Why can't the S&W M24 take M29 pressures...or can it?

[WallyM3]

I've been pawing through all the data and other information I can find in my manuals and on line for loading the 44 Special. Most sources suggest loads in the 45 ACP neighborhood (for a 200gr. bullet or boolit), but a couple of generally reputable sources publish numbers that purportedly produce 40,000 psi (not cup), a good 10% higher than SAAMI limits. :shock:

The source cautions: "Only to be used in guns in good condition and made after World War II.", tantalizingly omitting what firearm they used to test these loads (though the barrel length of 6-1/2" is noted - coincidentally Smith's target barrel length).

I'm tempted to explore the possibilities of these hot loads in N-frame Smiths chambered for 44 Special (all dash-something).

But before I go blowing things up, I'd like to get the benefit of any member experiences out there.

[MtGun44]

When was the gun made? If made after the 29s were produced, odds are extremely
high that the only real difference is the short chamber cut.

Bill

[Deep Six]

Some will say the Model 29 steel gets a different heat treatment than the 24. 40,000 PSI is +P for .44 Magnum. Although a lot of people don't like to hear it, S&W N-frames are probably the "weakest" of the mainstream .44 mag sixguns on the market today. Personally, I wouldn't put 40KSI rounds through either a 24 or a 29. If you really want to test the loads, I would go find a Redhawk.

Also, why do you want 40KSI special loads? The special is a great cartridge and some really awesome sixguns are so chambered. But 40KSI is why the 44 Magnum was invented....

[WallyM3]

All the guns are post-1983.

I wouldn't want to fire a 40k psi load even in a M29. I merely cite these sources as evidence that it's possible to get much more out of the 44 Special than most of the load books (written with the lawyer's OK) suggest, and was wondering if others had dabbled in this realm. Personally, I think of the 44 Magnum as a carbine cartridge.

I'm not a handgun hunter which is where the 44M, 460 and 500 shine.

My usual reloading efforts tend towards lighter and lighter loads with funky, old fashion boolits, but I'd like to have something authoritative for the 3" (see below). Both are 24-3s.

98360

[Outpost75]

Ask any skilled revolver smith about S&W Cylinder backspin.

[WallyM3]

OK.

Are there any skilled revolver smiths out there that will discuss "S&W cylinder backspin"?

[dubber123]

OK.

Are there any skilled revolver smiths out there that will discuss "S&W cylinder backspin"?

I've heard about it plenty, but have never personally had it happen in my .44's or .45's, and I have shot a good amount of full power loads, 240's at 1,400+, 300's at 1,200+ in the 6" .44, 315's at close to 1,200 from the 4" .44, and 320's at 1,150 from my 4" .45 Colt. The only S&W I had experience back spinning was a .500 S&W that did it on a regular basis. Thankfully it wasn't my gun.

[WallyM3]

Drubber, where you at in VT?

I've never heard of it before. I suppose if you make enough guns, some mechanical vulnerability will be revealed. There have been over 6 million Model 10s alone made. I suppose a few of them hiccupped.

By 44, I assume you mean Mag? Or Special?

[dmize]

Personally I only shoot italicized loads in Rugers.
As has been said previously the 44 Special is a spectacular cartridge in its own rights. All of my loading manuals show bullets heavier than 200 grains. The famous Skeeter Load comes to mind.
I may be wrong but I believe backspin happens,(have only heard of it happening on 29's,629's and X Frames,so I assume recoil plays a substantial part), when the hammer rebounds enough to unlock the cylinder and allows it to turn back on the previously fired cylinder. Since I have 17 Ruger Single Actions and 8 Ruger Double Actions and no Smiths I cannot comment more that what I have read.

[44MAG#1]

I have had it happen. The cylinder rotates back one chamber so when you cock the gun the fired chamber comes up under the hammer.
The 44 Special can be loaded to within 10 to 12 percent velocity with 16 or 17 percent less powder than that of the 44 Mag with 250 gr cast with a load that from sources are under 30000 PSI.
A FT Blackhawk will easily take it as well as an N-frame Smith while burning less powder.
If you can't do it with 10 to 12 percent less velocity with a 250 from a 44 special then you cant do it with a full 44 mag.
My 45/8's FT Blackhawk 44 Special will do 1150 with a 250 Keith with ease with a more than safe enough load of 2400.
What will another 100 FPS get you?

[WallyM3]

Thanks, dmize. I need to do a mechanical "think through" about that.

Is this a phenomenon that Keith ever mentioned in his experiments with hot loads?

44MAG#1: I don't have a velocity goal in mind, but I was musing on the "efficiency" issue (if you will) involved in "souping up" the 44 Special to solid 4-digit performance (with jacketed, HP bullets of around 200 gr) for close range work.

Do springs and gunk enter into the equation at all (meaning back-spin, which after all is a malfunction).

[dmize]

Covering my ***.....The only things of Elmers' I have read is SIXGUNS and HELL I WAS THERE. I recall no mention of him experiencing that problem.

[WallyM3]

Maybe he might not, anyway. But I'll bet he went well into "unpublished" territory with his 44 Spec loads.

I don't want to get carried away with this notion, or project the image that I'm wanting to get high 44 Magnum performance out of a 44 Special Smith. Handloader, Issue #25, lists a velocity of 1,380fps (6-1/2" bbl.) from 14gr. of Herco with Ideal 429303.

I like that boolit!

[Piedmont]

The gun is strong but it is no fun to shoot with heavier loads since it is so light. I don't even like Skeeter's load in mine (7.5 Unique, 250 Keith), so lowered it to 6.5 grains. After shooting that a while, I decided all I am going to do with the revolver is shoot targets and aluminum cans, neither of which require a 250 grain bullet, so I bought a 195 grain bullet mold. From here on out I will pretend it is a .44-40.

[WallyM3]

I don't much like taking punishment, either, but there's a good bit of confidence riding on one's right hip when the load is hot.

Otherwise, I shoot very light for pleasure.

I used to do some plinking with a .500 Nitro with light loads. No more.

[dubber123]

Drubber, where you at in VT?

I've never heard of it before. I suppose if you make enough guns, some mechanical vulnerability will be revealed. There have been over 6 million Model 10s alone made. I suppose a few of them hiccupped.



By 44, I assume you mean Mag? Or Special?

I'm about 10 minutes from your house. :) Yes, the 2 .44's I worked with were mags, I do have a NIB 624 6" I have to wring out some day.

[dmize]

Since I am fortunate enough.....thank God and my wife.......to own handguns from 22 to 500. I came to the conclusion to shoot my revolvers for accuracy first then tinker with power.
50 holes from 250 grain bullets at 1,000 fps in a 10 ring or 1 of those holes in an eye socket will make you a better and much happier shooter........

[44MAG#1]

44MAG#1: I don't have a velocity goal in mind, but I was musing on the "efficiency" issue (if you will) involved in "souping up" the 44 Special to solid 4-digit performance (with jacketed, HP bullets of around 200 gr) for close range work.

The situation should parallel with lightweight bullets in the situation you have with 200 gr bullets.
Again if you are 100 fps under a 44Mag why be concerned about pressure as long as it's safe?

[Wally]

I use the Lee 208 WC in mine for plinking cans... Sadly Lee discontinued it...their 218 SWC is a good substitute.



The gun is strong but it is no fun to shoot with heavier loads since it is so light. I don't even like Skeeter's load in mine (7.5 Unique, 250 Keith), so lowered it to 6.5 grains. After shooting that a while, I decided all I am going to do with the revolver is shoot targets and aluminum cans, neither of which require a 250 grain bullet, so I bought a 195 grain bullet mold. From here on out I will pretend it is a .44-40.

[enfieldphile]

I'm not a skilled revolver smith, but I recall the entire set of circumstances.

In 1988, S&W did a study. They even engaged the services of 2 non-factory men in studying the entire issue of durability of the 29. Crane drop open, cylinder backspin, timing, end shake, lockwork, etc. were all studied. Men were using the 29 in metallic silhouette and the guns were having all these issues. Metallic silhouette shooting burned up a lot more rounds in a short time then most casual 29 owners shoot in 6 moths! The somewhat plain-jane Ruger SBH held up much better then the slick, smooth and pretty 29 in Metallic silhouette.

The results of that study led to a service package upgrade (sorry can't recall the number right now) for the 29.

WallyM3 cites: The source cautions: "Only to be used in guns in good condition and made after World War II."

Metallurgy took a huge leap during WWII! The post-WWII guns are better steel then the pre-war guns. Post WWI guns are better then pre-WWI guns. The 1908 New Century S&W .44 Special (AKA Triple-Lock) was the best steel of its day, but not even as good as WWI gun steel.

All types of Metal today are better then the metal of just 35-40 years ago. Even notice how these new cars run 120,000 + miles w/o burning oil or any bad valves? Better metal and better oils!




Are there any skilled revolver smiths out there that will discuss "S&W cylinder backspin"?

[BCRider]

On a gun where the chamber was a hair advanced compared to the forcing cone I could see a rather strong hit as the bullet passes from the cylinder to the forcing cone occurring. And with all the recoil energy pushing and pulling the stop bolt might just jump out of the notch enough to let the cylinder kick back and then relock in the previously fired position.

Certainly there must be some radial kick to produce this. And the only place I can see the radial kick coming from is some throat to forcing cone mis-alignment.

Yes? No? I'm not a proper wheelgun smith. Nor do I play one on TV. But I do stay at Howard Johnson hotels to increase my online believability.... :D

[WallyM3]

Well, the Howard-Johnson's connection surely merits respectful consideration.

I think that I will try the dictum of a compatriot of yours in BC by drawing the mechanical parts, 10 times size, so that I can "walk around" inside the operation and understand what's going on. Physical limits cannot be overcome.

[leftiye]

I don't much like taking punishment, either, but there's a good bit of confidence riding on one's right hip when the load is hot. Otherwise, I shoot very light for pleasure. I used to do some plinking with a .500 Nitro with light loads. No more.

Do some research on .44 penetration (hint: 44s have it in spades). There is only a small portion of a 44 mag's energy used up in perforating a deer or a man. The rest is expended in the backdrop (standersby?). Hot loading a .44 (mag or special) won't matter to the target deer or horse's **** but hardly atall. Study thread in hunting with cast boolits determined that lighter boolits and any ole velocity you like in a 44 special was deer medicine. Exception would be with JHPs where more velocity would provide betterer expansion. With JHPs, you have a problem for the 44 special - all of the JHPs are made to expand at 44 mag. velocities. I'm not a "make your magnum rifle into a pistol by downloading it" kind of a guy, but .44s have much more kickazz than poor little ole Barack's sons need. That's why the .45 acp is still going so strong. Maybe a 200 grain HP (or 180, or 160 grains) loaded up to expand (you'll still have more than .357 energy levels)?

[GaryN]

I was trying to capture a 44 magnum slug I had cast. It was a Mihec 503 hollowpoint. I lined up eight milk jugs full of water. It went through all of them.

[gunsbrad]

O.K. folks I am here to throw a wrench in the works. Assuming the same grade of steel the 24 and 29 are not the same. The cylinder of the 24 is shorter while the frame window is the same size. This means that a relatively thin section of barrel has to protrude through the frame UNSUPPORTED to reach the cylinder. This is most definitely weaker than the 29.

However, the 24 is plenty strong enough for the healthy pressure tested load data that is out there. All that I have seen is under 30,000psi usually around 27,000psi. With these loads you could get up to 1,200fps from a 250 cast boolit, and you should be able to shoot them forever.

I suspect shooting a few 40,000psi loads probably wont hurt anything, but this old boy ain't gonna try. 250s at 1200 is good with me.

Brad Hurt

[Dan Cash]

O.K. folks I am here to throw a wrench in the works. Assuming the same grade of steel the 24 and 29 are not the same. The cylinder of the 24 is shorter while the frame window is the same size. This means that a relatively thin section of barrel has to protrude through the frame UNSUPPORTED to reach the cylinder. This is most definitely weaker than the 29.......

.....Brad Hurt

Brad, I think if you will check, the "unsupported" barrel section to which you refer is much thicker than the chamber walls of the cylinder so the point is moot. However, if one wants .44 Mag. performance, get a .44 Magnum revolver. Hodroding cars or guns reduces their useful life.
Dan

[WallyM3]

I lost track of my own thread there for a while.

This contemplated project (that of getting solid 4-figure velocity from light jacketed bullets) is for a very limited number of loads. In fact, I have two boxes of 100 Hornady 200gr. XTPs and two boxes of 40 Barnes TAC-XPs to work with and that'll be it. As observed, a steady diet of hot stuff prematurely fatigues both gun and shooter.

Handloader Magazine claims an N-frame-safe velocity of 1,142 fps for Speer's 200gr. Gold Dot (with Clays) and 1,091 fps for the Hornady bullet (with Herco). Extrapolating Lyman's data, these loads would likely be below 20,000 CUP. In fact, the highest recommended charge is still below Lyman's recommended starting load for 44 Magnum with a 200gr. jacketed bullet.

Pushing the lead bullet (potentially even faster) would be an academic exercise since expansion with a WC moots the thing and 200 gr @ 900 fps is more than plenty.

[Jtarm]

I lost track of my own thread there for a while.

This contemplated project (that of getting solid 4-figure velocity from light jacketed bullets) is for a very limited number of loads. In fact, I have two boxes of 100 Hornady 200gr. XTPs and two boxes of 40 Barnes TAC-XPs to work with and that'll be it. As observed, a steady diet of hot stuff prematurely fatigues both gun and shooter.

Handloader Magazine claims an N-frame-safe velocity of 1,142 fps for Speer's 200gr. Gold Dot (with Clays)

Clays? Seriously? Universal or regular?

You had better double check that. If HL actually published a load that generates 1100 FPS with Clays, I'd contact them to make sure it wasn't a mis-print.

I used to get great accuracy from a. 6.5" 624 with 16.5 2400 behind a 429421, then decided I may as well use a magnum.

The LBT ogival WC makes a near-wadcutter-sized hole, but has a bit more range thanks to the slight ogive .

I sometimes wonder how Elmer Keith & friends achieved magnum velocities in those prewar Smiths & Colts. They probably ruined more than a few.

[WallyM3]

My omission. "Universal Clays", not Clays.

This from Issue #224.

Unique, 9.0 gr. 1,072 fps
Herco, 9.5 gr. 1,091 fps
Universal Clays, 9.5 gr. 1,142 fps. (with an extreme spread of 28)

In an earlier edition, they publish results almost 300 fps faster with Pb, but caution that loads can produce up to 40,000 (beyond SAAMI limits, even for 44 Margum). That's waaaay beyond where I'd want to go.

[mark2935]

Wallym3, Is this just a question or are you looking for a self-defense load? If the first, no problem. If you are looking for a self-defense load, stick with commercial .44spl. ammo. Two reasons: Plaintiff's attorney will paint you as a masked ninja killer who built that bullet just to kill his client. (you lose your house etc. etc. etc.) Recovery time, firing a controlled pair with the special loads will be faster than with mag. loads. Just my thoughts.

Mark#35

[WallyM3]

It's primarily a question, but wrapped in a constraint. If I were to follow through, I'd hope it would be his estate filing the suit and that, given the facts, the case would be "thrown out", or that the jury wouldn't necessarily side with the perp's predicament. Of course, nowadays, you never know...even in Vermont.

Then there's that whole "wrongful death" thing. And the insurance company trying to wriggle out of the Umbrella policy.

The loads that I might ultimately try would be hot 44 Specials, but below 44 Magnum, more or less.

Most factory ammo for the 44 Spec. looks pretty ghastly from where I sit. Round noses, slow speed and all.

I though I might get "Are you out of your mind?" kind of responses, but I see some folks are chewing on this one. Really, all I'd like to achieve is expansion in a 200gr jacketed bullet. It appears that this occurs (with the two bullets I have) at 900 fps. Add some margin for a 3" barrel.

[44MAG#1]

Speer #14 manual, 200 gr Gold Dot designed especially for the 44 Special, 8.6 gr PowerPistol 976 fps. 5.5 inch barrel. I use 9 gr with a 250 cast.
Go up slightly until you reach your goal.
Speers load is loaded to not over 15,500 PSI so you have some squirming room.
In a FT Blackhawk or an N-frame Smith I would use 9.5 gr and think nothing about it. You should be close to your goal in a 4 inch gun. 1000 fps is a 4 digit velocity.

[Firebricker]

IIRC they added the Endurance Package to 29s to sturdy them up not sure what year it was. FB

[Char-Gar]

Back in the early 80's Skeeter Skelton though S&W should reintroduce the Model 24 and asked his readers to flood Smith and Wesson with letter to show the interest level. I dutifully wrote such a letter and in due time Smith and Wesson brought out a short run of 24s in 6.5 and 4 inch barrels. I felt obligated to buy one of the 6.5s and so I did. After these sold out, Smith knew a good thing, and brought out another run in stainless, the 624. Lew Horton got into the act had had some 3 inch round butts made in blue and stainless. I ended up with one of these as well.

As soon as we got our hands on these things, we started to hot rod them a la Elmer Keith. The handgun tolerated the Keith 17.5/2400/240 Keith SWC well, the recoil and muzzle flip of the slim barrels was fierce. We soon quit that nonsense. I have no idea if these will stand 40k PSI loads or not, but I for one have no interest in trying.

If a fellow wants to shoot really fierce 44 loads a model 29 made after the 1989 enhancements is the way to go. After a few hundred full snort rounds in the pre-enhanced lockwork Smiths, backspin will prove to be a real problem.

[Char-Gar]

Wallym3, Is this just a question or are you looking for a self-defense load? If the first, no problem. If you are looking for a self-defense load, stick with commercial .44spl. ammo. Two reasons: Plaintiff's attorney will paint you as a masked ninja killer who built that bullet just to kill his client. (you lose your house etc. etc. etc.) Recovery time, firing a controlled pair with the special loads will be faster than with mag. loads. Just my thoughts.

Mark#35

That is a load of nonsense first foisted on the public by a gun writer and it has never been true. Still it gets passed on and passed around years after it has been discredited.

[dubber123]

I wonder just what makes this back spin occur? My first 629 was made in 1984, and it has digested a bunch of 240 gr. XTP's in the 1,300+ fps. range, and a fair amount of 300 gr. LBT WFN's at 1,200+. All loads were run until I was not happy with extraction feel, then backed off. I have never once had the cylinder unlatch, or spin backwards.. My other 629 is an Endurance package gun, so it doesn't count.

[Char-Gar]

I don't think "wrongful death" is the right area of the law for your point. There is a category of torts, known as "Intentional Torts". It is this classification of torts on which the insurance companies tries to skate.

This is why in civil lawsuits against a shooter, the victim claims the shooting was accidental. The lawyers know that if the shooting was intentional, the insurance company will make for the back door. No insurance means no solvent defendant and no solvent defendant means no pay day.

I am talking Texas law here, who knows what the law is in deep Yankeeland, if they have any law up there. They might still have trial by combat for all I know. :-)

[dubber123]

For what it's worth, I have had better luck getting 50/50 lead boolits to expand reliably from revolvers than any jacketed I have tried. A 50/50 HP'd boolit would be what I would carry. Easier to get speed from as a bonus.

[Char-Gar]

I wonder just what makes this back spin occur? My first 629 was made in 1984, and it has digested a bunch of 240 gr. XTP's in the 1,300+ fps. range, and a fair amount of 300 gr. LBT WFN's at 1,200+. All loads were run until I was not happy with extraction feel, then backed off. I have never once had the cylinder unlatch, or spin backwards.. My other 629 is an Endurance package gun, so it doesn't count.

Cylinder backspin was pretty much an unknown thing until the metal silhouette game came into being. The Smith 29 used took a beating from protracted firing they had never experienced before. That is when backspin became and issue and Smith and Wesson decided to fix the problem, which they did.

[WallyM3]

I don't think "wrongful death" is the right area of the law for your point. There is a category of torts, known as "Intentional Torts". It is this classification of torts on which the insurance companies tries to skate.

This is why in civil lawsuits against a shooter, the victim claims the shooting was accidental. The lawyers know that if the shooting was intentional, the insurance company will make for the back door. No insurance means no solvent defendant and no solvent defendant means no pay day.

I am talking Texas law here, who knows what the law is in deep Yankeeland, if they have any law up there. They might still have trial by combat for all I know. :-)

I thought "Wrongful Death" got OJ.

One set of laws we don't have here is gun laws. It's carry at will.

Why not a 29? Certainly I'd like to add one. However, at the present, there isn't, nor will there likely be an extra $1,000 for another Smith. Least wise, not this month. All I want to do is to push the performance a little beyond the usual written for all 44 Special kind of loads in the handbooks, for a very few rounds.

I don't want to go to 40,000 psi, not even 30,000 likely, but if a J-frame can handle 357 type battering, shouldn't the N-frame digest more than 17,000?

[dubber123]

I have no doubt you'll hit your goal in your Smith. Running it up to 25-30,000 Psi is about doubling the low pressures of most printed loads, and will make a tremendous increase in velocity. I'm still in favor of a softish lead HP, but you should be able to get enough speed out of a lighter jacketed too. I have a box of 180 gr. XTP's here I can drop off if you want to try them too.

[Wally]

I have a Model 24 and a Model 29....I never load the Model 24 hot as I see no reason why to tear it up with such a load. A 220 SWC at 1,000 FPS is plenty powerful IMHO.

[WallyM3]

I have no doubt you'll hit your goal in your Smith. Running it up to 25-30,000 Psi is about doubling the low pressures of most printed loads, and will make a tremendous increase in velocity. I'm still in favor of a softish lead HP, but you should be able to get enough speed out of a lighter jacketed too. I have a box of 180 gr. XTP's here I can drop off if you want to try them too.

That was the very bullet I was looking for when I set out to plan this...whatever it is. I'd love to get my hands on a box.

[Jtarm]

My omission. "Universal Clays", not Clays.

This from Issue #224.

Unique, 9.0 gr. 1,072 fps
Herco, 9.5 gr. 1,091 fps
Universal Clays, 9.5 gr. 1,142 fps. (with an extreme spread of 28)

In an earlier edition, they publish results almost 300 fps faster with Pb, but caution that loads can produce up to 40,000 (beyond SAAMI limits, even for 44 Margum). That's waaaay beyond where I'd want to go.

Sounds good. I looked those up on LoadData.com (Wolfe Publishings database) and I think you'll be fine. They're basically +P, not magnums.

[gunsbrad]

Dan Cash,

You are quite rite that the cylinder walls are thinner than the unsupported section of barrel. However Slightly off timing or a leaded forcing cone and the boolit will slam into this section into what amounts to a partial constriction and forcing cone/rear bbl area has splits. As I said it is not as big a deal on this revolver as others, but it is a deal hence in this area at least it is not as strong as a 29. It is still plenty strong and Keith loads are no problem. This would be as high as I go though.

Brad Hurt

[WallyM3]

"Sounds good. I looked those up on LoadData.com (Wolfe Publishings database) and I think you'll be fine. They're basically +P, not magnums."

That's one of the places I got my numbers. I've ordered reprints from Handloader.