. Accuracy in all is excellent for the platform. I found that the little bit that is gained by adjusting the load or changing components for each is not worth the trouble.
buck460XVR is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 02:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.09638 seconds with 11 queries