Hodgdon Data - Page 2

Bullet94 · June 29, 2005, 11:39 PM

Mike Irwin

Some of the listed loads would not cycle my gun and I’m loading more than a grain over listed MAX loads to achieve listed bullet speeds. When the listed velocities are met the ejected brass doesn’t hit me in the head, but changing the ejector angle sounds like a good idea.

Wlst101

No new info. I also have a 50 Beowulf that I’ve been reloading for and had a problem with H4227 until I found out that my H4227 had been recalled because it wasn’t H4227. Hodgdon put another powder in some of their containers that were marked H4227. At least it was a slower powder and I quit using it before I knew of the recall (way too much unburned powder).

If you’re going to load for 45 GAP all I can tell you is to start with the listed loads and work up from there. I believe the different chambers even in Glocks are probably what is causing the difference in my gun from the listed data. I don’t think my data would necessarily give you the same results in your gun. This is why I haven’t listed my results here. I’ve seen data from another person with a Glock and it did not match mine except he was loading over listed MAX loads to get listed velocities too.

**Mike Irwin** · June 30, 2005, 09:58 AM

"Some of the listed loads would not cycle my gun and I’m loading more than a grain over listed MAX loads to achieve listed bullet speeds."

OK, that's certainly interesting.

Maybe a call to Hodgdon is in order.

This is a new cartridge, and loading information is still being developed. It could be that they worked up the data with a pistol that has little in common with yours, and what worked in their guns might not work in yours.

June 29, 2005, 11:39 PM	#26
Bullet94 Senior Member Join Date: September 8, 2004 Location: Kansas Posts: 723	Mike Irwin Some of the listed loads would not cycle my gun and I’m loading more than a grain over listed MAX loads to achieve listed bullet speeds. When the listed velocities are met the ejected brass doesn’t hit me in the head, but changing the ejector angle sounds like a good idea. Wlst101 No new info. I also have a 50 Beowulf that I’ve been reloading for and had a problem with H4227 until I found out that my H4227 had been recalled because it wasn’t H4227. Hodgdon put another powder in some of their containers that were marked H4227. At least it was a slower powder and I quit using it before I knew of the recall (way too much unburned powder). If you’re going to load for 45 GAP all I can tell you is to start with the listed loads and work up from there. I believe the different chambers even in Glocks are probably what is causing the difference in my gun from the listed data. I don’t think my data would necessarily give you the same results in your gun. This is why I haven’t listed my results here. I’ve seen data from another person with a Glock and it did not match mine except he was loading over listed MAX loads to get listed velocities too. __________________ PRO-SECOND AMENDMENT - Live Free or Die

June 30, 2005, 09:58 AM	#27
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,388	"Some of the listed loads would not cycle my gun and I’m loading more than a grain over listed MAX loads to achieve listed bullet speeds." OK, that's certainly interesting. Maybe a call to Hodgdon is in order. This is a new cartridge, and loading information is still being developed. It could be that they worked up the data with a pistol that has little in common with yours, and what worked in their guns might not work in yours.