The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 17, 2002, 01:10 PM   #1
willdaniels
Junior Member
 
Join Date: August 6, 2002
Location: New Haven CT
Posts: 7
accurate no.9

anyone ever use accurate i ordered some no.9 to reload .44 magnum.
willdaniels is offline  
Old August 17, 2002, 06:48 PM   #2
griz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2000
Location: Middle Peninsula, VA
Posts: 1,419
I've used it in 44, 357, 357 SIG, and for reduced loads in 22 Hornet. It works great in the 44 mag. I've only had two problems with it. The first was high extreme spreads with light bullet 357 loads. Not an optimum powder for that so I quit using it for that application. The second is the powder is so fine it doesn't work well in some measures. If the tolerences are loose then the individual spheres jam up the works.
griz is offline  
Old August 17, 2002, 06:50 PM   #3
warrior23
Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2002
Location: N.Y
Posts: 29
I use AA #5 in 45auto,AA#4350 in 300wm and AA#2230 in 223 rem with great success I have AA#9 and #7 but have'nt started to reload with those 2 yet.
warrior23 is offline  
Old August 18, 2002, 09:04 PM   #4
cheygriz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 11, 2002
Location: high up in the rockies
Posts: 2,232
AAC#9 is by far the best powder that I've ever used in .357 and .44 Magnums. I use 125 GR bullets in .357 and both 180 and 240 GR in .44.

I've never had a problem with metering in my powder measures, but it is fine grained, and an older well used measure may cause difficulty with it.

I've had best results with standard pistol primers (NOT magnum) and maximum loads. If you wish to load less than max, try AAC#7.

Using standard primers requires just a bit more powder to achieve the same velocity, buy in my experience the loads are more consistent and more accurate.

Griz,

If you had hgh extreme spreads with light bullets in .357, you might want to try again with standard primers. Can't promise it will work for you, but it worked for me.
__________________
If you think a mighty military force is expensive, wait 'til you see what a weak one costs.
cheygriz is offline  
Old August 18, 2002, 11:18 PM   #5
Phil in Seattle
Member
 
Join Date: January 29, 2000
Posts: 97
AA#9 in 357 with 125 gr golden sabers over a standard primer gave me squib loads that result in bullets stuck in the barrels of two different pistols.

Using the Hornady 180grJHPs it worked fine.

I think that magnum primers are really need for AA#9, at least with heavier loads of powder.
Phil in Seattle is offline  
Old August 19, 2002, 09:47 AM   #6
griz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2000
Location: Middle Peninsula, VA
Posts: 1,419
Yes 125s are where I had the problems. Magnum primers seemed to help a little with my loads. I did find the crimp is critical. Some bulk bullets I tried had a very shallow cannelure and I had spreads of over 300 FPS with those. Also noticed Accurate Arms has changed their data for that combo several times. In one of the manuals, the first I think, they even said Not Recommended for #9 with 125s. I found it simpler to use 110 for the few 125s I load now.
griz is offline  
Old August 19, 2002, 10:03 PM   #7
Watchman
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2000
Location: ARKANSAS
Posts: 484
AA # 9 burns best when compressed. I use it for my Colt Anaconda and it is very accurate.

The instructions say that any loading must have at least 90 % loading density or squib loads will result.

Could it be that you guys are loading too light ?

Ive never had a problem, but AA9 likes to be loaded close to full charge. It does not like anything less.
Watchman is offline  
Old August 20, 2002, 03:46 AM   #8
WESHOOT2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 1999
Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country)
Posts: 13,903
IN THE 44 MAG

Bit 'fast' for optimum velocities.
Bit 'flashy' in certain loads.

IMNSHO decent powder in this caliber; can be very accurate.
__________________
.
"all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"
WESHOOT2 is offline  
Old August 20, 2002, 10:18 AM   #9
cheygriz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 11, 2002
Location: high up in the rockies
Posts: 2,232
AAC#9, with Remington standard no. 1 1/2 primers and a VERY HEAVY charge chronograph 1625 FPS average out of the 6 inch barrel of my Ruger Security Six. (Remington 125 GR JHP)

Extreme spread for 10 shots runs less than 25 FPS. Flash is substantial, but I'm willing to tolerate it for the velocity and accuracy I get with this load.

Basically the same with both my 180 Gr and 240 GR loads in .44 Magnum. (S&W Model 29.) Very consistent, very accurate, and MAX. Again, Remington # 2 1/2 STANDARD primers.

BTW, all three of these loads are lightly compressed.

And no, I wouldn't use AAC#9 with light bullets in anything less than a maximum load.
__________________
If you think a mighty military force is expensive, wait 'til you see what a weak one costs.
cheygriz is offline  
Old August 20, 2002, 11:17 AM   #10
Poodleshooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 7, 2000
Location: Floating down the James River in VA
Posts: 2,535
Quote:
Some bulk bullets I tried had a very shallow cannelure and I had spreads of over 300 FPS with those.
I had similar results trying #9 in .357 and .44 using bulk bullets. Massive extreme spread. I chalked it up to the empty space that #9 leaves in the case, even with max loads. I use a Lee seater/crimp die and usually set the roll crimp at 1/2 additional turn into the press. How much crimp did you use to get better results?
Poodleshooter is offline  
Old August 20, 2002, 01:34 PM   #11
griz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2000
Location: Middle Peninsula, VA
Posts: 1,419
I couldn't get a good load with those bulk bullets and that powder. I ended up using Hornady bullets, which have a more pronounced cannelure, and a very heavy crimp. Also mag primers. Like cheygriz's load, it gave very high velocity. The extreme spread was still a bit high for me, around 100 FPS. I was worried about the pressures since it seemed like the primers were a bit flatter on the fast rounds. This is a very subjective thing and I might have been talking myself into seeing it. None the less, I switched powders.

Still use #9 for 44 and others and it is excellent. But when I run out I'll standardize on H110 to reduce inventory.
griz is offline  
Old August 22, 2002, 05:19 PM   #12
cheygriz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 11, 2002
Location: high up in the rockies
Posts: 2,232
Griz,

The differences in luck that we've had with #9 could be no more than a matter of different tolerances in different guns.

Like you, I've tried loads in my guns that work like gangbusters for a friend in his gun and gave lousy results in my guns.

I totally agree with trying to standardize on powder and primers. And I really like H-110. It was my standard for several years. In fact, that's the main reason that I tried working up magnum loads with standard primers in the first place. So far, it's worked well for me, and I don't have to stock any magnum primers except Rem 9 1/2 M large rifle magnum. (My .300 and .338 WinMags just won't cut it with standard primers.)

I think this is what makes handloading so interesting. Every gun, and every load, is an entity unto itself. I once had a load worked up for an HK-91 in .308 that would shoot 5 shots into 2 inches with the factory iron sights all day long. That same load in a scoped, heavy barrel Remington 700 wouldn't even stay on the target. Go figure!
__________________
If you think a mighty military force is expensive, wait 'til you see what a weak one costs.
cheygriz 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 11:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2013 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.08464 seconds with 7 queries