.44 mag load data for Longshot?

[robinny]

I have some Hornady 180 grain XTP bullets I'd like to load up with Hodgdon Longshot for a friend's .44 mag Redhawk, but the only source for load data I can find is the Hodgdon website. I usually like to refer to at least two sources if possible. Does anyone know of any other published data for this combination?

Thanks heaps!

[Seedy Character]

Don't have another site to reference you to and I agree with checking 2 sources. Sometimes, I check 3 or more, when a wife discrepancy is found.

However, with having HODGDON powder, I would be comfortable with having only HODGDON data.

I normally load L'il Gun. Let us know how that Long shot works out.

[robinny]

Tanks, dood. I feel pretty confident it's safe to use this powder with this bullet since Hodgdon lists it, but it still would be nice to have a little more data.

I have run it through the Gordon's Reloading Tool simulator, and was very surprised at how big the charge range was. Hodgdon says something in the neighborhood of 13.5 grains starting to 14.8 grains max IIRC, whereas GRT doesn't give a low pressure warning until you go down below 10 grains and high pressure above 15, I think. I suspect it's because Longshot is not commonly used for .44 mag so they haven't had much user data submitted to refine their numbers, but that's just a guess on my part.

[totaldla]

LongShot is too slow to make plinkers and too fast to get top velocity.
But one has to use what they can get nowadays.

[robinny]

Not trying to be argumentative, but the max load muzzle velocity Hodgdon lists (1600 fps) is faster than any of the dozen loads listed for 180 grain bullets in my Lyman 50th edition. I was a little surprised at that because I thought like you did that it was sort of middle of the pack.

As you say, beggars can't be choosers. I bought it because it was available.

[langenc]

Call Sierra Bulletsmiths 800 number. they will answer all questions no matter what/who made the components.

They will also check info I bet most of us dont have.

[black mamba]

14 grains under the 180 XTP is a superb load in my 629 Classic 6½". I have used it in both 41 and 44 magnums with lighter charges giving 1000-1050 fps with excellent results.

[robinny]

Originally Posted by black mamba

14 grains under the 180 XTP is a superb load in my 629 Classic 6½". I have used it in both 41 and 44 magnums with lighter charges giving 1000-1050 fps with excellent results.

That is good to know. For target practice my buddy certainly doesn't need the 1400 fps Hodgdon says we'll get at 13.5 grains.

Thanks for the tip, langenc. I'll give them a ring.

[Unclenick]

Originally Posted by robinny

I have run it through the Gordon's Reloading Tool simulator, and was very surprised at how big the charge range was. Hodgdon says something in the neighborhood of 13.5 grains starting to 14.8 grains max IIRC, whereas GRT doesn't give a low pressure warning until you go down below 10 grains and high pressure above 15,

You have to keep in mind the simulators have limitations. The powder models are not exact and frequently are better at one end of the load range than at the other. I've used QuickLOAD for two decades and GRT since it became available, and both need confirming calibration. You have to remember they have no direct way to allow for primer differences or bullet jump to a throat, and they assume ideal barrels, which frequently means their velocities are a tad on the high side relative to the peak pressure calculated. What these programs are really good at is small relative comparisons. You change powder charge 2% then the relative change in pressure and velocity values are usually pretty close.

In the case of your load, using case water overflow capacity of 39.50 grains (QL default value; a little low IME, but I used it anyway), I had to increase GRT's Ba (powder burn rate factor) from 2.7118 to 3.3077 to get a peak pressure match to Hodgdon's measured data for 14.8 grains in their 8.275" test barrel. Velocity still fell short 26.1 fps. In Quickload I got to a matching peak pressure by changing the powder burn rate factor to 2.9825. It got closer on velocity, being down only 7 fps. Lowering the load to 13.5 grains, QuickLOAD was under pressure by 660 psi, but over velocity by 6 fps. In GRT, changing to 13.5 grains came up just 391 psi short on pressure and just 4.8 fps short on velocity.

So, of the two, the adjusted GRT simulation did better at the low end of the load range and QuickLOAD did better at the high end. But that's all after first forcing a pressure match to the data at the high load in Hodgdon's measurements. If I go with the powder defaults and that same 39.5 grains case water overflow capacity, GRT pressure is -22.4% low and its velocity is -79.3 fps low, and Quickload's pressure is -20.9% low and its velocity -75 fps low.

So, for accurate predictions, it is always best to a peak pressure match to measured data with interior ballistics software. IME, they have a harder time with straight wall cases like the 44 Mag than they do with bottleneck rifle cases, so it is most important with them. Generally speaking, bottleneck case numbers are closer to Hodgdon data even with the defaults, but I like to crosscheck them anyway whenever possible.