Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > >

Reloading All Reloading Topics Go Here


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-24-2021, 12:55 PM
teletech teletech is offline
Member
174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL  
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 416
Likes: 43
Liked 418 Times in 186 Posts
Default 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL

I found data for Titegroup that was working pretty well for me in my TL, but I've run out of that powder and with things being what they are it seems like I'm better off working up another load than waiting.
So, have others seen or used data for .44 special with a 174 cast bullet?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-26-2021, 01:50 AM
Nemo288's Avatar
Nemo288 Nemo288 is offline
Member
174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL  
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Badgerland
Posts: 2,248
Likes: 475
Liked 1,367 Times in 713 Posts
Default

Hodgdon has data for both 165 and 185 gr cast bullets in the 44 special.
You could interpolate and then back off and work up as usual.
You didn't say what alternate powder you were considering but with revolvers almost any shotgun or pistol powder can be made to work if one is careful.

For instance a powder I would use (that I have and is on that list) would be Universal.
Hodgdon lists 5.5-6.3 grains under the 165 and 5.4-6.4 under the 185.
My ladder then for a 175 would be 5, 5.5, 6 grains.
If you are willing to push SAAMI to +P in a modern gun then 6.5 would be useable, if it's accurate.

You can also look at 180 gr. jacketed data as your 175 will have lower friction (and weight).

Since that looks to be a range and plinking round, I would try for the lowest load that is accurate and still gets the bullet out of the barrel.

I consider 550 fps the minimum to guarantee cast bullet exit and 600 fps for jacketed.

Sorry to ramble on but trying for the lowest accurate load was a pursuit of mine for many years including trying various fillers most of which were more work than they were worth.
Granulated shotshell buffer is about the easiest and best if you ever go that route.
Corncob tumbling media also works as it is somewhat compressable and light.
Also worked up loads with powder for which there was no data like CSB-1 during the last big shortage several years back.
44 special is a handloader's dream as it is so versatile and forgiving.
__________________
NEMO
"Everything 44"

Last edited by Nemo288; 08-26-2021 at 02:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #3  
Old 08-26-2021, 08:41 AM
teletech teletech is offline
Member
174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL  
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 416
Likes: 43
Liked 418 Times in 186 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo288 View Post
Hodgdon has data for both 165 and 185 gr cast bullets in the 44 special.
You could interpolate and then back off and work up as usual.
You didn't say what alternate powder you were considering but with revolvers almost any shotgun or pistol powder can be made to work if one is careful.

For instance a powder I would use (that I have and is on that list) would be Universal.
Hodgdon lists 5.5-6.3 grains under the 165 and 5.4-6.4 under the 185.
My ladder then for a 175 would be 5, 5.5, 6 grains.
If you are willing to push SAAMI to +P in a modern gun then 6.5 would be useable, if it's accurate.

You can also look at 180 gr. jacketed data as your 175 will have lower friction (and weight).

Since that looks to be a range and plinking round, I would try for the lowest load that is accurate and still gets the bullet out of the barrel.

I consider 550 fps the minimum to guarantee cast bullet exit and 600 fps for jacketed.

Sorry to ramble on but trying for the lowest accurate load was a pursuit of mine for many years including trying various fillers most of which were more work than they were worth.
Granulated shotshell buffer is about the easiest and best if you ever go that route.
Corncob tumbling media also works as it is somewhat compressable and light.
Also worked up loads with powder for which there was no data like CSB-1 during the last big shortage several years back.
44 special is a handloader's dream as it is so versatile and forgiving.
Thanks for this very helpful response. I still forget about the online apps the various manufacturers provide.
I didn't list powders since I have a wide variety to choose from just now, including some obsolete ones so didn't want to prejudice the jury, as it were. With that in mind I'm even more pleased the Hodgdon site still has data for some SR powders. I've sometimes looked for the most efficient powder in terms of highest velocity for the lowest chamber pressure, in this case that would be the 700X/800X which I do have and have never used since I've read of people having issues with bridging. I wonder if the starting load of 6.3 is enough that I wouldn't need to worry about that?

The triple-lock is the very antithesis of "modern" so I'll be staying as close to starting loads as I can and still get good accuracy.

No need to apologize, I appreciate the experience and detail. I'm not planning to go down the rabbit hole far enough to need fillers but I'm also punching paper with firearms that are over a century old so not needing any more stress on them than necessary to do that.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #4  
Old 08-26-2021, 09:54 AM
Ivan the Butcher Ivan the Butcher is online now
Member
174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Harlem, Ohio
Posts: 10,620
Likes: 14,701
Liked 17,337 Times in 6,211 Posts
Default

Bridging is when powder doesn't flow out of the powder drop (But you already knew that!), and second issue is when powder just sticks to the inside of the powder drop.

The two simplest answers are the same Vibration. One is a small vibrating devise firmly attached to your powder drop (two friends did this to shotgun presses, one used a small pink marital aid, the other use the vibrator from a beat up Bark-o-Lounger) and this idea worked well for several decades. The other solution is what Lyman did over a hundred years ago with the #50 (and later #55) powder drop. "They hit it with a Hammer". There is a small door knocker like attachment that you flip when the handle is up and again when the handle is down. They called the thing a "Hammer". You can do the same to any powder drop, by rapping it with a screwdriver handle or a small hammer. Again, once when the chamber is filling and when the chamber is emptying.

I have a Lyman 55, but have used the screwdriver method on a Redding BR 30 and a few other drops. The Lyman is so fast, you hardly loose any time once you are used to it.

Ivan
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #5  
Old 08-27-2021, 04:05 PM
Nemo288's Avatar
Nemo288 Nemo288 is offline
Member
174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL  
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Badgerland
Posts: 2,248
Likes: 475
Liked 1,367 Times in 713 Posts
Default

The whole idea of keeping the 44 special at or below ~15kpsi is to not damage those old revolvers.
Brian Pearce and others suggest anything made after WWII and is properly heat treated can withstand quite a bit more, like 20-25 kpsi and that's what we call +P although it's not an official regime like the .38 spec. +P.
You should be good if keeping to those listed loads under 13kcup.
Your triple lock is stronger than the top break #3's IMO.

I have a Redding 30 and developed a style where I rap the handle fairly well when going both up and down, trying to keep the force uniform.
I also try to stay away from powders that do give trouble.
One reason for moving from IMR to H4198.
There are so many fine grained powders that work in revolvers I have never strayed far from the ones that work for me like Bullseye, Universal, N105, 2400.
PB and CSB-1 have also worked but are more obscure these days.
Unique meters OK but not perfectly and will occasionally leave a flake under the extractor star gumming up the works especially with low pressure loads.
Universal doesn't do that.
Definitely a favorite.
__________________
NEMO
"Everything 44"
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-27-2021, 06:16 PM
ArchAngelCD ArchAngelCD is offline
Moderator
174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL  
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Northeast PA, USA
Posts: 6,483
Likes: 488
Liked 2,816 Times in 1,571 Posts
Default

I would use the 185gr load data on the Hodgdon site, it can be used safely. They list data for 700-X and 800-X so I would give it a try. Universal isn't a bad choice either.
__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-27-2021, 06:38 PM
teletech teletech is offline
Member
174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL  
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 416
Likes: 43
Liked 418 Times in 186 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo288 View Post
I also try to stay away from powders that do give trouble.

PB and CSB-1 have also worked but are more obscure these days.
Unique meters OK but not perfectly and will occasionally leave a flake under the extractor star gumming up the works especially with low pressure loads.
Universal doesn't do that.
Definitely a favorite.
Good tips.
I'm lazy enough that my Dillon 650 tends to wear it's usual measure unless I have a compelling reason to fuss with it, and while I do have several pounds of 700X and 800X, only if they were going to be noticeably nicer than on of the easy-metering powders would I fuss with them.
Funny you should mention PB, I have a big can of that as well I've been wondering just what to do with.

What, you mean "flaming dirt" doesn't burn cleanly at low pressures?!? I'm shocked!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-27-2021, 11:37 PM
Nemo288's Avatar
Nemo288 Nemo288 is offline
Member
174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL  
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Badgerland
Posts: 2,248
Likes: 475
Liked 1,367 Times in 713 Posts
Default

From an old IMR data pamphlet (5/03):

.44 S & W SPECIAL
REM. CASE; REM. 2 1/2 PR
HORNADY 240 GR. LEAD SWC;
.430" DIA.; 6.5" REVOLVER BBL.; 1.470" C.O.L.

powder      max  fps     CUP
700-X         4.9  740  13900
PB              5.7  750  14000
SR 7625     6.2  770  13800
800-X         6.9  695  13900
SR 4756     7.5  760  13600
IMR 4227  14.3  790  13700

One of my super-low loads was 4.5gr PB under a 240 SWC.
BUT it also had 13.5gr Grex filler which boosts pressure although the velocity was still only in the mid 600's.
I would say that ladder 5, 5.5, maybe 6gr would also work for PB with those light weight bullets of yours.
PB burns pretty fast and quite clean.
I believe PB stands for "porous base" and was designed to be a clean shotgun powder.
That makes it perfect for low pressure revolver loads.
Finally was discontinued a few years ago.
Wasn't selling well and the manufacturing technique was obsolete.

From another forum (2011):
"PB is the sole survivor of what was intended to be an entire line of propellants. The concept was to have a generic powder kernel that was porous, and to add the various inhibitors and additives to tailor burn rate, flash and other characteristics to the "sponge-like" kernels as needed.
It can be thought of as a second-generation powder: It's newer than such greybeards as Bullseye and Unique, but not nearly as sophisticated as almost any other powder we have today."

Powder Burning Rate Chart
lists PB as being right next to Universal in burn rate.
(and Universal as faster than Unique).
The 2 attached rate charts have PB faster and next to N320.
The charts below also show Universal as slightly slower than Unique.
My experience with 44's and QuickLOAD tend to show Universal as slightly faster than Unique.
We all know how accurate these charts are.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Burn Rates - 2014-2015.pdf (78.0 KB, 4 views)
File Type: pdf 2012LoadDataBurnRateChart.pdf (42.8 KB, 2 views)
__________________
NEMO
"Everything 44"

Last edited by Nemo288; 08-28-2021 at 06:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #9  
Old 09-07-2021, 10:39 AM
teletech teletech is offline
Member
174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL 174TC projectiles in 44 SPL  
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 416
Likes: 43
Liked 418 Times in 186 Posts
Default

Thanks very much for the load data and the history!
As it happens I was at a shop with a good stock of powder so got lazy and scored some more Titegroup, but I also kept your data in my notes so I can run some of that PB as a comparison... next time I have empty brass that is.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
225 gr. Projectiles bananaman Reloading 5 12-28-2017 06:43 AM
WITHDRAWN Hornady .257 75 gr HP Varmint #2520 projectiles for lead pistol projectiles MP1983 Accessories/Misc - For Sale or Trade 2 11-09-2017 08:07 PM
Projectiles in .9, .38/.357, .40 & .45 mosquito Accessories/Misc - For Sale or Trade 13 02-06-2014 09:57 AM
9 MM Projectiles F/S.................... 8ball Accessories/Misc - For Sale or Trade 0 03-20-2012 12:03 AM
Old Projectiles diamond_c The Lounge 13 08-28-2010 11:33 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:10 PM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.42 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2021 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)