Questions about 44 mag

09outlander

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
77   0   0
Location
Dunnville
So I'm picking up a revolver in 44 mag on the weekend and I will be reloading for it. For plinking I plan on using titegroup/w231 with 240 cast bullets.

For full power loads I plan on using H-110, but I am unsure about what bullets to use. Can I shoot full power loads using 240/300gr cast bullets or should I use FMJ bullets?
 
I shoot nothing but cast 245gr Keith SWC out of my Redhawk, both for plinking (6.0-8.0gr of W231) and full power loads (24.0gr of H110) with great results. Big bore handguns work great with cast bullets and they keep the costs down a bit.


Mark
 
W231 is an excellent powder for lighter loads in the 44 magnum.
But I was never too happy with H110/W296 for heavy loads.
I have owned and shot rather extensively, five different 44 magnum revolvers, two S&W and three Ruger Super Blackhawk's, plus two Marlin rifles in 44. With the pistols I shot competetive silhouette.
I'm looking at my notes of chronograph results from a 7 1/2 inch Ruger Super Black Hawk, shooting the Keith 429421 bullet.
24.5 grains of H110 gave a five shot average of 1323, but with an extreme spread of 103.
22 grains of H110, av. 1188, es 95.
20 grains of H110, av. 1126, es of 198!
I like the old original powder that Elmer Keith used in designing the 44 magnum, Hercules 2400. The load that he settled on was 22 grains, with his 429421 bullet. Here are the results of that powder, tested in the same Ruger revolver.
The Keith load of 22 grains, Hercules 2400 in the 7 1/2 inch Ruger, five shot average, 1415, es 68.
The load I settled on for much of my silhouette shooting was 20 grains of 2400, five shot average 1312, es spread of 41.
Only 17.5 grains of 2400 gave five shot average of 1120, with an es of just 45.
These tests were with flat base bullets, but one test in my notes of the same Keith 245/250 grain bullet in gas check design.
24.5 grains of W296, av. 1385, es of 80.
I used and tested, both large pistol standard primers, as well as large pistol magnum primers. I could detect no difference in any of the tests, between the two different types of primeers.
And here was a test of W231, same Keith flat base bullet.
8.2 grains of W231, five shot average 1018, with an es of only 17!
 
Gas check bullets?
Hard cast or wheel weights?

For full load being using 24gn H110 with XTP bullets (expensive). Hodgdon sites has 1522fps for this load which seems too high, need a chrony to confirm but till then don't want to use Berry's plated with max 1250fps.

7.5gn TG with 240gn WW cast bullets plinks accurately, moderate recoil, no barrel leading.
Haven't tried full load with cast.
I shoot nothing but cast 245gr Keith SWC out of my Redhawk, both for plinking (6.0-8.0gr of W231) and full power loads (24.0gr of H110) with great results. Big bore handguns work great with cast bullets and they keep the costs down a bit.


Mark
 
"...Can I shoot full power loads..." You can shoot "full power" cast bullet loads. Jacketed bullets are too expensive to shoot regularly.
 
What are the composition of these flat base bullets?
Wheel weights air cooled?
Wheel weight water quenched?
Hard cast?
W231 is an excellent powder for lighter loads in the 44 magnum.
But I was never too happy with H110/W296 for heavy loads.
I have owned and shot rather extensively, five different 44 magnum revolvers, two S&W and three Ruger Super Blackhawk's, plus two Marlin rifles in 44. With the pistols I shot competetive silhouette.
I'm looking at my notes of chronograph results from a 7 1/2 inch Ruger Super Black Hawk, shooting the Keith 429421 bullet.
24.5 grains of H110 gave a five shot average of 1323, but with an extreme spread of 103.
22 grains of H110, av. 1188, es 95.
20 grains of H110, av. 1126, es of 198!
I like the old original powder that Elmer Keith used in designing the 44 magnum, Hercules 2400. The load that he settled on was 22 grains, with his 429421 bullet. Here are the results of that powder, tested in the same Ruger revolver.
The Keith load of 22 grains, Hercules 2400 in the 7 1/2 inch Ruger, five shot average, 1415, es 68.
The load I settled on for much of my silhouette shooting was 20 grains of 2400, five shot average 1312, es spread of 41.
Only 17.5 grains of 2400 gave five shot average of 1120, with an es of just 45.
These tests were with flat base bullets, but one test in my notes of the same Keith 245/250 grain bullet in gas check design.
24.5 grains of W296, av. 1385, es of 80.
I used and tested, both large pistol standard primers, as well as large pistol magnum primers. I could detect no difference in any of the tests, between the two different types of primeers.
And here was a test of W231, same Keith flat base bullet.
8.2 grains of W231, five shot average 1018, with an es of only 17!
 
What are the composition of these flat base bullets?
Wheel weights air cooled?
Wheel weight water quenched?
Hard cast?

The alloy of cast bullets is not as critical as a lot of people think.
All of the bullets referred to in my article would be wheel weights from about twenty years ago. I dropped them from the mold into water, just for the convenience of it. Like not damaging them when they drop. As we know, dropping them into water only makes them harder for a short while, then they revert to the original hardness of the metal.
When I was seeing how fast I could accurately drive cast bullets in a 30-06, I usually used pure linotype with a gas check. When I was doing this experimenting, I accidentally discovered a very significant fact about shooting cast bullets, something that I have never heard of, or read of, anywhere.
I was doing this in the winter time at a virually unused range, with lots of snow on the ground. In the spring I could pick up my bullets, completely undamaged, from stopping in the snow.
This testing was being done at a time when ordinary shooters couldn't even dream of having a chronograph. I would take one type of powder and load in groups of five, going up a couple grains with each group. Then I would shoot them in the groups of five, for accuracy. With cast bullets they go from being quite accurate, to one or two foot flyers, just with the addition of a bit more powder.
In the spring of the year when I recovered my bullets, I discovered that some, obviously the bad fliers, had a groove cut down the side of the bullet, full length of the bullet and about 1/16 inch across!
It was plain that even a linotype bullet with a gas check, could not hold the pressure, so it just cut a swath down the bullet to escape.
As a point of interest, to get highest velocities, I figured slower burning powders had to be used. Thus, I used quite a variety of slower burning rifle powders. I had the original Lyman Cast bullet loading guide to go by, but figured for best velocity and accuracy I would experiment further than what the Lyman book showed. Thus, I used a wide variety of powders not usually shown for cast bullets.
Don't want to stir the pot here, just reporting, but one of the powders that gave the best accuracy, and a powder I used a lot, was good old war surplus H4831, loaded down to about 75% or so, of normal loadings!
 
Thanks for the info. Read all the articles on cast boolit site, consensus seems to be what you describe when bullet don't seal resulting in leak gas burning the base, line scorch and poor accuracy. Culprit seem to be too hard of a bullet.

I shoot at POCO range which is way to busy to recover bullets. Have to get a chrony before pushing my cast bullets to full.

So many powder, so many options, mind boggling.
The alloy of cast bullets is not as critical as a lot of people think.
All of the bullets referred to in my article would be wheel weights from about twenty years ago. I dropped them from the mold into water, just for the convenience of it. Like not damaging them when they drop. As we know, dropping them into water only makes them harder for a short while, then they revert to the original hardness of the metal.
When I was seeing how fast I could accurately drive cast bullets in a 30-06, I usually used pure linotype with a gas check. When I was doing this experimenting, I accidentally discovered a very significant fact about shooting cast bullets, something that I have never heard of, or read of, anywhere.
I was doing this in the winter time at a virually unused range, with lots of snow on the ground. In the spring I could pick up my bullets, completely undamaged, from stopping in the snow.
This testing was being done at a time when ordinary shooters couldn't even dream of having a chronograph. I would take one type of powder and load in groups of five, going up a couple grains with each group. Then I would shoot them in the groups of five, for accuracy. With cast bullets they go from being quite accurate, to one or two foot flyers, just with the addition of a bit more powder.
In the spring of the year when I recovered my bullets, I discovered that some, obviously the bad fliers, had a groove cut down the side of the bullet, full length of the bullet and about 1/16 inch across!
It was plain that even a linotype bullet with a gas check, could not hold the pressure, so it just cut a swath down the bullet to escape.
As a point of interest, to get highest velocities, I figured slower burning powders had to be used. Thus, I used quite a variety of slower burning rifle powders. I had the original Lyman Cast bullet loading guide to go by, but figured for best velocity and accuracy I would experiment further than what the Lyman book showed. Thus, I used a wide variety of powders not usually shown for cast bullets.
Don't want to stir the pot here, just reporting, but one of the powders that gave the best accuracy, and a powder I used a lot, was good old war surplus H4831, loaded down to about 75% or so, of normal loadings!
 
Casting 240gn with WWs, using 7.5gn Titegroup for plinking. Accurate and NO leading.
Being thinking of trying 22-24gn of H110 with same bullet. Getting some linotype soon, will add to WW to see what combo of hardness works best.

Mind me asking how much the bullets are?
Plain base, fairly hard. I buy them from Ben Hunchak, so can't say exactly what mix he is using.


Mark
 
Here are my loads for my 5.5" Ruger Redhawk. Very little experimenting so far and I haven't shot it as much as I would like.
L'il Gun gives very good velocity, but I've always gotten unburned powder left and those pesky little specs can really stick everywhere on the gun.

I bought a pound of VV N110 last fall, but still haven't found the time to try it. I am hoping for similar velocities but with lower SD and much cleaner burning than either H-110 and L'il Gun. Has anybody tried it in the .44 Mag and with what results?

Powder Weight grs Bullet Weight grs Cases Primer C.O.L. Avg. fps Energy E.S. fps S.D. fps
Factory Rem UMC-Rem. JSP 180 Rem Rem 1,600 1,023 62.00 35.00
H-110 23.0 Hornady XTP JHP 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,246 828 90.78 31.41
H-110 23.3 Hornady XTP JHP 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,254 838 56.06 19.64
H-110 23.5 Hornady XTP JHP 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,262 849 65.60 21.47
H-110 23.8 Hornady XTP JHP 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,277 869 53.14 18.60
H-110 24.0 Hornady XTP JHP 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,304 906 28.67 9.74

L'iL Gun 23.6 Hornady XTP JHP 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,400 1,044 98.98 33.92
L'iL Gun 23.8 Hornady XTP JHP 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,386 1,023 50.10 18.84
L'iL Gun 24.0 Hornady XTP JHP 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,393 1,034 19.58 8.12
L'iL Gun 24.2 Hornady XTP JHP 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,381 1,017 58.62 18.70
L'iL Gun 24.4 Hornady XTP JHP 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,399 1,043 40.55 14.73

L'iL Gun 23.0 Can-Am TMJ 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,299 899 73.81 29.32
L'iL Gun 23.2 Can-Am TMJ 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,328 939 52.52 19.49
L'iL Gun 23.4 Can-Am TMJ 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,304 906 49.70 20.14
L'iL Gun 24.1 Can-Am TMJ 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,304 907 59.61 20.83
L'iL Gun 24.3 Can-Am TMJ 240 Win CCI 350 1.600" 1,307 911 70.55 29.49
 
Casting 240gn with WWs, using 7.5gn Titegroup for plinking. Accurate and NO leading.
Being thinking of trying 22-24gn of H110 with same bullet. Getting some linotype soon, will add to WW to see what combo of hardness works best.

Mind me asking how much the bullets are?

What bullet lube?
 
H110 works nicely with XTP, too bad XTP is expensive.

Haven't tried Lil'Gun on 44 but for the 50 the LG burns cleanly whereas the H110 had unburned powder and stuck casing.
Here are my loads for my 5.5" Ruger Redhawk. Very little experimenting so far and I haven't shot it as much as I would like.
L'il Gun gives very good velocity, but I've always gotten unburned powder left and those pesky little specs can really stick everywhere on the gun.

...
 
H110 works nicely with XTP, too bad XTP is expensive.

Haven't tried Lil'Gun on 44 but for the 50 the LG burns cleanly whereas the H110 had unburned powder and stuck casing.



Wow, interesting! It's the opposite of what I've gotten, so far in my .44 Mag. I tried crimping the bullets tighter with L'il Gun, but that didn't change the results. Maybe I should try different primers. Are there any large pistol primers hotter than CCI 350?

The only other firearm I have tried L'il gun in is my Savage ML10II, but not anymore, so I just wanted to use the balance of it I had left. I actually want to change over to VV N110, if I can ever get to work up a decent load. :)

Oh, and for those of you getting good results with XTP's, I am getting acceptable results with Can-Am TMJ's and I am sure TMJ bullets from other manufacturers will do just as well. They're a cheaper option for full power practice ammo.
 
I just shot my first 75rds using H-110 and DRG 240gr hard cast bullets. I was using 24.0gr of H-110, very little smoke, very accurate at 25 yards. I'm quite happy with the DRG bullets, I only wish they made a 300gr bullet.
 
Back
Top Bottom