Load data for the 357 & 44 AMP |
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 234 |
| Author | |
pbcaster45 
180 Auto Mag 
Joined: 19 Feb 2019 Location: Oklahoma Status: Offline Points: 35 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Posted: 31 Jul 2023 at 2:00am |
|
Chronograph results for the previous load (I did change to the Winchester Large Pistol Primer)
Bullet: Barnes 225 gr. XPB (all copper hollow point) Powder: Hodgdon H-110 20.0 grs. Primer: Winchester Large Pistol Case: Starline OAL: 1.615 Average Velocity: 1357 fps ES: 64 SD: 23 I think I might test Ramshot Enforcer with this bullet. |
|
 |
|
|
Pantera Mike
Callahan's Auto Mag 
Joined: 20 Jan 2018 Status: Offline Points: 714 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 31 Jul 2023 at 3:50am |
Enforcer apparently has a faster burn rate, similar to Alliant 2400. It would probably be more tolerant of lower charge weights than WW296/H110 is. The knock against WW296/H110 is that they are notably unsafe at reduced load weights. The manufacturer goes out of their way to admonish against such experimentation. Supposedly pressure spikes can result, with concomitant firearms damage a possible result. Your load above seems well into this undercharge territory, save for the fact that your longer bullet apparently compresses the load, which can raise pressures, perhaps to a safe level. Thus, if you are seeking lightweight loads you would be better off with 2400. Enforcer seems to be a good match for 2400 although I wouldn’t assume that one could simply substitute equivalent powder charges between the two powders. You are definitely going into pioneer mode when developing loads using components that only recently came into existence. One has to pose the question, ‘why?’ Why risk damage to yourself or the gun when there are plenty of established recipes to follow? I do understand the urge to try a bullet between the normally found 200 and 240 grain weights, and one could possibly extrapolate powder charges from known good data when using a bullet of an intermediate weight. But I would control my variables and only chase a single unknown. I would either try Enforcer with a known bullet weight, comparing chronograph results with test loads using a proven formula with one of the established powders, OR I would try an intermediate bullet weight with one of the established powders, extrapolating between the minimum loads for the weights above and below my test bullet. In the latter case, I would also create test loads with known bullet weights to compare my performance with the published data, since all data is produced using cut down rifle cases. You may be using Starline pistol brass which has been shown to deliver lower pressures for a given charge weight, and typically about a 100fps reduction versus the same weight in a cut-down rifle case. A chronograph is a key tool here. If the data says x grains gives y fps and your testing with different brass shows a similar reduction in velocity, you can slowly elevate your charge weight until you achieve the published velocity, and then tentatively apply that delta to loads of increased strength. All the while keeping an eye out for overpressure signs like flatted primers, or in more extreme cases, cocking pieces and bolts flying past your head!
|
|
|
|
|
Luc V.
Admin Group 
Joined: 09 Mar 2008 Location: Belgium Status: Offline Points: 1314 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 31 Jul 2023 at 5:20pm |
|
Just out of curiousity, I ran your data trough QuickLoad, looks like a safe "practise-target" load to me: Why the change of primers, are the federals to much flat? Ps, the charge should be compressed 112% full of the case capacity, and QL gives a velocity of 1352 fps, thats pretty close calculated... 
|
|
|
|
|
pbcaster45
180 Auto Mag
Joined: 19 Feb 2019 Location: Oklahoma Status: Offline Points: 35 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 31 Jul 2023 at 5:38pm |
|
Thanks for the QuickLoad data! Ran out of Federal 155s! Sometimes you have to use what you have!
P.S. The primers looked nice and rounded - normal pressure indications (for both primers). I think the Winchester Large Pistol is hotter than the Federal 155 but not as hot as the CCI-350.
|
|
|
|
|
pbcaster45
180 Auto Mag
Joined: 19 Feb 2019 Location: Oklahoma Status: Offline Points: 35 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Aug 2023 at 3:27pm |
|
A 25-yard group with my final hunting load at 25 yards. I wish I could brag about my amazing one-handed shooting ability, but this was off the bags and taking my time (probably 5 minutes!) I was getting intermittent feeding jams earlier in the month but a very light buffing of the frame part of the feed ramp completely eliminated those (so light a before and after photo would have looked the same). I still get maybe one stovepipe every 50 rounds but I'm pretty sure that's me being careless with my grip. Sending the barrel assembly off for the Mag-Na-Port process next week - hope that works as well as Kent Lomont suggested! My hunting load uses a very old lot of H-110 from the 90s (priced $11.75 a pound!) - haven't had a chance to check it with the chronograph yet but it's very accurate. It goes without saying... don't rest the barrel on the bags!
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 234 |
| Tweet |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
pbcaster45 wrote: