farmersamm
05-23-2016, 05:11 PM
Been playing with the new 44, and after having a ton of fun with H-110, decided it was time to find something that wouldn't wear out a considerable investment. Time to slow it down a bit.
To give you a bit of background..........I'm a recreational shooter. I like to slap steel plate around for a bit for fun. I don't hunt, I'm partial to beef, and don't see a change in the near, or distant future. And about the only thing I compete in, is the dash to see who can get to the buffet line before the chicken legs are all gone (I'm partial to dark meat).
Don't drive a diesel dually, with a chip that makes the motor belch clouds of noxious smoke. Drove a truck for years, and own two Class 8 semi's. I got the real thing, and don't need to play the 'my ***** are bigger than your *****' thing at my age. I'm a geezer:grin:
Hadn't picked up a gun in near on 39yrs. Got back into it while attending a get-together up in Washington State a while back. I shoot steel for fun. Besides the fun of shooting, there's the fun of welding it all back together once it's abused.
Anyways......after playing with the H-110, being amazed at the muzzle blast, and ring of fire, I decided twas time to settle down a bit. After all, the Super Redhawk costs about as much as a new gearbox for the hydraulic pump on the hay swather. Time to get real. I don't like replacing a gearbox, and I'd feel real stupid replacing an expensive toy due to it loosening up.
Test gun: Ruger Super Redhawk 7.5" barrel
Powder: HP-38 (Yeah, it's not at the top of most peoples list)
Primer: Winchester LP
Bullet: Lee 90285, 200gr flat point
Alloy: 12.5 BHN (whatever comes in the package from Ebay, +- some linotype as seen fit)
The Loads:
8gr...1069fps...17fps spread
9gr...1164fps...30fps spread
10gr...1273...28fps spread
11gr...1337fps...29fps spread
10.5gr...1322fps...32fps spread (indicates a more efficient load than the 11gr)
It's not screaming hot, but it's a bit North of what your 45ACP will accomplish, and not something you'd like to put your foot in front of. And it keeps that shiny new gun shiny, and still tight.
The data is available from Hodgdon, but like all data, is suspect in my mind. All about the variables ya know. My results, using published data, generally vary. Tis what it is.
Published stuff is just that......published, not written in stone. I prefer to start low, and work up. The observations are the best yardstick I guess.
168711
Left, to right, are the loads.
First load...8gr
Second load...9gr
Third load...10gr
Fourth load...11gr
Fifth load...10.5gr
Start to see primer flow at 11gr, tone it back to 10.5gr, and see the same amount of primer flow. Tells ya that 10.5gr is about the most efficient load. Not much loss in velocity. Primer flow about same as 11gr. You got some pressure goin' on at this point.
Some closing points...........
It's insane to take published loads for bullet weight alone. It doesn't take into consideration seating depth. Seating depth is one of the biggest determiners of pressure. All bullets aren't created equal.
The Lee #90285 us a pretty poor choice for magnum loads. The crimping groove (cannelure for y'all tech nerds) is simply too shallow. The thing tends to move at higher velocities/recoil. You can increase crimping pressure, but you'll reach a point where the OAL length is shortened with the higher crimping pressure. This can be overcome by chronoing (that a word??) the loads, and adjusting accordingly. At least check the velocity at the harder crimp. Remember that you're increasing seating depth with a harder crimp, or decreasing case length due to compression. I have observed no change in bullet position with pretty mild loads, not with hotter loads....it simply likes to move under recoil. The stupid crimp groove is only .0045 in depth. Compare that with other bullets.........the Lee 105 SWC has a much more generous crimp depth. Dunno what they were thinking.
Case malleability might be a contributing factor.......I'm using Winchester brass for now. Starline is much less malleable, and might hold a crimp better.
To give you a bit of background..........I'm a recreational shooter. I like to slap steel plate around for a bit for fun. I don't hunt, I'm partial to beef, and don't see a change in the near, or distant future. And about the only thing I compete in, is the dash to see who can get to the buffet line before the chicken legs are all gone (I'm partial to dark meat).
Don't drive a diesel dually, with a chip that makes the motor belch clouds of noxious smoke. Drove a truck for years, and own two Class 8 semi's. I got the real thing, and don't need to play the 'my ***** are bigger than your *****' thing at my age. I'm a geezer:grin:
Hadn't picked up a gun in near on 39yrs. Got back into it while attending a get-together up in Washington State a while back. I shoot steel for fun. Besides the fun of shooting, there's the fun of welding it all back together once it's abused.
Anyways......after playing with the H-110, being amazed at the muzzle blast, and ring of fire, I decided twas time to settle down a bit. After all, the Super Redhawk costs about as much as a new gearbox for the hydraulic pump on the hay swather. Time to get real. I don't like replacing a gearbox, and I'd feel real stupid replacing an expensive toy due to it loosening up.
Test gun: Ruger Super Redhawk 7.5" barrel
Powder: HP-38 (Yeah, it's not at the top of most peoples list)
Primer: Winchester LP
Bullet: Lee 90285, 200gr flat point
Alloy: 12.5 BHN (whatever comes in the package from Ebay, +- some linotype as seen fit)
The Loads:
8gr...1069fps...17fps spread
9gr...1164fps...30fps spread
10gr...1273...28fps spread
11gr...1337fps...29fps spread
10.5gr...1322fps...32fps spread (indicates a more efficient load than the 11gr)
It's not screaming hot, but it's a bit North of what your 45ACP will accomplish, and not something you'd like to put your foot in front of. And it keeps that shiny new gun shiny, and still tight.
The data is available from Hodgdon, but like all data, is suspect in my mind. All about the variables ya know. My results, using published data, generally vary. Tis what it is.
Published stuff is just that......published, not written in stone. I prefer to start low, and work up. The observations are the best yardstick I guess.
168711
Left, to right, are the loads.
First load...8gr
Second load...9gr
Third load...10gr
Fourth load...11gr
Fifth load...10.5gr
Start to see primer flow at 11gr, tone it back to 10.5gr, and see the same amount of primer flow. Tells ya that 10.5gr is about the most efficient load. Not much loss in velocity. Primer flow about same as 11gr. You got some pressure goin' on at this point.
Some closing points...........
It's insane to take published loads for bullet weight alone. It doesn't take into consideration seating depth. Seating depth is one of the biggest determiners of pressure. All bullets aren't created equal.
The Lee #90285 us a pretty poor choice for magnum loads. The crimping groove (cannelure for y'all tech nerds) is simply too shallow. The thing tends to move at higher velocities/recoil. You can increase crimping pressure, but you'll reach a point where the OAL length is shortened with the higher crimping pressure. This can be overcome by chronoing (that a word??) the loads, and adjusting accordingly. At least check the velocity at the harder crimp. Remember that you're increasing seating depth with a harder crimp, or decreasing case length due to compression. I have observed no change in bullet position with pretty mild loads, not with hotter loads....it simply likes to move under recoil. The stupid crimp groove is only .0045 in depth. Compare that with other bullets.........the Lee 105 SWC has a much more generous crimp depth. Dunno what they were thinking.
Case malleability might be a contributing factor.......I'm using Winchester brass for now. Starline is much less malleable, and might hold a crimp better.