Charter Arms 44 special Bulldog a waste of money?

[umwminer]

Seating depth is 3/32 deeper with the wadcutter than the Lyman 429421 250gr SWC .

[Forrest r]

Seating depth is 3/64 deeper with the wadcutter than the Lyman 429421 250gr SWC .

I guess there's 2 ways you can look at it:
You're 1 1/2gr over max & 3/64 deeper into the case of a known bullet.
You're at max load for a bullet that has 1/4"+ less seating depth.

As far as the nra vs pearce data:
IMHO, the nra dropped the ball with the unique & bullseye powders.
429215 nra ='s 5.0gr bullseye/8,400psi lyman manual ='s 5.0gr bullseye/12,300cup
429421 nra ='s 7.5gr unique/10,940psi lyman manual & pearce ='s 6.9gr unique/13,300cup
429383 pearce ='s 7.0gr unique lyman manual ='s 6.5gr unique/14,000cup
429421 nra ='s 5.0gr bullseye/10,370psi lyman manual 4.8gr bullseye/12,500cup

Pearces #'s are in line with lyman's #'s. The nra #'s for bullseye & unique, not so much.

[CJR]

Since I like the 44 S&W Special, this has turned out to be a very interesting topic for me. I will confine my additional comments to only the Skeeter Skelton load of 7.5 grains of Unique behind a Lyman 429421 cast bullet at approximately 950 fps and Brian Pearce's comments that it is a 22,00 psi load.

1. The earlier SAAMI pressure ratings, for the 44 S&W Special, were about 14,000 psi which apparently protected older revolvers from blowing-up. The latest ANSI/SAAMI pressure rating for the 44 S&W Special is now 15,500 psi.
2. Brian Pearce stated, in his article, that the Skeeter Skeleton load was a 22,000 psi load, which is approx. 1.42X to 2X MORE THAN the old /new SAAMI MAXIMUM ALLOWED PRESSURE specs. Therefore, Pearce's statement is one I do not agree with.

Here are the facts that I feel supports my disagreement:

1. I cited the two(2) NRA Handloading manuals; one NRA manual listed two 44 S&W Special loads of 7.5 grains Unique behind the Lyman 429421 cast bullet with pressures of 10,940 psi and 11,250 psi, while the other NRA manual listed one(1) load of 7.5 grains Unique behind a 250 gr. cast bullet with a pressure of 11,250 psi. As far as I know, all NRA pressure testing of loads was done by the professional H.P. White Laboratory in Bel Air, MD.
2. The Lyman 44 Edition manual and the Lyman 45 Edition manual both list a maximum load, for the 44 S&W Special, of EIGHT (8) grains of Unique behind the Lyman 429421 cast bullet at 1,000 fps with NO pressure listed. I assume these Lyman maximum loads, of EIGHT (8) grains of Unique behind the 429421 cast bullet, DID NOT EXCEED the SAAMI Allowed Maximum pressure of about 14,000 psi for obvious liability claims against Lyman. In other words, why would Lyman knowingly publish loads that surpassed the SAAMI Maximum Allowed pressures for the 44 S&W Special and expose itself to liability claims?
3. The Lyman 50th Reloading Manual lists a maximum load of 6.9 grs. Unique behind the 429421 cast bullet at a pressure of 13,300 C.U.P., which is 2,200 CUP UNDER the SAAMI Maximum Allowed Pressure for the 44 S&W Special. Providing, of course, that CUP is approximately equal to psi. In other words, this " Lyman listed maximum pressure of 13,300 psi" is a " Lyman Allowed Maximum Pressure" and NOT a SAAMI allowed maximum pressure for the 44 S&W Special. Shall we say maybe a "legal imposed maximum pressure" to protect Lyman from gun blow-up liability claims?

So basically, what I'm reading doesn't put the Skeeter Skeleton load, of 7.5 grains of Unique behind a Lyman cast bullet, anywhere near the Pearce's statement of it being a 22,000 psi load.

Best regards,

CJR

[rking22]

I posted the below on the M24 thread relative to the same discussion. Please note Larry Gibson's post I quoted, and search around for the threads full discussion. I shoot Skeeter's load in a 696 and gp100 ,but I expect it is closer to Larry's data that is close to Pierce more than the dated NRA data. Just shoot a factory 12500psi load then a Skeeter load, bang bang, then tell me they are the same pressure! Ño doubt barrel cylinder gap plays a role and the NRA data was a vented barrel.

The modern sensors are faster responding to the peak pressure than older sensor tech. Suspect that is the real reason for the discrepancy.

Here is the NRA article with the pressure data,for everyone’s reading pleasure! Becides, I like ...
http://www.goodrichfamilyassoc.org/4...%20Special.pdf
And then there is this more modern data from a thread a few years back:

“In a closed breach Contender test barrel "Skeeter's load" of 7.5 gr Unique under the 429421 (255 gr) in WW cases with a Fed 150 primer give excellent internal ballistics with a peak average psi(M43) of 22,500. In a revolver with longer throats and the barrel/cylinder gap the psi will be lower but the load is still in the "+P" catagory compared to standard SAAMI MAP for the .44 SPL cartridge.

Skeeter developed that load for Colt P models and he and most everyone else has shot a lot of them. Out of my 5 1/2" barreled SAA revolver that load runs right at 825 fps. I've shot several thousand 240 gr commercial cast over Skeeter's load with nary a hic cup and nothing but excellent accuracy with pleasant shooting.

Larry Gibson
Last edited by Larry Gibson; 07-18-2012 at 04:34 PM.“

Goes to show that dramatic differences can be measured between supposedly identical loads, tread carefully!

[35remington]

Too many incorrect assumptions made in the previous post by CJR. The old data cited was not pressure tested at the time relevant to current methods.

That 7.5 grains exceeds SAAMI spec by a notable amount you can take to the bank. Note that no current data is close. That should get your attention. Not 45 year old data.

The egregious error is the NRA data, which implies it is well below spec when it is not.

Depending upon who does the pressure testing PSI may vary somewhat. Relating data with CUP to psi is also questionable.

Pearce suggesting the load is higher than allowed spec is more of a service to the reader in terms of safety than the ridiculously low NRA numbers.

To give equal time to all the players involved here, and to correctly note where the greater harm did in fact occur, extensive discussion on your part about the danger and disservice of the NRA figures is warranted.

All signs point to the NRA data being wrong. You need to consider that.

For some reason Pearce has drawn your ire while the NRA has escaped discussion. To some extent this is looking at the issue in reverse.

The post previous to mine just updated you and popped up while I was composing this, which is why I am editing it now. I suggest believing it more than old NRA numbers.

[CJR]

35 Remington,

Your response is duly noted. But I cited both the Lyman loads and the NRA loads. My question still remains. What specific lab measured the Skeeter Skeleton load for pressure? Please supply the name of the pressure testing lab for I am interested in contacting them.

Best regards,

CJR

[35remington]

Ask Pearce.

The problems with using old data has been noted, as has converting from one measuring method to another. The super low numbers of the NRA “data” would immediately draw the attention of anyone who has loaded any amount of 44 Special ammo. I can assure you those numbers drew my immediate suspicion as to their accuracy.

I am somewhat surprised that you figured that Pearce had the more erroneous information.

You may want to contact Larry Gibson via PM here.

[9.3X62AL]

Speaking from a non-scientific reference point.......accepting/assuming worst-case scenario as a "given" is the safer route.

Many thousands of "Skeeter's Loads" sent downrange from S&W Model 624, or equivalent loads in 44 Magnum cases (8.5 grains of Unique) and 44 Magnum revolvers of 4", 6", and 7.5" lengths. These are superb loadings--in revolvers capable of containing them safely. Skeeter's Load makes 44 Special a viable and modern defense caliber, and in 44 Magnum makes that monster a docile all-day enjoyment if you are so inclined.

I do not consider a CA Bulldog variant in that classification. I am glad that "umwminer" emerged unscathed from his revolver's catastrophic failure. The Bulldog variants remain a viable defense caliber in SAAMI-spec loadings, just not especially "modern". A 44 caliber bullet moving at 675-750 FPS will not do anything or anyone it connects with one bit of good. Respect the mechanism--use all of its potential, by all means--just don't exceed it.

[MT Gianni]

35 Remington,

Your response is duly noted. But I cited both the Lyman loads and the NRA loads. My question still remains. What specific lab measured the Skeeter Skeleton load for pressure? Please supply the name of the pressure testing lab for I am interested in contacting them.

Best regards,

CJR

Skeeter died in the 80's. Probability of that lab still being around is small.

[CJR]

The H.P. White Laboratory, Inc. performed the pressure testing, on the Skeeter 44 S&W Special load, for the NRA. The H.P. White Laboratory Inc. has been in ballistic testing for seventy-five (75) years. They are the world's leader in ballistic testing and the World's Gold Standard in ballistic testing. They are The State-of-the-Art in ballistic testing and court testimony. Their many customers include NATO, the FBI, NRA, SAAMI, etc. So, in my view, when someone states the NRA test data is bogus, aka." the H.P. White Laboratory Inc. test data is bogus", because someone else ran the same tests and got 22,000 psi please tell me who did the testing and how it was done. Also for your enlightenment please do a search for "H.P. White Laboratory Inc". I would venture a guess that no one, who does ballistic testing (i.e. Lyman, Hodgdon, etc.) has the state-of-the-art equipment that H.P. White Laboratory Inc. has developed over 75 years. However I could be wrong. Just tell me what testing lab did the testing to come up with 22,000 psi for the Skeeter load. Personally, I believe this is important information to know.

Best regards,

CJR

[35remington]

That is a nice post, but it does not change the fact the NRA data is wrong. Any thoughtful reloaders of 44 Special ammo will and already have come to that conclusion.

Ask Pearce if you want to know where he got it.

Really, what you are telling us is that loading data well in excess of current loading manual maximums is way under SAAMI spec pressure. Something don’t match. We know where the discrepancy lies, and are satisfied there is no mystery here.

If you want to believe that one exists, it is up to you to resolve it.
The first possibility is to consider that the data was misprinted or misconveyed because it does not at all match up to what is currently known.

This may mollify your sense of HP White invincibility. One thing is for sure....someone got something wrong, and it was either the NRA or HP White, if they were in fact the testing lab.

We have already given you the answer. Eventually with some digging you will get where we are already, but the substance of the message you will eventually verify is as stated....Pearce is a lot closer than the NRA figures are in terms of accuracy.

[rking22]

I have been searching for the pressure test protocol for the Pearce data, no luck. The NRA data was in the NRA guide published in 1969, I suspect the data was "best available" given the sample rate of that era test equipment. It is also from a time when CUP and PSI were used interchanagebly, and incorrectly!
I REALLY wish the modern writers were as through as Ken Waters in laying out their testing parameters. Back then it was fairly easy to tell that a load was stated "OK" just because the gun stayed together! Ken Waters told you how he determined the pressure estimates he published, generally case head expansion.

I understand the quandry, but when presented with this type discrepancy, the prudent choice is to go with the conservative data. I have no idea if it's 22k or 15+k , but it has worked well for many years. That proves to my satisfaction it is a safe load in typical 44 specials. I am not going farther up in charge weight, no need Sketter's load works just fine. It could be that the pressure peak duration was shorter than the 1960era equip could measure, does that make it "not there" or unimportant???? If NRA data was copper crusher data mathematically converted to PSI it could be right but incomplete compared to our current technology to capture at many thousands more samples per second. Or the conversion formula was wrong, or some copy editor thought PSI sounder more spaceage than CUP....

[35remington]

Repeatedly asking us where Pearce gets his data is a waste of time. So please ask him and stop asking us.

Testing conducted here supports Pearce’s findings. Handloading data of more reliable means recently printed supports his findings. The issue to be resolved is why old data disagrees with modern sources.

As was stated, old data has been found to be often in error. Perhaps they missed a decimal. It is possible to use logic and evidence to figure this out. The way to do it is ask yourself why no one lists a loading like that with more modern methods as being well below SAAMI limits.

So then you must not only not believe Pearce, but you must doubt other loading data sources as well, which isn’t.....logical.

[georgerkahn]

I, too, am a .44 S&W Special afficiando, and I just loaded a few hundred 200-grain RN Flat top 200 grain cast bullets over 4.8 grains of Alliant Bullseye. I haven't as yet, but one of my planned firearms to shoot these in is a stainless CA Bulldog.... should I be "nervous" re this load in this revolver? (It's a 'pet' load of mine in another (Smith) revolver).

Also, as a btw, I clicked the hyperlink in an earlier post (#84) -- http://www.goodrichfamilyassoc.org/4...%20Special.pdf -- and cannot seem to get anything. Help?

Thanks.
geo

[Good Cheer]

Was in a LGS today and looked at one they make now, stainless, had probably a two inch barrel chambered in .45 ACP and set up so it didn't need a moon clip to extract. I liked it, and the .45 ACP has a lot more real man stopper factory loadings out there than the .44 Special it seems. Might have to look into getting one of those.

Me too. Started looking a while back. Haven't seen one yet in person.
Somehow that line "I raised my trembling Webley and fired!" has always appealed to me and a Charter Arms .45 would be a pretty reasonable stand in.

[rking22]

My bad, sorry link is
http://www.goodrichfamilyassoc.org/44_Special_Articles/
It can be found under "favorite cartridges " forum in the stickies. 44 enthusiasts.
The NRA article is http://www.goodrichfamilyassoc.org/4...%20Special.pdf

Hope that works.

Also , there is an early Bulldog in a pawn shop in Columbia Tn, 250$ realm...so tempting..

[35remington]

What that does make you wonder is how they got 7.5 grains Unique and the 429421 so badly wrong as a pressure figure. I mean.....11,000 psi and below? That makes zero sense of any kind.

To any long time 44 Special handloader the numbers are not even remotely credible.

[35remington]

So here’s your choices:

The H P White pressure testing equipment very inaccurately measured the pressures developed with the 429421 and 7.5 grains of Unique powder.

H P White did not give the author of the article the correct pressure figures for the load in question. Twice.

The author, twice, misprinted the pressure figures given to him by H P White

In so doing, we rightfully turn the discussion toward how the NRA pressure figures as tested by H P White could be so in error, which is where the discussion really needed to be going anyway.

[Forrest r]

2. The Lyman 44 Edition manual and the Lyman 45 Edition manual both list a maximum load, for the 44 S&W Special, of EIGHT (8) grains of Unique behind the Lyman 429421 cast bullet at 1,000 fps with NO pressure listed. I assume these Lyman maximum loads, of EIGHT (8) grains of Unique behind the 429421 cast bullet, DID NOT EXCEED the SAAMI Allowed Maximum pressure of about 14,000 psi for obvious liability claims against Lyman. In other words, why would Lyman knowingly publish loads that surpassed the SAAMI Maximum Allowed pressures for the 44 S&W Special and expose itself to liability claims?

CJR

Not trying to be argumentative but I wouldn't trust the lyman 44/45 data anymore than the nra data.

You quoted the lyman 44th data at 8.0gr of unique/429421. Somehow you overlooked the 17.7gr of 2400/429421 as being safe. You also didn't quote the 18.3gr of 4227/429421 that the lyman 44th deemed safe.

lyman 44th ='s 17.7gr of 2400/429421
nra ='s 16.0gr of 2400/429421 18,600psi

the lyman 44th data is 1.7gr over the nra data???? 16gr vs 17.7gr


The lyman 44th data also list 18.3gr of 4227, that's in the 20,000+/- cup range


FWIW:
Pearce never said that the "skeeter" 7.5gr load was a 22,000psi load. If you'd bother to look at the pearce article everyone keep quoting you will clearly see pearce has 8.5gr of unique/429421 listed as a MAX/22,000psi load.

IMHO:
A lot of the older data is all over the place. How the lyman 44th deemed the 17.7gr of 2400 load safe/below max saami specs is beyond me. Just like I'm not going to believe the nra 7.5gr unique loads being 10,000psi+ either.

Just be safe and look at data from a couple sources.

[35remington]

Here are the Pearce findings:

http://www.goodrichfamilyassoc.org/4...%20Special.pdf