Question about Keiths' loads

[336A]

I've been reading and re-reading a few articles written by Elmer Keith here http://www.elmerkeithshoot.org/GA/

After reading a couple of articles and taking note of his now famous loads, my mental juices statred to churn. In one of the articles EK states that he used 17.0gr of 2400 in his .44 SPL loads containing the 429421 bullet in modern solid head brass. This is pretty much common knowledge as solid head brass has less powder capacity than did the old balloon head brass. Now fast forward to the article that Brian Pearce wrote on the then new Ruger FT .44 SPL, one of the loads that he used was Elmer's load (except now with Alliant instead of Hercules 2400) with no problems what so ever.

So this where I start thinking to myself. If Brian Pearce used the EK .44 SPL load (and I'm sure there more out there that have too) which posed no problems are Elmers' other loads still safe? Loads such as 22gr of 2400 under the 429421 for the .44 mag, and 19-20gr of 2400 under the H&G 258 220gr boolit in the .41 mag. So what do you all think on this subject? Here is one of the articles that lead me to post this question
http://www.elmerkeithshoot.org/GA/1969_01_Elmer_Keith_Favorite_Load.pdf

[subsonic]

In some guns, with some components, maybe.

Always work up to max loads.

The "new" 2400 is considered hotter by many, but there is conflicting data to support that.

Compare his loads to current loading manuals and see what you think. Pay attention to the pressure data.

For me it is a moot point as there are better components than those he used available today.

I would suggest AA9 or H110/296 for any load like that.

On the gunsamerica blog, Ross Seyfried lists some serious loads for the new Ruger flat top .44spls using H110. The article is about the flat top Bisleys.

[pdawg_shooter]

Hey, if it aint broke, dont try to fix it!

[white eagle]

work up
work up
and work up
each and every gun has its own parameters there are few
pat answers to anything however if you experiment you have had good teachers leading the class so it has been done

[Larry Gibson]

I've pressure tested old Hercules 2400 and new Alliant 2400 using Kieth's load of 22 gr under a RCBS 44-250-K in a side by side comparison. I believe my article on the test is a sticky here somewhere or a Cast Pics article. I've also pressure tested 3 seperate lots of Alliant 2400 with that load now. They all give a PSI of very close to 33,000 psi (M43). Any deviation is well within normal lot to lot variation and/or the temperature variation of the tests. That is my standard "regualr" cast bullet magnum load for my Ruger FTBH with 6 1/2" barrel velocity was 1462 fps on the last test. I've found no difference between the older Hercules 2400 and the newer Alliant 2400 in the 44 Magnum or several other cartridges I've used 2400 in.

However, as noted, I worked up to that load and anyone loading with 2400 or any other powder should work up to it also.

Larry Gibson

[runfiverun]

i'm more on board with the skeeter load in the 44 special.
the grips on the rugers are too small for my hands and thats all i can keep hold of.
i don't get much over 19grs with the 2400 in either the 44 mag or 45 colt.
once i get to that point in the mag case i just go on up to h-110.
i'm pretty sure elmer would have also if he would have had it around.

[454PB]

I don't use 2400 anymore, so I'll defer to the previous answers. However, I'm constantly amazed at the fact that Elmer worked up his loads from scratch, back when there was precious little pressure testing equipment even in the ammunition factories, and using very limited powder selections.......and they're still being used today.

[220swiftfn]

As stated before, work up loads..... The gentle reminder here is that Elmer also blew up some guns with his load development, so it's important to keep the action strength in mind (a load that's fine in a .44 SPL Blackhawk will blow up a Colt SAA for example....) So the answer to your question is......... it depends.


Dan

[Larry Gibson]

i'm more on board with the skeeter load in the 44 special.
the grips on the rugers are too small for my hands and thats all i can keep hold of.
i don't get much over 19grs with the 2400 in either the 44 mag or 45 colt.
once i get to that point in the mag case i just go on up to h-110.
i'm pretty sure elmer would have also if he would have had it around.

FYI;

Interesting that I just pressure tested Skeeter's load a few days ago. I use the Lee TL429-240-SWC though instead of the 429421. Used 7.5 gr Alliant Unique in WW cases with Fed 150 primers. OAL was 1.511".

Shot the usual 10 shot test string out of the Contender test barrel. M43 Oehler gave the load 22,500 psi with SD of 1,300 and the ES at 3,700 psi(M43). Velocity was 1059 fps (muzzle) out of the 8.4" test barrel with the SD at 12 fps and the ES at 36 fps. That is quite consistent. Velocity runs 920 fps out of my Ruger FTBH with 6 1/2" barrel and is quite accurate.

SAAMI MAP for the 44 SPL is 15,500 psi (piezo transducer) so Sheeter's load is definately a +P+ for the 44 SPL and low end for the 44 Magnum. I would expect the psi to be a little higher with the heavier 429421 cast bullet.

Larry Gibson

[MtGun44]

I keep hearing all the "new 2400" versus "old 2400" stories, and I have both kinds in stock,
and use interchangably and find no difference that I can detect. I am very glad to hear
an expert WITH THE PROPER EQUIPMENT like Larry verify what I am pretty convinced is the
case - old and new 2400 are no more different than two lots of old or two lots of new.

I prefer 20 gr of 2400 in my most common loads with RCBS 44-250-K or H&G 503 or on of
my Lyman 429421 mold variations. That warthog on the left did not like the load at all. ;-)

Bill

[winelover]

I pretty much use 2400 exclusively for magnum handguns. I buy it in the 8# jugs and have been doing so since the mid 70's. I too also ignore the difference between the "old" and "new". My 44 RH will handle the maximum charges but I've settled on 20 grains for a built in margin of error. I haven't changed to the standard primer recommendation, either. I have several thousands of CCI Magnums and I intend to use them up. My guns don't like H-110 or 296 any better than 2400.

Winelover

[Alan]

The advantage (and I think the only one) that #2400 has over H110/WW296 is that it can be throttled back and still give superb accuracy. H110 can a little bit, but I still have the old WW296 on hand, and the matching Lyman handbooks say to use it exactly as listed w/ no component changes or charge reductions. (which is why I still have some of it on hand)

For instance in .38 Spl, 8 gr is a wonderful accuracy load w/ 158-168 gr cast boolits. The load I have shot for years in my K-38's and M-15's is 10gr. It is still a tack driver, but it's also tippy-top +P, maybe similar to the +P+ FBI load. I know post-war K-frames can shoot it forever w/o loosening up. I know any cartridge with the Keith boolit does NOT go in my Rossi stainless .38

[44man]

The advantage (and I think the only one) that #2400 has over H110/WW296 is that it can be throttled back and still give superb accuracy. H110 can a little bit, but I still have the old WW296 on hand, and the matching Lyman handbooks say to use it exactly as listed w/ no component changes or charge reductions. (which is why I still have some of it on hand)

For instance in .38 Spl, 8 gr is a wonderful accuracy load w/ 158-168 gr cast boolits. The load I have shot for years in my K-38's and M-15's is 10gr. It is still a tack driver, but it's also tippy-top +P, maybe similar to the +P+ FBI load. I know post-war K-frames can shoot it forever w/o loosening up. I know any cartridge with the Keith boolit does NOT go in my Rossi stainless .38
Not so with H110! It is exactly the same powder as 296 with only a slight difference in canister burn rate.
Both H110 and 296 have starting loads and max loads. You do not go below with either.

[Shuz]

A few years ago, when the stories first started appearing in some of the gun magazines about how the "new Alliant 2400" was faster burning than the old Hercules 2400, I contacted the Alliant company and discussed this issue with one of their technicians. I was told then that there was no difference between the two, other than normal lot to lot variation.
Larry Gibson has conducted tests that indicate that there is no difference other than lot to lot variations. Why won't this "difference rumor" die? I suspect there are those who have found out that lesser charges of 2400 suit their needs as well, with less recoil, than ol Elmer's loads, and they just need a "difference rumor" to justify their "wimpyness"!
While I believe Larry's tests and the technicians comments demonstrate there is no appreciable difference, I have found that 18g of 2400 and 429421 suits my needs, especially in my 329 PD! Perhaps I'm a wimp!

[Larry Gibson]

Shuz/44man

These days, the truth be known, I shoot a lot more of Skeeter's load and 8.5 gr Unique in Magnum cases than I do magnum level loads in my 44 Revolvers.......guess I've wimped out too[smilie=l:

Larry Gibson

[felix]

Wimp today, ***** tomorrow. That's the progression, Larry. I don't know what's next, and afraid to ask someone in the know for fear I might be next. ... felix

[Silver Jack Hammer]

Brian Pierce has written a lot about .44 Special loads referencing Keith’s work. Pierce divides his loads up into categories of pressure and lists which guns are safe for the various pressures. In Handloader #217 he lists 17 gr of 2400 in a .44 Special case with a 240 gr bullet is a 19,000 psi load and is safe only Colt SAA’s manufactured after WWII.

The Speer #14 lists an important Safety Notice that loads listed for the Ruger New Model Blackhawk and Old Model Vaquero are not to be used in the new model Ruger Flattop.
I do not have in front of me the dose of 2400 Brian Pierce said he was using in the Ruger Flattop. New Model Ruger Flattop loads according to Speer should be kept in the 14,000 psi range. I can’t find a 14,000 psi load with 2400. According to Pierce loads under 14,000 pse are 13.0 gr of Blue Dot and a 245 Keith bullet which he says will give you 992 fps. Other loads Pierce lists in the .44 Special with the 245 gr Keith bullet are 11.5 gr of VV-3N37 for 1,037 fps also 11.5 gr of HS-6 for 1,020 fps.

18.5 gr of 2400 is a 23,000 psi load and should only be used in the N frame Smith and Wesson.

Brian Pierce has written that the US Firearms single action has a thicker cylinder than the Colt and a beefier topstrap and he has had one bored out to .44 Magnum and has been shooting it without ill effect. This should really drive the Keith bullet even more deeply into the dirt on the other side of the deer but would be more recoil than I would prefer in a gun of that weight.

I got 1194 fps out of my Smith Model 29 6 ½” bbl. with 17.5 gr of 2400 in 44 Special cases with the Keith 245 gr bullet. I have found Blue Dot more favorable than 2400 in consistent shot to shot velocity and get 1131 fps with 12 gr. in my Colt SAA 3rd generation 43/4” with the Keith bullet. I have gotten 5” groups at 100 yards with fixed iron sights with this load. I’ve backed off to 11 gr of Blue Dot and this load is carried more than shot in the Colt due to recoil and wear on the gun. When hiking in the Pacific Northwest where I live the biggest thing I’m likely to encounter is a black bear or a cougar and I feel adequately armed. I’d feel very comfortable shooting 11 gr of 2400 out of a Smith N frame all day but would rather carry a Colt on my hip rather than a Smith N frame all day.

[Larry Gibson]

Meow..........

Larry Gibson

[Larry Gibson]

SAilver Jack Hammer

The Speer #14 lists an important Safety Notice that loads listed for the Ruger New Model Blackhawk and Old Model Vaquero are not to be used in the new model Ruger Flattop.
I do not have in front of me the dose of 2400 Brian Pierce said he was using in the Ruger Flattop. New Model Ruger Flattop loads according to Speer should be kept in the 14,000 psi range.

Huh? Are you saying they are saying I shouldn't shoot 44 magnum level loads in my Ruger 50th Aniversary new model flat top 44 magnum? That Brian Pierce says I should shoot only basic 44 SPL loads not of higher psi than factory 44 SPLs? That sure would be news to me, would be news to my Ruger FTBH becuase it thrives on magnum loads and I'm sure it would be news to Ruger who builds 44 Magnums you can shoot magnum loads in? Did I miss something or are you refering to .44 SPL chambered handguns only?

Larry Gibson

[runfiverun]

appreciate that larry.
i'm actually at 7.0 grs and using either the win or cci-300 primer.
it has to be consistent [ballistacly[sp?] also, it sure shoots tight groups in the blued, and the stainless ,even though the cyl throats need opened a little [swapping to the blued cylinder sure shrinks the group]
and in the bisley it's down right dangerous to anything it's pointed at out to 50-60 yds.

[Mal Paso]

22g of 2400 behind a 250g Keith is my best top end load touching 1500 fps from a 4" Colt.

20g of 2400 is almost too much for my S&W 629. Spent cartridges that would fall out of the Colt or Ruger stick in the 629. I think the 629 cylinder is starting to expand at that pressure so I stop at 19g. I put enough rounds through that 629 I think metal fatigue could be a problem.

Elmer blew up guns.

[Rafe Covington]

I been using 20 grs 2400 with the 429421 for so long can't remember when I first started useing it. It was accurate than and still is. JMHO

Rafe:drinks:

[WinMike]

I have found Blue Dot more favorable than 2400 in consistent shot to shot velocity and get 1131 fps with 12 gr. in my Colt SAA 3rd generation 4 3/4” with the Keith bullet.

I used Ken Water's info in "Pet Loads" and when I loaded 13 gr. Blue Dot (4" N-frame), I had too many "leftover" granules on the bench. I was blaming it on my new batch of Blue Dot being too slow.....or too short of a barrel.

Bet you're going to tell me to cut back to 12 gr.

[Potsy]

I suspect Silver Jack Hammer may be referring to the .45 Colt in Flattops and New Vaqueros as opposed to the .44 Special or Magnum. Don't mean to speak for him, haven't looked at a Speer #14, but those are the only warnings I've heard of as of late.

I do get kind of tickled at those who recoil in horror at Elmer's loads. No doubt some were kinda brisk, and he blew up a few guns early on. But 20 grn of 2400 under a 454424 in a Blackhawk (full size model) sure does shoot good and cases fall out of the chamber (if you believe in that as a pressure indicator). Same charge under a 270-SAA is pretty stellar too, albeit with a bit more recoil. Elmer was pretty careful to specify that he used that load in a Blackhawk only.

The most famous blow up was a Colt SAA that he was loading with a cut down .45 Sharps bullet and a case full of black powder. He decided that with the balloon head cases at the time and the thicker cylinder walls of the .44 Special, that was the route he would go. I've thought about trying his .44 special load in my 624 but I can't imagine that's gonna be real fun to shoot with those Magna grips.

To me, that was his only unfortunate legacy. 80 years later, instead of a grand selection of .45 Colt chambered guns, we have a myriad of .44 Magnums (that's not really a bad thing, I just like a .45 Colt and think it was treated unfairly). Also 80 years later, some folks still believe .45 Colt brass is inherently weak.

[44MAG#1]

I have just read my Speer #14 manual on the 44 special section and the 44 Mag section (even had my glasses on) and did not see any reference on not using any of their loads in a Flattop Ruger or any other gun suitably marked with either the 44 special caliber or 44 Mag caliber.
In other words such warnings do not exist in my #14 manual.
their 44 special loads are safe in 44 Specials and their loads for the 44 Mag are safe in 44 Mags.
The models of guns are not mentioned.

[Larry Gibson]

I also looked high and low in Speer's #14 under the 44 SPL and 44 Magnum and could not find any such warning. I did find under the 45 Colt (Ruger and Contender Only) section a warning that Ruger advise 14,000 psi loads in the New Vaguero only. No mention of "flat top. Assuming Silver jack was refering to such New Vaquero's in 45 Colt. Is Ruger making a flat top based on the New Vaquero in 45 Colt?

Perhaps any owners of the New Vaquero framed FT in 44 SPL could advise if any warnings were included in the directions/manual that came with the revolver?

Larry Gibson

[Potsy]

Yes, Ruger is building a .45 Colt on the .357 frame flattop; which (correct me if I'm wrong) is very similar in size to the new vaquero.
BUUUUT, as far as limiting it to 14,000psi, they are building them with .45ACP convertible cylinders!! I'll refrain from opening that can of worms any further.

[Larry Gibson]

Yes, Ruger is building a .45 Colt on the .357 frame flattop; which (correct me if I'm wrong) is very similar in size to the new vaquero.
BUUUUT, as far as limiting it to 14,000psi, they are building them with .45ACP convertible cylinders!! I'll refrain from opening that can of worms any further.

Doh!!!!

Well Ruger is a member of SAAMI so I suspect, since the SAAMI MAP for the 45 Colt is 14,000 psi, that is the reason for that. However, as mentioned, if they are making 45 ACP cylinders then the SAAMI MAP for that is 21,000 psi (23,000 psi for +P) then that really opens a can of worms..........Doh!!!!!

Larry Gibson

[Silver Jack Hammer]

This post started with 336A started thinking about Keith loads with 2400 and 336A mentioned he has a Ruger flattop in .44 Special. Never would I suggest Larry Gibson or anyone else not use full magnum loads in their flattop 50th Anniversary Ruger .44 Magnum. 336A states he has a Ruger flattop calibrated in .44 Special. The 50th Anniversary is a different model.
Handloader #244 Brian Pierce writes two loads for the Ruger New Model .44 Magnum 50th Anniversary flattop in 2400; 21.0 gr Keith boolit 1,420 fps and 20 gr of 2400 for 1,384 fps. These loads are within SAAMI specs maximum average pressure for the .44 Magnum 36,000 psi.
Handloader #260 Brian Pierce lists for the Ruger New Model flattop with a max load for 2400 at 17.0 gr with the Keith bullet at 1,211 fps. Keith’s 17.5 gr of 2400 in solid head .44 Special generates 25,000 psi. He mentions that similar velocities can be achieved with other newer powders such as Pistol Power which achieves 1,000 fps with 8.0 gr and less than 15,500 psi. But Pistol Power is not what 336A was pondering.
Dave Scovill states that 12 gr of Blue Dot is absolute max for the .44 Special in the Colt SAA. The N frame Smith and Wesson WinMike mentions is rated to withstand much greater pressure, than the Colt SAA, namely 36,000 psi. I routinely loaded my Super Redhawk with 14.5 gr of Blue Dot under a 300 grain bullet and that combination was comfortable to shoot all day, but it is not relevant to 336A’s post here.
The Speer #14 was published in 2007, 336A’s Ruger flattop .44 Special was manufactured after the manual was published so I mentioned it because the Ruger frame size of the .44 Special is commensurate with what Ruger calls the New Model Vaquero which presumably Allen Jones posts to caution on.
I have my own loading data for the Super Redhawk, Super Blackhawks, Blackhawk New Model 45 Long Colt, Old Model Ruger 3 screw .357’s, along with a few Model 29’s I’ve owned and Colt SAA’s. I just hope to be helpful in the conversation.

[Larry Gibson]

Silver Jack Hammer

Mucho gracias for clearing that up, much appreciated.

I get the same velocity out of my Ruger 50th Anniversary 44 Magnum FT that Brian does with 21 gr 2400 under the 44-450-K bullet. It also measures less than the SAAMI MAP in a tightly chambered, no barrel cylinder gap, Contender test barrel. The 22 gr Alliant 2400 load under the same bullet in WW cases with Fed 150 primers runs 33,800 psi(M43) out of the same Contender test barrel. It clocks 1462 fps out of the Ruger FTBH. I've tested that load 22 gr load 3 times now with 10 shot test strings (as does SAAMI use 10 shot test strings) using 2 different lots of Alliant 2400 and it remains very consistent and under the SAAMI MAP. As you state the SAAMI MAP for the 44 Magnum is 36,000 psi(piezo transducer).

Your information is helpful as I now will understand when someone mentions the psi limit on "flat tops". I always appreciate learning something on this forum, thanks.

Larry Gibson

[336A]

Hold the horses a minute I did not say that I own a Ruger FT .44 SPL in my OP. I did however state that Brian Pearce used the Keith load when he wrote an article for then new at the time Ruger Lipsey .44 SPL with no ill efects.

That lead me to ask if Keith's other loads such as those for the .41, and .44 magnum could also be consisered safe/relevant as well. Nor did I say that I was going to run right to my loading bench and load right up to the gunnells without working up first. For the record I own a Ruger NM .41 magnum, not a .44 SPL or a .44 magnum.

As far as the .41 magnum it is concerned IMHO that keiths load for this cartridge is safe. The reason for me saying that is that most reloading manuals show a MAX load as 19gr of 2400 with a 210gr JHP/JSP bullet. A cast bullet is most certainly going to operate at lower pressure due to it having a lower friction coefficient than a like weight jacketed bullet.

[44MAG#1]

Just for the edification of others. I have a Flattop Ruger in 44 Special and also a Blackhawk in 45 colt.
I measured both cylinders and this is what I found.
Ruger Flattop in 44 Special: Outside of cylinder mikes 1.675 inches. Outside walls thickness measures .085 inches and the inside wall thickness measures .064 inches.
Ruger Blackhawk in 45 Colt: Outside of cylinder measures 1.730 inches. Outside walls thickness is .075 inches and the inside walls measures .066 inches.

Now if the 45 Colt Blackhawk is deemed safe by none other than John Linebaugh at 32,000 CUP's what would the rating of the Flattop 44 Special be?
Linebaugh is considered by many as being very knowlegeable on the 45 colt.
Would anyone want to say that the 44 Special Flattop would be any weaker?
Now if ruger themselves chamber cylinders for the 45 Colt NEW Vaquero in 45 ACP and don't warn anyone against using +P loads in them what would the 44 Special Flattop be safe with with the smaller holes in the same cylinder size with thicker outside wall thickness and much thicker inside wall thickness?
I know how to read a set of calipers I might add.

Makes one pause and think doesn't it.

[jblee10]

I have used Elmer's load of 13.5 grains of 2400 behind a 358429 loaded in 38 Special cases. I use it in a Rossi 92 lever action though. And it's a great load in my rifle but the 92 is a stout action. There is no way I would shoot that in a 38 even if it fit in the cylinder. In a 357 mag revolver I would start low and work up. I probably wouldn't go all the way to 13.5 grains for a handgun.

[beagle]

I kind of snicker at .44 Special "Keith" loads. I asked Brian Pierce once if he would help us "beat up" on Ruger for a .44 Special Blackhawk/Super Blackhawk and he wrote back that Ruger was afraid that reloaders would hot rod them above safe levels. Several months later, Lipseys came out with their .44 Specials and I bought one and enjoy shooting it at the 1,000 FPS level which I realize is over factory velocities.

The point I'm trying to make is why take what we ask for and try and make it do something it wasn't intended to do? If you want to play with Elmer's loads, grab a SBH or a Redhawk .44 Mag and have at it.

I enjoy the .44 Special for what it is...a nice shooting, accurate, easy to load caliber./beagle

[PacMan]

Just for the edification of others. I have a Flattop Ruger in 44 Special and also a Blackhawk in 45 colt.
I measured both cylinders and this is what I found.
Ruger Flattop in 44 Special: Outside of cylinder mikes 1.675 inches. Outside walls thickness measures .085 inches and the inside wall thickness measures .064 inches.
Ruger Blackhawk in 45 Colt: Outside of cylinder measures 1.730 inches. Outside walls thickness is .075 inches and the inside walls measures .066 inches.

Now if the 45 Colt Blackhawk is deemed safe by none other than John Linebaugh at 32,000 CUP's what would the rating of the Flattop 44 Special be?
Linebaugh is considered by many as being very knowlegeable on the 45 colt.
Would anyone want to say that the 44 Special Flattop would be any weaker?
Now if ruger themselves chamber cylinders for the 45 Colt NEW Vaquero in 45 ACP and don't warn anyone against using +P loads in them what would the 44 Special Flattop be safe with with the smaller holes in the same cylinder size with less thick outside wall thickness and much less thick inside wall thickness?
I know how to read a set of calipers I might add.

Makes one pause and think doesn't it.

So the 44 cylinder is smaller in dia,has thicker outside walls and thinner inside walls than the 45.Did i get that right?

[44MAG#1]

"The point I'm trying to make is why take what we ask for and try and make it do something it wasn't intended to do? If you want to play with Elmer's loads, grab a SBH or a Redhawk .44 Mag and have at it."

I think that is a very true statement but, that could be applied to may guns. If one has to use extra heavy bullets in a 44 Mag when it was developed around a 240 to 250 gr bullet why not grab a 454 Casull since they have been available now for several years and it one has to use real heavy bullets in a 454 why not grab a 475 linebaugh blah blah blah.

[44MAG#1]

Yeah you got it. Thinner only by .002 inch too.
Gives one something to thnk about.

[PacMan]

44mag#1
Its the last half of your last paragraph that is throwing me off.

[44MAG#1]

I will reword that okay. Hows that. I had less on my mind.

[Larry Gibson]

336A

As far as the .41 magnum it is concerned IMHO that keiths load for this cartridge is safe. The reason for me saying that is that most reloading manuals show a MAX load as 19gr of 2400 with a 210gr JHP/JSP bullet. A cast bullet is most certainly going to operate at lower pressure due to it having a lower friction coefficient than a like weight jacketed bullet.

Interesting:smile:

I also am a fan of the 41 magnum having had a couple M57s, a couple M58s and 2 Ruger BHs. I currently have a NMBH Bisley with 7 1/2" barrel. I've used the Lee 175 SWC and 195 SWC, RCBS 41-210-SWC and Lyman's 410610 in all except the M58s (like an idiot I traded both off:-() . Of course I've also shot a few jacketed bullets through them also. Unfortunately I've not picked up a Contender barrel yet so I haven't pressure tested any loads.

I've found that 18.5 -19 gr is about max of 2400 under the 195 SWC and the RCBS 210 SWC in S&Ws. The extraction gets "hard" when the ejector is used. I've found that with 20 gr 2400 the cases just fall out of my Ruger NM. I see in the #3 Cast Bullet Handbook Lyman has the max load of 2400 at 20 gr for a 212 cast bullet and at 18.5 for the 215 gr 410610. The new #4 CBHB has 17.1 gr of 2400 as the max for the RCBS 210 SWC.

I don't use 2400 under the 210 jacketed as I prefer H110. Under the 210 Hornady JHP 20.5 gr was about max in the S&Ws but i use 23.5 gr under 210 XTPs for 1475 fps out of the Ruger Bisley and again the empty cases litterly fall out of the chambers.

I'm hard pressed these days when walking out the door as to which to take; the 41 Magnum Bisley or the 44 Magnum FTBH. Both are top performers and they "gitter done". :-)

Larry Gibson

[336A]

Thanks for the great info Larry. I haven't gone over 18.5gr of 2400 with jacketed bullets in my .41. I reached my recoil threshold and accuracy was very good considering my modest skill. For a more sedate load I'm using 8.5gr Unique and a 215gr SWC, it too is accurate. I have pretty much left H110/296 for 2400 and now I'm thinking about giving AA#9 a try as well.

[Larry Gibson]

8.5gr Unique and a 215gr SWC

That is a sweet load in the .41:D

:lovebooli

Larry Gibson

[Char-Gar]

I have always used 2400 for full snort magnum loads and Unique for special loads and less than full snort magnum rounds. Been doing it for many years and I see no reason to change.

Some of Elmer's top end loads were at or over the red line. It has nothing to do with new vs. old 2400. It is the same powder as Larry proved. Elmer just ran them hot, pershaps too hot for most of us today.

I started getting very flat primers with 22/2400/Keith bullet load back in the early 60's and droped back to 21 or 20 grains.

I would suggest that some of you guys read too many gun magazines and let the authors do you thinking for you.

[GLynn41]

I have used lots of 2400 and have a new pound of the stuff elmer is the reason -- all of the .41s and that is all I have -- do not normally like the 20 gr and and sometime the 19 gr //I am talking about cast 220-230 Keith -- from LAH or Lyman 410459-lead head-- or a saeco mold I did have
I shot last week my 6" VH Dan Wesson and was using 18 gr with 230 keith from LAh, saceo mold and Lyman //with clean chambers most were fine but the lead head were sticky- lightly// I have an old lyman cast boolit hand book - and it even goes to 21 gr with the 410459- -- but normally I shoot 18 sometimes 19 gr-- also have found AA#9 pretty close to 2400--which is probablely a big well duh--my two TC 10" .41s also did not like the 19 gr load-- for mine it is pretty much 18-18.5-- i alos use in my 4" tracker with cut back hulls 1.1" and Keith over 13 gr --very pleasant but have clock them yet- should be according to John Taffin about 1100+ -- I only use two powders-2400 and 296 --

[StrawHat]

Does anyone remember the results of testing the 22/2400 load by the White Labratories? I believe the pressures were a bit higher than recommended by the factories. Did I continue to use the load. Well, yes, for a while. But then backed off to 21 grains and eventually just switched to the 45 long Colt. Not only can the Keith loads be hard on the revolvers but they can also be hard on the shooter. 22/2400 was rough on my wrists.

[44man]

Does anyone remember the results of testing the 22/2400 load by the White Labratories? I beleive the pressures were a bit higher than recommended by the factories. Did I continue to use the load. Well, yes, for a while. But then backed off to 21 grains and eventually just switched to the 45 long Colt. Not only can the Keith loads be hard on the revolvers but they can also be hard on the shooter. 22/2400 was rough on my wrists.
Long ago I used the 22 gr load with the 429421 all the time. A wonderful load.
It was not hard on guns, even the S&W 29.
Factory loads would make you look at the gun to see if it blew up! :mrgreen:
But now, as old as I am, the .44 with anything is a ***** cat. I moved to 296 long ago and will never go back.
I will not put down 2400 because my original flat top with a 7-1/2" barrel was so stinking accurate I was shooting from 400 to 600 yards with it.
I have a huge problem with anyone saying a one gr difference in the load recoils easier. If you can feel that, get a .38! :mrgreen:
I am 74 and have fallen in love with the .500 JRH in the BFR. thought the .475 was fun until I got this one.
I love the .44 still and always will but hold little for those that claim it is too much.
Some buy a .357 and shoot .38's only, .44 special loads in the .44 mag, then those that buy a .500 S&W and are looking for 800 fps loads!!!!!
Yeah, I know but just WHY DID YOU BUY THE GUN? Did you know they make .22's?
I will be harsh on some, sorry. You bought the gun and you can learn to shoot it.
The biggest problem is those that want light guns or real short barrels in the large guns. If paper could hold pressure some would buy a paper gun because they will not have to carry weight. Those things hurt! A .357 can hurt. No one in their right mind will buy a 6# rifle in .577 or .600 and some bitch about an M1 in 30-06. But they want a 3# revolver in a .500 S&W when a .44 tears them up. Then they want a 300 fps load because the gun is too much.

[looseprojectile]

44Man is a year older than me, he thinks a lot like I do.

Back when there were no .357 brass to be had I took the 38 special to the limit.
Ruger 357 flattop. Then when they started making them, a .44 Super Blackhawk
Was acquired. The old .44 special cases worked really good in that.

Now, dont do as I do, or did, please follow the loading manuals.

The blast of the four and five eights .357 Ruger was magnificient to behold.
The recoil of the Super Blackhawk was something to experience. The barrel would end up pointing vertical after each shot.
We were really having fun. Had to put a really heavy crimp on the loads to keep the powder from pushing the boolit out.

I proved to myself that "You can't get too much 2400 or H110 in a .357 or .44 magnum cartridge to hurt the gun".[Ruger single actions only please]. I believe that a lot of the excess powder just blows out the muzzle. If you use any powder faster than 2400 you are really on your own and treading on the SUPER light fantastic.
I suspect that Ruger knows that their guns will survive pressures in excess of a hundred thousand pounds. How else would so few have blown up??

I am only guessing and telling just my personal experience and feelings here. I had no equipment to measure pressure or velocity fiftyfive years ago.
It's a wonder and testament to gun designers that I didn't blow myself up.

Life is good

[45 2.1]

Some of Elmer's top end loads were at or over the red line. It has nothing to do with new vs. old 2400. It is the same powder as Larry proved. Elmer just ran them hot, pershaps too hot for most of us today. Yep, Elmer blew some sixguns up and had them rebuilt so he knew where he could go. Realize also that the cartridge brass back in the 40's wasn't quite as good as we had it in the 60's and the superior brass we've had since the 90's. The difference could easily account for the increased charge he used. Not too many people have actually tested the load, his era brass and lead/tin alloys as he used them in the present time and components available now.

[Alan]

I was in a gun shop many years ago in Nacogdoches, TX. A gent had brought a Super Blackhawk .44 in to have it drilled & tapped for scope bases, and he was telling us about his gun. He wasn't all that happy with it, since he had had to send it in to Ruger to have a bulged cylinder replaced. He described the load - it was either 2 or 4 grains more than Elmer's favorite, under the 265 gr Hornady soft point. I remarked that I bet he backed down from that one, and he replied that no, he still used it since it was a tack driver. o_0

[Silver Jack Hammer]

45 2.1, are you saying thicker brass is keeping guns together or allowing heavier loads today? Brass doesn’t keep a gun together, steel does. We’ve had some case head failures here lately, blown a magazine out of an auto pistol and a set of grips off an auto pistol but the gun is intact. Case failure doesn’t blow steel, a blown gun is from overpressure.

I am a firm believer that American steel today is superior to what Elmer Keith had available to him. Smart handgunners are buying better guns today than what was produced in the 40’s and 60’s. Yes some of those old guns were and are beautiful, but todays guns are better.

[giz189]

I have used lots of 2400 and have a new pound of the stuff elmer is the reason -- all of the .41s and that is all I have -- do not normally like the 20 gr and and sometime the 19 gr //I am talking about cast 220-230 Keith -- from LAH or Lyman 410459-lead head-- or a saeco mold I did have
I shot last week my 6" VH Dan Wesson and was using 18 gr with 230 keith from LAh, saceo mold and Lyman //with clean chambers most were fine but the lead head were sticky- lightly// I have an old lyman cast boolit hand book - and it even goes to 21 gr with the 410459- -- but normally I shoot 18 sometimes 19 gr-- also have found AA#9 pretty close to 2400--which is probablely a big well duh--my two TC 10" .41s also did not like the 19 gr load-- for mine it is pretty much 18-18.5-- i alos use in my 4" tracker with cut back hulls 1.1" and Keith over 13 gr --very pleasant but have clock them yet- should be according to John Taffin about 1100+ -- I only use two powders-2400 and 296 -- Glynn41, do you have any unburned powder in your 41's barrels with the 2400 and a Large Pistol Primer?

[336A]

BTW anyone happen to have any chrono data for a 220gr Keith bullet over 19gr of 2400 for the .41 magnum?

[grendelbane]

It has been several years since I have tested any .41 magnum loads. Back in the day, my 4" model 58 would almost hit 1300 FPS with 18 grains of 2400 and the 220 grain bullets.

In my 6" model 57, velocity was over 1300, but I can't find my notes from that period, and my memory is a trifle rusty.

19 grains might produce a tad bit more. The 18 grain loads shot well, and kicked hard enough for even a young man. Nowadays, I might drop down even lower.

[white eagle]

fwiw
I have shot Elmers load of 22.0 gr /2400 in my SBH with a 240/250 gr boolit
I experienced 0 problems in my gun I have however started using heavier boolits and have adjusted my load of 2400 accordingly

[sixshot]

Don't know what issue it was in but Brian Pearce did a write up in Handloader where he used 2, maybe 3 guns, all in the same day, same bullet & equal charges of Hercules 2400 & Alliant 2400 & always got higher velocity (higher pressures) with the new Alliant powder. I'm sure someone will find it before I do.
I never, ever lean really hard on any caliber, if I need to go higher I move to a bigger gun/ case combination, why stress the gun?
Since the 60's I've used 21 grs of 2400 in my 44's for a top end load, 17 grs of 2400 in my 41 maggie's with a 230 gr Keith & in my 357's I've shot many thousands of 13.5 grs of 2400 in a 38 special case with the Keith bullet, this latter load had been in Ruger Blackhawks, not the short cylinders of the model 28's, etc. My everyday load in Ruger 45's has been 9 grs of Unique & my hunt em down & shoot em load has been 18.5 grs of 2400, both with the Keith, #452424.
Lots of game has got serious lead poisioning from the above loads & I've never had a bobble in any sixgun with the above loads. Some people are recoil proof, usually the young guys, & some guys flinch from the recoil of a staple gun. Still goes back to the basics, which is, power means nothing without accuracy, accuracy means nothing without penetration & penetration means nothing without the proper bullet for the job.......... oh, & I'm picking North Carolina over Kentucky!!!

Dick