Is 2400 all it's cracked up to be?

[336A]

The reason that I ask this question is that I've read that some folks are only getting 1250fps from a 6 1/2" .41 magnum with 19.0gr and a Lyman 410459. I know that it is a accurate powder with cast bullets and held in high regard by many here. I bought my first pound of it not long ago based on all the good feedback that I found here. However I also know that there are other powders that are just as accurate and will actually meet my expectations

Now however I'm begining to question it's performance. The reason I'm questioning it is if I'm going to deal with all of the buck and snort I better be getting the performance to go with it. I don't own a chrono but would expect that 18.5gr and a 220gr Kieth bullet would easily put me over 1200fps from my 4 5/8" Ruger .41 magnum, and 19.0gr very close to 1300fps. What are others experiences with 2400's performance?

[5shotbfr]

i dont look at its top end preformance .. i love 2400 for its versatility i can use it in nearly everything i shoot , and while it may not be the top preformer in anything it works good in everything i use it in

[bob208]

nothing aginest the powder or the gun. but you are hamstringing the powder with the short barrel. i have found 2400 works best in barrels 6" or longer. also a tight crimp helps it to light off better.

i have use it in a 4 5/8 bh in .357 and always got unbruned powder.

[Wally]

The reason that I ask this question is that I've read that some folks are only getting 1250fps from a 6 1/2" .41 magnum with 19.0gr and a Lyman 410459. I know that it is a accurate powder with cast bullets and held in high regard by many here. I bought my first pound of it not long ago based on all the good feedback that I found here. However I also know that there are other powders that are just as accurate and will actually meet my expectations

Now however I'm begining to question it's performance. The reason I'm questioning it is if I'm going to deal with all of the buck and snort I better be getting the performance to go with it. I don't own a chrono but would expect that 18.5gr and a 220gr Kieth bullet would easily put me over 1200fps from my 4 5/8" Ruger .41 magnum, and 19.0gr very close to 1300fps. What are others experiences with 2400's performance?

I also shoot the .41 Magnum...I prefer Unique as it is cheaper, you use a lot less of it and I get almost as much velocity with cast bullets when using it in lieu of 2400. Blue Dot is also an excellent substitute.

[JohnnyFlake]

Yes, 2400 is an excellent powder and it is very versatile. It does well in pistols but it excels in handgun calibers, fired in rifles, .357, .44, .45 & .454 etc.

2400 is a bit slower burning, than say, Unique. Therefore, in a rifle the load will take full advantage of the slower burning powder, giving greater velocity and it's very accurate with cast bullets.

In a pistol, even with a 7 1/2" barrel you do not get the full potential of what the 2400 powder can deliver. Your better off using Unique for your pistol loads. It is also a very accurate powder with cast bullets.

[336A]

nothing aginest the powder or the gun. but you are hamstringing the powder with the short barrel. i have found 2400 works best in barrels 6" or longer. also a tight crimp helps it to light off better.

i have use it in a 4 5/8 bh in .357 and always got unbruned powder.

Your absolutely right that I'm not doing it any justice in conjuntion with the short barrel. However the fella with a 6 1/2" gun should have easily obtained 1300fps IMHO with 19.0gr. Actually I'm not getting any unburned powder left over butI do use a good roll crimp.

[9.3X62AL]

I'm a HUGE fan of Alliant 2400 for use in 410 shotshells, cast boolit rifle loads, and magnum-level revolver loads. I go through an 8# caddy in 1-1/2 to 2 years. Is it the BEST fuel for magnum-level revolvers? That's debatable--but that it is among the best is not. It has done very well for me in calibers ranging from 32 Magnum to 45 Colt at Ruger levels. It does well in 30 Carbine Blackhawk loads, too.

No single smokeless powder can do all things well, but 2400 does right well in appropriate taskings.

[1Shirt]

If I had to have only one choice of powder for cast, it would be 2400!
1Shirt!

[JohnnyFlake]

The following is a copy of some loading information off of John Limbaugh's Site. It shows 2400 in the mix. Note: The 2400 does not develop 1300fps as you were thinking it should, unless you move up to 21.0gn or more from a 7" barrel.

John Limbaugh~
VELOCITY AND PRESSURE COMPARISONS SHOWING THE SUPERIORITY OF H-110 AND W 296 OVER OTHER COMMONLY USED POWDERS IN THE .45 COLT. 7" TEST BBL.

BULLET POWDER GRAINS VELOCITY CUP
260 GR. LEAD SWC H-110 27 1459 FPS 30,600
260 GR. LEAD SWC H-4227 26 1377 FPS 30,600
260 GR. LEAD SWC # 2400 20.5 1294 FPS 29,800
260 GR. LEAD SWC HS-6 16 1259 FPS 30,800
260 GR. LEAD SWC UNIQUE 12 1199 FPS 30,000
310 GR LEAD SWC H-l10 23 1330 FPS 30,000
310 GR LEAD SWC H-4227 23 1176 FPS 29,400
310 GR LEAD SWC # 2400 19 1172 FPS 29,400
310 GR LEAD SWC HS-6 14 1119 FPS 30,400
310 GR LEAD SWC UNIQUE 11 998 FPS 29,200

Starting Loads Maximum Loads
Bullet Powder Grs. Vel. CUP / Powder Grs. Vel. CUP
260 cast H-110 25.5 1364 24,800 / H-110 27 1459 30,600
260 cast H 4227 24 1180 24.800 / H 4227 25.5 1340 30,000
260 cast #2400 19 1165 24,800 / #2400 20.5 1294 29,800
260 cast HS-6 14 1130 25.000 / HS-6 15 1225 30,000
260 cast Unique 10.5 1050 24,800 / Unique 12 1199 30,000
This data can be used with the 240 gr. Sierra JHP, 250 XTP and 260 Speer JHP

Starting Loads Maximum Loads
Bullet Powder Grs. Vel. CUP Powder Grs. Vel. CUP
310 cast H-110 21.5 1109 24,400 / H-110 23.5 1316 32,000
310 cast H 4227 21 1016 24.900 / H 4227 22.5 1164 30,000
310 cast #2400 17 1013 24.400 / #2400 19 1172 29,400
310 cast HS-6 12.5 994 25.000 / HS-6 13.5 1043 29,800

[Rico1950]

That data is for the 45 Colt. 336A is asking about the 41 magnum.

[300winmag]

I use 2400 in 357mag,41mag, 44mag, 410, 20ga,12ga works well for me, although I do not try to achieve 1300fps. Speed and accuracy is to different ball games. IMO

[subsonic]

Linebaugh.

2400 is pretty good, but H110/296 is better and cleaner. AA9 is better and cleaner too, if you need something a hair faster than H110.

[shooting on a shoestring]

Its all a mute point without a chronograph. The guns or recievers used to generate published data vary several percent from what will come out of yours. With a chronograph you increase the charge and see the increase in velocity until you hit one of three conditions. 1 pressure spikes and you can't load hotter, 2 you hit max case capacity and can't get anymore powder in the case, or 3 you start getting less velocity with increased powder charge. Any of the three say you've hit top end for your boolit in your gun. When you run 2400 to one of the above limits and do the same for 296/H110 or Blue Dot or AA9 then you will know which is the fastest. Of course somewhere along the road you might take a detour into looking for best groups and again 2400 might have your best load...and maybe not.

[bigboredad]

FOR ME and only for me velocity alone does not make or break a powder. I believe it's too easy for us all to get hung up on how fast we can make a bullet go. I've found that a 340gr bullet at a top speed of 1150 is in my comfort zone is very accurate and has stopped every freight train I have shot with it. I have traded bullet weight for velocity but this is just for me YMMV

[azrednek]

I also shoot the .41 Magnum...I prefer Unique as it is cheaper, you use a lot less of it and I get almost as much velocity with cast bullets when using it in lieu of 2400. Blue Dot is also an excellent substitute.

I haven't had or used a crony in years but my favorite giving me the best shot to shot accuracy in my 41 is Herco. I'm shooting 41 in a S&W with an 8 3/8 in barrel. I shoot and cast using a gas checked 210gr Lyman 410610 and when I have time to burn I have an old discontinued Lee single holer that drops a 240+gr flat base. My Lyman mold has to use Lyman's #2 formula or a considerable amount of expensive tin or it casts undersized. I'd have to dig up my notes but I believe I use apx 10 or 11 grs of Herco for the best shot to shot accuracy.

I have used 2400 with good results in my 41 but Herco gives me smaller groups. My feeling and loading manuals say the velocity is considerably faster with 2400 than with Herco. As long as I'm just shooting holes in paper targets that don't shoot back I'm not overly concerned about velocity. My goal with my 41 are tight groups and those attractive looking clusters on paper.

My experience has indicated anything I load with 2400, 357, 44 Spec & Mag, 38+P for my 38/44 and Rossi lever action rifle. Even the condom clad J-words require a heavy crimp. Friend of mine claims 2400 is the best in both accuracy and FPS in his 41 mag Marlin rifle but we don't want to discuss the type of bullets he uses in this forum. I've taken my 41 on two Javalina hunting trips. I was confident with my Herco load but unfortunately I never got a shot on either trip.

In summary if it is max velocity you're after you can't go wrong with 2400. There might be some other powders out there that may squeeze a few more insignificant FPS but I'm confident enough that as long as my handloads have a heavy crimp I'm pushing it about as fast as it can go with 2400. For the best shot to shot accuracy. Off all the powders I've tried Herco beat them all. Blue Dot being close and it or Unique would be my next choice if Herco was unavailable. I first started loading 41 back in the mid 70's. With all the new powders that have been introduced the past 15 years there may be something a bit better. Beside internet advice the only way to know for sure is to try as many as possible.

EDIT: Somebody correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't a warning published a few years ago advising not to use Blue Dot in 41 Mag??

[336A]

Thanks for all the feedback folks. As I said earlier I kow that it is a accurate powder and has performed really well for me in that department. I'm also a newbie when it comes to using this powder unlike most here. I've not had the time yet to learn about it's intracacies like most. As some have stated I need a chrono and have been meaning to get one for a while now. Now however due to my new locale I have no where to set one up, as the only place I have to shoot is a indoor range.

I have noticed when using 19.0gr of this powder with a H&G #258 that there is still room left in the case if that means anything. I don't know however what the MAX powder charge is with this bullet so I decided to stop at 19.0gr. I know the opposite to be true when using a Sierra 210gr JHC bullet. Older data (Lyman 3rd edition) goes up to 20.0gr, but then the recoil generated from 19.0gr is right at my recoil limit. I wish that someone (Lyman) would offer updated info with this bullet or at least their 410459.

[btroj]

Is it all it is cracked up to be?

Yes, and so much more!

I use way more for cast bullet loads in rifles than I do in handguns. Works great for that,

For mag loads in handguns it works just fine, I just don't shoot many mag loads in mine.mm

My feeling on velocity in a handgun is this- if I am shooting a target that can tell if the bullet is 100 fps slower than it is supposed to be then I use a bigger cartridge! I just quit worrying about velocity and look for accuracy instead.

[David LaPell]

I use 2400 for my .38-44 and .357 loads, I get 1,250 from the former and more for the latter, but it isn't just the speed it is the accuracy and consistency. I also use to use 2400 in my .22 Hornet (where 2400 came from) and got excellent results there too. The other thing to remember with 2400 is to make sure you use the right primers too, alot of guys use magnum primers when they don't need to, all of my loads are standard primers only and I get better results.

[azrednek]

The other thing to remember with 2400 is to make sure you use the right primers too, alot of guys use magnum primers when they don't need to, all of my loads are standard primers only and I get better results.

That may explain why my shot to shot accuracy with 2400 is not as good as with Herco. Best I recall as it has been at least 10 years since I used 2400 in 41 Mag. I was using mag primers. With Herco I've used both mag, std and the Winchesters marked for std or mag. I have not seen any change either better or worse on paper. Going through a crony may tell a different story but I'm more concerned about the group size than I am speed.

I don't know if others will agree but I really want to emphasize my best results with 2400 were with a heavy crimp. It will be months before I load 41 mag. I am going to give 2400 another chance using a standard primer and see the results on paper.

Maybe Felix will chime in. He's a walking/talking encyclopedia on the 41 mag. My only experience with 41 mag has been with my S&W with an 8 3/8 inch barrel. With a barrel length of 4 5/8's there might be something better.

I don't know how new your Ruger is. My last new in the box Ruger, a 45 Colt with ACP cylinder. I had to have both cylinders reamed as the cylinder mouth measurements were all over the place. Thx to board member JiminPhx. After he reamed the cylinders to a consistent .452. The increase in the shot to shot accuracy was a remarkable improvement. Just something to consider with your Ruger. If the cylinder mouths are inconsistent in size. Ruger wont do jack to fix it. I confronted a Ruger rep at the last NRA convention in Phoenix. He told me Ruger would test it with jacketed ammo and if it meets Ruger's specs and they will simply return it to you. The Ruger guy was very polite about it saying he understands claiming he was a "lead slinger" and his results with lead were as he put it "disappointing". Before I knew Jim I asked the rep if Ruger would ream the cylinders if I was willing to pay for it and got a "sorry nope".

The best way to measure the cylinder's mouth is to slug the cylinder rather than rely on using a mike on the cylinder's mouth. While your at it slug your barrel to help determine the best size of sizing die to use.

[**oneshot**]

I use/used 2400 in a few calibers. I have steered away from it in most of my guns. NOT that the powder is bad, I just found it not the best burning powder unless near the top end. I found other powders that burn clean from low to high end, AA#9 being one of them.