H2400 vs a2400

[Shuz]

The whole story is this: Some time ago, Alliant bought out Hercules' powder facilities, and H2400 because A2400, but the formula stayed the same. However, within that same time period, technology forged on, and ALL powders are more accurately formulated and made now, and some say they've become just a half click "faster" because of the refinement in the chemicals used now, but not nearly enough to be significant, and surely within the normal bounds of lot to lot variation. So essentially, 2400 is 2400 is 2400, and all else is just fodder for the forums and those who just want/need something to argue about. It's really just that simple.

Well said! AMEN!

[tdoyka]

The whole story is this: Some time ago, Alliant bought out Hercules' powder facilities, and H2400 because A2400, but the formula stayed the same. However, within that same time period, technology forged on, and ALL powders are more accurately formulated and made now, and some say they've become just a half click "faster" because of the refinement in the chemicals used now, but not nearly enough to be significant, and surely within the normal bounds of lot to lot variation. So essentially, 2400 is 2400 is 2400, and all else is just fodder for the forums and those who just want/need something to argue about. It's really just that simple.

but, but, but everybody likes to argue

[Tracy]

Isn't a M28 an N Frame 357. The cheaper version of a M27???
Not saying you didn't loosen it up but it is hard for me to understand how a "couple thousand" rounds loaded with 16 gr 2400 and 158 gr jacketed bullets.
How was that accomplished?
There is no doubt the cylinder is more, more, more than thick enough around the chambers to withstand far more pressure than that load considering the same size gun is chambered in 44 Mag and 41 Mag.
There has got to be more too this.

Cylinder wall thickness has nothing to do with it. It's more about the crane, frame, lockwork etc. Also, 16 grains under a 158 grain bullet is well over most book loads; even the older books.

Btw, several are referring to Hercules 2400 as "H-2400." Which reminds me that there actually was a powder from Hodgdon called H-240. It was similar to 2400, but faster. I have a Lyman book that shows .44 Magnum Keith (429421) bullet loads of 23.0 2400 at 1460 fps, or 22.0 H240 at 1509 fps. The same book shows .357 Mag loads with the 165 grain 358429 Keith bullet (crimped over the forward driving band) of 14.0 2400 for 1460 fps, or 13.5 H240 for 1475 fps. Also .357 with 158 grain 358156 Thompson bullet with 15.0 2400 for 1520 fps, or 14.0 H240 for 1530 fps.

[44MAG#1]

Cylinder wall thickness has nothing to do with it. It's more about the crane, frame, lockwork etc. Also, 16 grains under a 158 grain bullet is well over most book loads; even the older books.

Btw, several are referring to Hercules 2400 as "H-2400." Which reminds me that there actually was a powder from Hodgdon called H-240. It was similar to 2400, but faster. I have a Lyman book that shows .44 Magnum Keith (429421) bullet loads of 23.0 2400 at 1460 fps, or 22.0 H240 at 1509 fps. The same book shows .357 Mag loads with the 165 grain 358429 Keith bullet (crimped over the forward driving band) of 14.0 2400 for 1460 fps, or 13.5 H240 for 1475 fps. Also .357 with 158 grain 358156 Thompson bullet with 15.0 2400 for 1520 fps, or 14.0 H240 for 1530 fps.

Okay Ill give you that but isnt the "N" frame an N frame? What about the crane, frame, lockwork etc. that is different.
Remember I am almost 65 and have owned J, K, L,, N and X frames in my life. Still own L, N, and X frame Smiths. Still shoot them. Know the internals too.
Just explain the senario to us. I am sure others want to know too. A couple thousand???

[Tracy]

Okay Ill give you that but isnt the "N" frame an N frame? What about the crane, frame, lockwork etc. that is different.
Remember I am almost 65 and have owned J, K, L,, N and X frames in my life. Still own L, N, and X frame Smiths. Still shoot them. Know the internals too.
Just explain the senario to us. I am sure others want to know too. A couple thousand???

Can't answer that, since I'm not the one who posted it. But I do know that I have had difficulties with N frame lockwork in both .44 Mag and .357 Mag; difficulties that I didn't have with even warm-loaded (to .44 Mag energy levels) .45 Colt in a 25-5. I don't know for certain that it had anything to do with pressure, but it seems that way to me.

[9.3X62AL]

I have S&W L- and N-frame 357 Magnum wheelguns living in my safe, and they get shot quite a bit. For a lot of years, my shop's duty load was the W-W Super-X 158 grain JHP, which from my rather tight Model 686 x 4" yields about 1250 FPS. 13.5 grains of 2400 does a great imitation of that load with Lyman #358156 capping the case mouth. The 357 Magnum got neutered to some extent by SAAMI in the 1990s, as did the 44 Magnum. PSIs and CUPs don't speak the same language, it seems.

Nothing is as constant as change, though--and about 4 years ago the folks that sign my CCW decreed that 357 Magnums must carry the Federal #357B load, their 125 grain JHP that churns up about 1425 FPS from that 686 mentioned above. I scored about a thousand Rem 125 JHP bullets soon after that, and found that 17.5 grains of 2400 mimics the Federal loading pretty closely. 125s aren't as accurate as the 158s, but run to SAAMI ratings the lighter bullets push back a bit less.

More change happened about a year ago. Away went most of the rules governing retiree CCW platform and caliber specs. People in cubicle farms have a very different set of chromosomes than my issued allotment, obviously. When in Rome......

[GooseGestapo]

I should have stated "SEVERAL thousand" as in closer to 10,000 as I started casting with a Lyman 358477 mold I bought at a yard sale. I had a problem with mold and sent it back to Lyman, who returned a NEW mold, I still have. I've shot over 50,000 bullets cast from it, but switched to Lee 6-cav molds about 35yrs ago.

Indeed, it was the yoke (S&W's have "yokes", Colt calls it a "crane"), hand and index on extractor that lossened up. Subsequent owner returned it to Smith who repaired it under warranty. He still has it, and shoots it occasionally. 40yrs after...
Jeff Weaver and Skeeter Skeleton used 16.2gr and 16.0gr respectively. Newer manuals show 14.5-15.0 as max. I don't disagree.
However, I haven't shot a lot of .357mag reloads fo last 20yrs. But, based on primer purchases, over 1,000,000 .38spl over last 40yrs.

[oldblinddog]

Can't answer that, since I'm not the one who posted it. But I do know that I have had difficulties with N frame lockwork in both .44 Mag and .357 Mag; difficulties that I didn't have with even warm-loaded (to .44 Mag energy levels) .45 Colt in a 25-5. I don't know for certain that it had anything to do with pressure, but it seems that way to me.

I have owned 25's and 29's. 24's, 25's, 27's, 28's and 29's are ALL N frame guns. AFAIK the internal lockwork is essentially the same.

A 25-5 is not up to 44 Mag pressures in .45 Colt. Just sayin'.

[sharpshooter3040]

I have lots of both. I was wondering the same thing years ago. I loaded up several of each type and found no appreciable difference


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[trapper9260]

I use the same charge in my loads of H and A and I see no differents of how it shoots.It is my go to for 410 loads.

[Larry Gibson]

"The 357 Magnum got neutered to some extent by SAAMI in the 1990s, as did the 44 Magnum. PSIs and CUPs don't speak the same language, it seems. "

I have pressure tested quite a bit of factory 357 and 44 Magnum ammunition, old and new. Both older Remington and Winchester dating back to the mid 60s gives very close to the SAAMI MAP psi (transducer/gauge). The 357, with the shift of LE trainng in the late '60s and early '70s to the use of duty ammunition instead of wadcutters, it was found the S&W M19s (the most common 357 revolver used back then in LE) did not hold up to a steady diet of factory 357 loads. It was the factories that then "dumbed down" the loads. The 44 magnum factory loads were also dumbed down because the M29s began having problems (real or imagined?). The SAAMI MAP for both cartridges remained the same.

Most factory major manufacturors, excluding the high performance ones such as Corbon, 357 and 44 magnum loads pressures I have tested /measured Oehler M43 PBL with gauge) run from the mid 25K psi to the low 30K psi. The lessor velocities of such loads is also comensorite with the lower psi's.

[9.3X62AL]

Yup. And now we have J-frame 357 Magnums and Win '73 clones in 44 Magnum. NO THANK YOU to both.

The K-frame 357s apparently don't like the Federal #357B load that FBI recommends, either. Pressures are within modern SAAMI-specs, but still the K-frames object. Not an issue for me, since my 357s are L- and N-frames, Ruger, or Henry. I also have 44 Magnum short and long guns, so there is no need to make the 357 Magnum stretch its legs much, beyond a few "BECAUSE IT'S THERE" loads for the Bisley Blackhawk (enough 2400 compressed under a #358156 to evoke 1550 FPS from a 7.5" barrel). The brass mostly falls free when you open the gate--elevate the muzzle--and turn the cylinder. Primer pockets are fine. At those pressures, 2400 burns very clean, too. Ruger revolvers are BEASTS. (Kids, don't try this at home).

[Tracy]

I have owned 25's and 29's. 24's, 25's, 27's, 28's and 29's are ALL N frame guns. AFAIK the internal lockwork is essentially the same.

A 25-5 is not up to 44 Mag pressures in .45 Colt. Just sayin'.

I didn't say anything about .44 Mag pressures in a 25-5. .44 Mag energy in a .45 Colt occurs at about 20 percent lower pressure than a .44 Mag.
That was my point, in fact: in my experience (which admittedly includes only one 25-5 but several 29s and 629s as well as a 27 and a 28), even .45 Colt loads that equal .44 Mag energy levels seem to be below the pressure threshold that causes undue wear in an N frame.
.357 and .44 Mags loaded to current specs are probably below that threshold as well.

[Tracy]

"The 357 Magnum got neutered to some extent by SAAMI in the 1990s, as did the 44 Magnum. PSIs and CUPs don't speak the same language, it seems. "

I have pressure tested quite a bit of factory 357 and 44 Magnum ammunition, old and new. Both older Remington and Winchester dating back to the mid 60s gives very close to the SAAMI MAP psi (transducer/gauge). The 357, with the shift of LE trainng in the late '60s and early '70s to the use of duty ammunition instead of wadcutters, it was found the S&W M19s (the most common 357 revolver used back then in LE) did not hold up to a steady diet of factory 357 loads. It was the factories that then "dumbed down" the loads. The 44 magnum factory loads were also dumbed down because the M29s began having problems (real or imagined?). The SAAMI MAP for both cartridges remained the same.
Most factory major manufacturors, excluding the high performance ones such as Corbon, 357 and 44 magnum loads pressures I have tested /measured Oehler M43 PBL with gauge) run from the mid 25K psi to the low 30K psi. The lessor velocities of such loads is also comensorite with the lower psi's.

I finally gave up on N-frame .44 Mags after trying several times to no avail, to get one to last even a thousand rounds of published 240-250 grain loads before developing functional problems. Maybe those standard bread and butter .44 Magnum loads weren't too hot for them; perhaps they would have had the same problems with less than 1,000 rounds of factory .44 Special loads too. Who knows.

[44MAG#1]

Let's say the 44 Mag factory loads have been dropped down a hundred fps because of the junk M29's and junk M629's. If one had a big bull elk in his sights at 50 yards would that Hundred fps make much difference or would how good a shot you are and if you're using a proper bullet would make the difference or would that extra hundred fps more would make all the difference one would need?

[Larry Gibson]

44MAG#1

Were that the case I would have my Ruger FTBH in hand with full power 44 Magnum loads............thus the elk wouldn't notice any difference because there wouldn't be any difference........

If I wanted to carry a heavily loaded 44 SPL then that's what I would have. I carry a 44 Magnum because I want 44 Magnum performance.

[44MAG#1]

What 44 Special do you carry that is loaded within 100 fps of the Top end 44 Mag loads you are talking about in the same barrel length?
Let's say 1240 with a Keith in a 4 inch M629?
BTW that wasn't the question I asked. I probably would be carrying my 454 Casull but there again that wasn't the question.

[Larry Gibson]

As I said "heavily loaded 44 SPL" try the origional Keith 44 SPL load of 18.5 gr 2400 under a 429421.......however, I do not carry that because I carry full power 44 Magnum loads. BTW; 1240 fps out of any 4" revolver with a 240 gr bullet is close to top end 44 magnum loads. Most 240 gr factory loads (with a couple exceptions as previously mentioned) with only be pushing 1100 fps +/- out of a 4" revolver. I load, specifically, a 240 XTP over 24 gr H110 or a 429640 Devastator HP at 270 gr over 23 gr H110.......1450 and 1375 fps out of my Ruger FTBH. Those 2 loads are right at the SAAMI MAP for the 44 magnum, not guessing as I have measured the pressure.

As to your "question"...which one? You asked 3 questions in that one sentence. My answer referenced them all; "thus the elk wouldn't notice any difference because there wouldn't be any difference". The elk wouldn't notice any differenc because I wouldn't be carrying a 4" M629. As stated I would have my Ruger FTBH with a 6 1/2" barrel. Were I to carry a 4" 44 magnum revolver it would be my Anaconda which can handle full power 44 magnum loads without the problems the M629 has........thus there wouldn't be any difference there either.

No sense getting into a nutrole here as I never told you not to carry and use whatever floats your boat. You can use what ever you want. I simply stated the facts regarding factory 44 magnum ammunition power levels. I also simply stated what power level of ammunition I carry when hunting with a 44 magnum and why. Shouldn't I be able to use what I want and say why?

[44MAG#1]

The full load Keith 44 Special load was 17.5 2400 in solid head cases.
Do you honestly think a M29 or a M629 couldn't take your "full load" for hunting?
Do you actually believe you could tell the difference in killing power between 1400 or 1300 fps with your aforementioned bullet? I don't think for one second you do.
Good for discussion though and discussions are good.
As far as toughness... Ruger is hands down over a Smith. I own Rugers and have run loads in them I wouldn't attemp in a Smith.
But let's keep our feet on the ground okay. Just like you and I wouldn't but a half ton pick up to haul 2 tons of rock on on a regular basis neither we would buy a dump truck to haul the groceries in either.

[Larry Gibson]

The full load Keith 44 Special load was 17.5 2400 in solid head cases.

And it was 18.5 gr in balloon head cases.......same velocity for both and equal to some factory "44 Magnum" loads I've tested.

Do you honestly think a M29 or a M629 couldn't take your "full load" for hunting?

Yes, but not for long as many have reported/experienced.

Do you actually believe you could tell the difference in killing power between 1400 or 1300 fps with your aforementioned bullet? I don't think for one second you do.

Killing power means different things to different people. I have killed deer and a few other animals including elk with heavy 44 SPL loads, factory 44 Magnum loads and my own 2 loads mentioned (HP'd 429244 instead of the Devastator) and yes, I could "tell the difference". The full power 44 magnum loads killed them quicker.

Good for discussion though and discussions are good.

That it is. Question(s) for you for the sake of discussion; why do you suppose the 280 Rem is considered more powerful (kills better) than the 7x57, the 7 Rem Mag than the 280, the 308W better than the 300 Savage, the '06 better than the 308W and the 300 Win Mag better than the '06? There are many more similar comparisons but the answer is the larger the capacity per caliber the faster a given bullet can be pushed and thus a "difference". Certainly may not be needed or even wanted by some who are happy with the lessor powered cartridge. Yet to another shooter the more powerful cartridge is preferred.

If the factory 240 gr out of your 4" M629 is sufficient then why would you be found with a 454 Casul in your hand? I imagine for the same reason I prefer to have full power 44 Magnum loads in my revolvers.......because there is a difference.

As far as toughness... Ruger is hands down over a Smith. I own Rugers and have run loads in them I wouldn't attemp in a Smith.

Ain't that the truth.......