slow.....down Besty how far to back off with AA #9 in my Henry .44

[10mmShooter]

Hi Guys,

Working on a little development and was trying some Accurate Arm No #9 for a brisk load in my Henry .44 and 629PC. All the manuals show 16.2 grains of AA#9 as bit below starting charge for for 240gr LRN-FP.

Well in my 629PC... 16.2 grains of AA#9 runs a 240 LRN at snappy 1165 fps across the Chrony

But....in my Henry .44 rifle the same 16.2 grs of No 9 with a 240 LRN-FP is at 1442 fps which is a bit to fast for my liking, I ran 25 rounds through it and had no leading....but my alloy runs 13-15 BHN, so I need to back down to 1250-1300 fps to not push the limits too hard with my cast bullets(no gas checks here)

Anyone running No 9 with 14-15 grain charge?? Curious about your velocities

I have No. 5, and No 7 on hand(not enough) ....but I have much more No 9 so I'm trying to work up a "warm" load with No 9. But not too warm :)

thanks

[bobthenailer]

Loaded In the 44 mag case I would not go lower than 16.2 grs of #9 it needs higher pressure to burn correctly.
I would use a faster burning powder from as fast as Bullseye to as slow as HS-6 !

I have never used #5 or #7 but i would start with #5 ! as a + you will use less powder with the faster powders.

The same load Fired in a rifle as comparied to a pistol will usually pick up 300 to 500 fps,

[Tatume]

Accurate No. 9 does not work well for what you are trying to do. Your load is much too low already. You should not be using less than 18 grains of No. 9 with a 240 grain cast bullet, and more is better.

When you reduce loads of No. 9 you will get stuck bullets. The primer will push the bullet into the bore without igniting the powder. For loads in the 1100 fps range you need a different powder.

[Lloyd Smale]

anything under 18 grains started to give me erratic velocitys in the 44 with 240s. Id look at 2400 if you want anything lighter