We're all over the _Handloader_ stuff, Peter, thanks to Jessie.

The point (for me) of THE LOAD isn't so much that it's hot, it's that it's wonderful.

I have all the issues of Handloader back to the first published in 1966. I also read (before I loaded the first rd of THE LOAD) those propellent profiles that you are referencing and another Handloader article where the writer went to a much stiffer charge of 4756 than what is being discussed here in a couple of J frames. The first article presents the idea that Speer had used an unusually slow burning lot of powder to develop the data. The second article discredits this. There is one error also stated and that is that the gun used to develop Speer's data was a model 27 so they may have felt that it was OK to use a stiffer charge. The truth is that Speer #8 data was developed in a K-38. That is according to what it says in the manual.

For the record. I am not especially interested in hot loads. I am interested in good loads.

Jes,
I would be interested in a small exerpt from one of the articles with load data. Email or PM me!
Thanks

Bro. Crazy, check your e-mail

Bro. Crazy, Bro. Nutty and Bro. Erich, I had anutter thingy fall off teday. I hoap yus not bee using EUP powder anymoore for "the Other Load". I wich I'd not used it, but I'd be wanting two be especal frum everyone else. Can yus be careful with "The Load". Latter Bros.

Bro. Joel I know you had a bad 'sperience with that OTHER LOAD, The EUP, and it must be a bummer having any of your thingies falling off, but consider the benefits. With your bright glow, others can find you even on the darkest night. Also you can go for a stroll at night and you are plainly visible to drivers.

Also you do not need a night light, YOU ARE ONE.

Bro. Nutty

Thaks Bro. Nutty fir the kiend werds. I nus yer wer a frend.

I doubt he has to worry about safe sex, either.

Bro. Joel, take a break from the shooting, go have a bratwurst, and wait until you regenerate before proceeding. You've earned it.

Brother Joel,
You are a shinning example, literally, of what I want to be as a handloader. I recently got several pounds of that EUP powder and began feeding it to my hunting dogs. I wanted to make them meaner, you know, feeding them gunpowder and all. They liked it soooooooo much that I got to wondering why! So I thought I would taste it and MAN it tastes just like chicken!

I hope the effects are less from ingesting it than from exposure to it.

I'll let you know! Maybe, I think.

Thanks,
Bro. Crazy

Bro. Crazy, i hed mama put sum on mi petza and like yu sed, it taist purdy dern good but Im paing fir it now. Hoep yir doggies dont end up liek me. Thanks fir all yore kiend werds Bros. Kepe up the guud werk on the "thE LOde"

Just to make sure this thread doesn't fall off the first page...

quote:

...Then, just like dad used to tell us, (there is always someone bigger) a guy walked in with a 50AE Desert Eagle! Not that dude made some noise! I could "feel" the concussion after he shot that thing!

A few months back I got myself into an interesting project. Wanted to develop an accurate supersonic load for 9mm 124 gr. plated bullet. So, I was in the middle of critical off-hands accuracy testing. Checked my grip, hyperventilated, exhaled, centered vibration, took up the trigger, re-centered vibration, and ... And 500 S&W revolver went off in the next booth. I shot ceiling. Twice.

Mike

I read this over several times as I am a 38/44 loader and shoot a lot of "hot" loads for my 38/44s. I also shot "hot" loads for my 357 Magnums including my Registered.

Several times it has been mentioned that the pressures for the 38/44 the 357 Magnum 38 +P and 38 Special have been lowered by the SAAMI for todays presumably less strong handguns.

So, if you are loading for a 1939 Registered Magnum, or a 1934 38/44 Heavy Duty, why not load to the pressures that the guns were designed to work with? I understand their are risks of metal fatigue or just wear and tear, but forgoing that why not?

My personal experience is that my older 357 Magnums seem to do just fine with original 357 Magnum loads. I have pushed 158 leads to over 1540 out of a 8 3/8" Pre-27 with no issues, serious case head expansion or sticky extraction. I found that my 38/44 HD's seem to be closer to the point of aim with 1050 fps 158's then 730 fps 158's of today.

So, if you are loading for a new 38 or 357 then yes maybe you might want to load it down to say the current saami specs but if you are not and are willing to pay the piper for wear and tear, then I say load to the old data.

Last comment. I have a colt Diamondback that I have shot about 46,043 rounds out of it. I normally for over 2 decades shot a standard 5.0 grns of unique with a 158 lead SWC. Back when I started this was a reasonable load, warm but not hot. Today this is beyond +P. Yes the gun has been back to colt for retiming and other parts, but it has sustained far more shooting then most would do to their guns of +P loads.

Would it have lasted longer if I shot 3.5 grn unique charges or whatever the current load is? Yes, but am I complaining about wearing it out after 30+ years of shooting it no.

quote:

I shot ceiling. Twice.

ROFL!

quote:

So, if you are loading for a 1939 Registered Magnum, or a 1934 38/44 Heavy Duty, why not load to the pressures that the guns were designed to work with? I understand their are risks of metal fatigue or just wear and tear, but forgoing that why not?

Some would think that there are other factors, burn rate changes yada yada, that would make it unreasonable to do what you have done for years, Pete.

The original point in all of these trials of old data are really just a return to what these fine, quality, durable firearms were designed to fire. You bring up a good point. Are the new guns the ones subject to destruction because they are designed for the lower pressures? I think that is the question I find in there.

Interesting thought.

(thinking)