Loading to the Max and then some.

[Bucks Owin]

I "hot" load my .45 Blackhawk to around 25K using W-296 and mainly shoot 270 to 325 gr cast PB bullets @ around 1200 fps. I have no need for any more "horsepower" and these loads will certainly do anything in the real world that the .43 mag can do IMHO... 8)

Both are fine rounds that I enjoy equally...

 

[Rclark]

My woods load is a tier 2 load, the 13g of HS-6 under 255g SWC (1100fps) which is all I think I'll ever need. Safe in all my Ruger .45s and I really don't think I am 'hot rodding' anything. But normally (my goto load) I like to shoot Green Dot under a 250g RNFP which is around a 900fps load. Much more pleasent to shoot for general shooting and still will handle most animals out there including the two legged soft skinned animal if necessary.

Problem is that they hurt my wrist, and I don't enjoy shooting them.

Yep... When there is no reason .... make the loads 'fun' to shoot. No need for elbow and wrist problems.

Answering the question, never loaded to 'then some'. Ruger Only Loads (Tier 3) is rated up to 30K, and Linebaugh did tests that blew the cylinder at 60K, so ~30K is the most I'd attempt (if I somehow got the stupid urge to go Cape Buffalo hunting... ). 40-50K I'll leave to other revolvers that handle cartridges like the .454 which was 'designed' for the high pressures.

I routinely load .44 Spl over book max, but I'm using sane loads (the "Skeeter" load) in modern, strong guns.

I too shoot the Skeeter load pretty much exclusively in my .44Specials (except the little Bulldog). I don't consider it 'over max' as it has been in the older manuals as a standard load, and used by many many many others from the 1950s going forward without a problem. Now the Keith load is pushing MAX a bit, but I occasionally will load this up for my medium frame BHs.

 

[stevemb]

Yup, praise the Lord, and pass the Unique. Do be careful with the little Bulldog though.

 

[Iron Mike Golf]

357 Mag , 145 gr cast plain base RN HP, Rossi Model 92. 2050 FPS. Don't recall the load. While working up, I miked the cases, checking case head expansion in .1 gr increments.

 

[Paul B]

When I first started reloading ammo, it was for an S&W 38/44 Outdoorsman, a heavy "N" frame revolver chambered to the .38 Spl. on a 44 frame. I loaded it up to a solid 1150-1200 FPS with a 158 gr. gas checked cast lead bullet. Potent as hell very accurate and killed a Black Bear with the gun. Took two shots. Several years late got an S&W M28 pre-model number 4" .357 Mag. and loaded to the then considered OK max of 15-5 gr. of Hercules #2400. Very powerful, very loud and kicked like hell. Current max for the .357 Mag. using Alliant's version of #2400 is 20.0 gr. I also note that ammo factories also downloaded ammo for the .357 Mag. and .44 mag. in their ammo. Was it unsafe during all those years that it was properly loaded? No. But it did tear up the lighter .359 mags like the S&W M19 and M166. People were told to shoot .38 Spl. in the guns and save the full power mag ammo for serious shooting. The .44 was downloaded because full power factory or Elmer Keith level hand loads were damaging the "N" frame guns, shooting them loose. After all, the "N' frame is a circa 1905 design. My 629 went back to S&W twice after running about 200 to 250 rounds of EK's load through it. It's in semi-retirement and the big loads are run through Blackhawks and Redhawks these days. In the .44 Spl. I run Skeeter's load, 7.5 gr. of Unique and the Lyman #429241 bullet.
For hot .45LC loads I run them through a Ruger Super B Bisley 5.5"and use John Linebaugh's data. THat version of the Bisley was recommended by Ross Seyfried for those who wanted a potent firearm but could not afford one of the every expensive 5 shot customs. Works for me.
Paul B.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

For hot .45LC loads I run them through a Ruger Super B Bisley 5.5"and use John Linebaugh's data. THat version of the Bisley was recommended by Ross Seyfried for those who wanted a potent firearm but could not afford one of the every expensive 5 shot customs. Works for me.
Paul B.

How does this differ from the 7.5" 45colt Bisley available today? Is that the Accusport Stainless Steel version?

 

[Paul B]

The 5.5" barrel is more for convenience of carry without radical loss of power. At least that's the way I undrstood the article. No reason why one couldn't use a 7.5" or 4 5/8" for that matter. Whatever turns you on.
Paul B.

 

[Bucks Owin]

The Bisley gripframe is thought by some (including Linebaugh) to be more comfortable to shoot under heavy recoil. It is no stronger than the plowhandle .45 and neither one are up to the pressure rigors of his 5 shot cylinder...(which is hot on the heels of the .454 Casull btw)... :wink:

 

[Paul B]

I can only answer regarding the comfort of the Blackhawk vs Bisley grip based on my ownexperience useing two 7.5" .44 magnums. For my hand I feel the Bisley allows me to handle the recoil better, especially for a quick repeat shot. As I grow older thouf, stiff recoil and artritis in my hands and wrist make shooting them with full power load to be not as much fun as it was in the past. The one that really hurts to shoot full power .44's is the 4 5/8" Super B with a standard Blackhawk grip. I think I'll make up a load with Elmer's bullet that runs closer to 1000 FPS rather than continue with the full power romper-stompers. Those flat out rap the hell out of my finger.
Maybe converting it to a Bisley frame might help I dunno.
Paul B.

 

[Rick Courtright]

Maybe converting it to a Bisley frame might help I dunno.

Hi,

Paul, do you have large hands or more "regular" sized? I ask because a couple of guys with reasonably large hands have shot my .357 Bisley and found it "uncomfortable." Personally, I'd venture a guess it's not the grip shape as such: it's just the factory grips are too slim for larger hands. My BIL and I both have .357 Bisleys, and about the same sized hands: a medium leather work glove is just a bit too tight, a large just a hair loose. He also has a standard BH in .357 (all three guns have 7 1/2" bbls.) We both prefer the Bisley grip to the "plow handle" of the standard BH. I dunno about him, but I've never shot a larger caliber in the Bisley configuration, so color me curious!

Rick C

 

[Paul B]

I guess you could say my hands are between medium and small.
Paul B.

 

[WESHOOT2]

anyone shoot a pistol caliber bullet over 2000fps?

All very theoretically, perhaps a certain poster here has pushed a few of his supply of R-P 110g JHPs past 2,000fps from his 7.5" 357 Redhawk, just because..... :mrgreen:


Perhaps it was in new sized cases, ignited with CCI550s, and very firmly crimped.

Perhaps..... 8)

 

[WESHOOT2]

All loads should be developed with specific goals. Since the bullet we choose does the actual terminal work, we should start with that.

 

[Rick Courtright]

All very theoretically, perhaps a certain poster here has pushed a few of his supply of R-P 110g JHPs past 2,000fps from his 7.5" 357 Redhawk, just because..... :mrgreen:

Hi,

Again, just theoretically, could a guy doing that sort of stuff ever bend a .357 Redhawk?

Rick C

 

[Paul B]

All very theoretically, perhaps a certain poster here has pushed a few of his supply of R-P 110g JHPs past 2,000fps from his 7.5" 357 Redhawk, just because..... :mrgreen:

Hi,

Again, just theoretically, could a guy doing that sort of stuff ever bend a .357 Redhawk?

Rick C

Yes. I've seen one that got bent. Dude mistook Bullseye for #2400. KABOOM!
Paul B.

 

[WESHOOT2]

Not sure; bent the 44, but not the 357s, 41, or 45 Colt.

Of course, it ain't yet over........

 

[volshooter]

I never go beyond listed loads. There is no reason to as most published loads will do the job. Whenever I start loading a new caliber I think about what I want it for, but I test for the most accurate load. I want accuracy. Power means nothing if you cannot hit where you aim. Deer and bear can and are taken with .22LR. A very accurate round. I develop loads only to get the best accuracy. The only warm load I have is for the .44 mag in a SBH. After extensive testing it shot extremely good groups with 21.5gr of WW296 behind Jessie Clark's 290gr WFP. I got this load from Jessie his self. Stiff but below max. This load convinced me to sell my .454.
I choose not to hot rod any of my reloads. I want groups. I have taken deer with a 1911 loaded with SWC's under 20 yards with none running off. At 50-70 yards I can drop a deer with a .22 stinger. If you need more buy a bigger caliber. You really do not need it if you can hit where you aim. 8)

 

[Paul B]

I won't say I never go beyond listed loads because I do. :shock: I know of four rifle cartridges that are not loaded to their full potential. The 7x57, .257 Robt., .280 Rem. and 30-06. The 7x57 because of the so-called weak 93 and 95 Mausers and the same ffor the .257 Robt. because those 93 and 95 Mausers could be turned into a neat light weight custom sporter. The .280 because it was originally intended for pump and semi-auto rifles and we all know about those early 1903 Springfields and their bad heat treatment. It's a shame we can;'t get proper pressure tested data for the 7x57 and .257, but the liability lawyers strike again. :x
Handguns like the .357 and .44 Mag. get loaded at or near listed max although the loads were "reduced" quite a few years back. The original charge for the .357 Mag. was 15.5 gr. of HERCULES #2400, not the ALLIANT version which I believe is faster. Same goes for the .44 with the original max load being 22.0 gr. of HERCULES #2400 Both loads used lead bullets. I still have a full box of 1960's issue Winchester .357 Mag. and the blast and recoil is much greater than current published max. I pulled one bullet and weighed the powder charge and it was exactly 15.5 with a powder I would bet is 2400. I doubt I'll ever shoot them, not because they'd be unsafe by today's standards but because those load with that soft swaged bullet leads barrels badly. The loads were reduced in the .357 by the factory because the "full power" loads battered the "K" frame S&W M19 and M66 in short order. Same deal with the M29 and M629 S&W .44's. Factory level ammo and hand loads would cause me to send my 629 back to S&W after about 250 to 300 rounds. After sending it back twice with the cost of shipping and repairs, it now is a safe queen that rarely gets shot. Full power stuff gets shot in Super Blackhawks or Redhawks for the .44. Full power .357s are shot in the "N" frame M28.
Paul B.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

...without exceeding the original pressure spec of 46,000 CUP. :wink:

That is a lot more than 35,000psi for the 357magnum. Is that for sure from the old days?

 

[Paul B]

"Lyman still tests in CUP where the warmest load pressure wise was 44,400 CUP. :wink:"

I'm disinclined to agree with that statement.. The Lyman Manual #44 circa 1967shows a start load of 46.0 gr. of IMR4895 for the 150 gr. bullet and a max for that bullet of 51.5 gr. Lyman #45 manual has that exact same load data for he 150 gr. bullet with the added C.U.P. figure of 49,200 C.U.P.
If you compare those figures with the 150 gr. bullet data in the #49 Lyman manual they are EXACTLY the same. This leads me to believe at least with that one load, that Lyman has nor retested that load since 1967. My copy of #49 is circa 2010, just four years ago. Most bullet weights only have a P.S.I pressure label with one bullet in the whole column. The only except is for 165 gr. bullets.
I used the 150/4895 data because I have experience with that bullet weight and powder. I hunted deer with 49.0 gr. of IMR4895 for years and quit the load in 1973 as my Springfield 1903 bubba job was too heavy at 9,000+ t. MSL. A while back I loaded some up to chronograph more for spits and grins and to find out just how fast they were going. The first shot blew a primer. I pulled the rest and weighed the charges. All were on the money.
I no longer believe Lyman's C.U.P. data and am careful as hell with the P.S.I. marked loads.
Paul B.