Keith .38/44 load

[LazarusLong]

Wheeew is all I have to say. 13 grains of 2400 under a 358429 in a .38 case was giving slightly sticky extraction and flattened primers in my Highway Patroman. I've seen numerous people who know their stuff reccomend the full 13.5 grains (Taffin, Skeeter, Keith, etc..).. What gives? Anyone else have experience with this load? Must all have highly polished chambers and using CCI primers

 

[DougE]

This is sure to spark another discussion on " The Load "

 

[Vanilla Gorilla]

Well, now that you mention it, "The Load" was a bit sticky, too. I loaded up a few today with a half-grain less and we'll see how that works out.

"Flat primers, huh? Guess we need harder primers."

 

[Paul5388]

13.5 gr in my 6" M28-2 will produce 1270 fps MV and 622 ft lbs of ME. My cylinder is just like it left the factory in 1972.

I guess I need to check it in my 4" 1955 Highway Patrolman and see what it does in it.

 

[Gun 4 Fun]

Wheeew is all I have to say. 13 grains of 2400 under a 358429 in a .38 case was giving slightly sticky extraction and flattened primers in my Highway Patroman. I've seen numerous people who know their stuff reccomend the full 13.5 grains (Taffin, Skeeter, Keith, etc..).. What gives? Anyone else have experience with this load? Must all have highly polished chambers and using CCI primers

I never had any trouble with it in my 28-2 from '75. Have you checked your throats for diameter? Could be under a thou or two. Worth checking, since Smith has varied throats in most of their other guns over the years a little. I haven't tried it in my 27-2 yet, but I am planning on it since I have quite a few of those bullets to load up yet.

 

[Hoptob]

Lasarus, did you use magnum or standard primers?

 

[Vanilla Gorilla]

Standard primers. I know this because they were MY primers.

 

[Skip Sackett]

Working up loads, remember that principle?

Well, I've had sticky loads too. Usually when I started out high with a load and then tried to work my way down. Is that how you are supposed to reload? Just wondering!

All sarcasm aside, when putting a load into a different firearm than the one that it was developed in, it needs to be worked UP again even if it is the same model firearm.

Case in point: I had two M586 6" barreled revolvers. In one I worked up "THE LOAD" and had absolutely no problems at all. No sticky extraction, none. No flattened primers, none, and yes they were standard ones. No pressure signs at all. Switched firearms and got both! Lesson learned. Work up loads per firearm. What is safe in one may not be safe in another. Everything made by man has tolerances. Stack all of those up one way and you get one set of results, put them in the "mean" and you will have quite different results.

Guns are individuals and need to be treated as such.

p.s. For clarification of terms; sticky extraction to me means that you have to use a tool or a bench to remove the spent cases. Is that what you had with the Keith load?

 

[Vanilla Gorilla]

p.s. For clarification of terms; sticky extraction to me means that you have to use a tool or a bench to remove the spent cases. Is that what you had with the Keith load?

Absolutely not. We wouldn't even be discussing these loads if that was the case. I guess to say "sticking" to us was more of taking a nice little bump on the extractor with the free hand to get the cases to drop.

My recent Handloader has an article by Brian Pearce citing 12.5 grains as his load of choice. I'm going back to load some of those and see what I get.

Edit to add: These loads were worked up to, but not in this particular revolver. To be honest, I hadn't thought of the idea of working up loads to particular guns, outside of something like abnormally tight throats or something similar.

 

[LazarusLong]

I never had any trouble with it in my 28-2 from '75. Have you checked your throats for diameter? Could be under a thou or two. Worth checking, since Smith has varied throats in most of their other guns over the years a little. I haven't tried it in my 27-2 yet, but I am planning on it since I have quite a few of those bullets to load up yet.

Throats are good, a .357 sized bullet can be pushed through with only slight resistance. Wonder what other factors can affect pressure in other guns? The barrel cylinder gap is pretty average, so that can't be it, either.

 

[Frank237]

I've never used the 13.5 gr 2400 load in 38 spcl cases. If I want mag performance I use mag cases.

From what I've read 2400 has changed since Keiths and Skeltons day. It was reformulated several years back and now burns a bit FASTER. The old 13.5 load may now be 13.0 grains???

Just a thought.

FN in MT

 

[JohnK]

My memory was that Keith seated the bullet, not in the crimping groove, but much lower, in one of the grease grooves. This gave much increased case capacity, and similiar overall length to the .357 cartridge.

I also remember him recommending use of this load only in .357 revolvers.

 

[canoe on the yukon]

I've worked up a load in one gun which performed just fine and then when using the same load in another gun so chambered,got sticky extraction.Nothing you're experiencing is out of the normal.Back down and work up.

 

[Skip Sackett]

Some useful information---------

Here are Keith's loads, some of them at least for handguns.

It would seem to me that being on the safe side I would use the 12gr load for starters that he recommends for the C**t handguns.

Sometimes what is perceived as something by one is not what is perceived by another.

Flattened primers is subjective. Sticky extraction is too, as we discussed earlier. If there is any rounded part left to the primer, I don't consider them flattened. Others have another interpretation of them though.

 

[scattershot]

IIRC, Skelton used the 358156 bullet, which has two crimping grooves. He crimped the bullet in the lower groove, giving more powder capacity.

 

[BruceM]

+1 on 358156 in 38 Special cases with 13.5 grains of 2400. The .357 is one round where the Thompson bullet worked better for me that the Keith style.

I've used 15.0 with that bullet in .357 cases but that must be worked up to in individual guns. Was fine in my Python but a little sticky in M27. Go figure.

Bruce

 

[LazarusLong]

Here are Keith's loads, some of them at least for handguns.

It would seem to me that being on the safe side I would use the 12gr load for starters that he recommends for the C**t handguns.

Sometimes what is perceived as something by one is not what is perceived by another.

Flattened primers is subjective. Sticky extraction is too, as we discussed earlier. If there is any rounded part left to the primer, I don't consider them flattened. Others have another interpretation of them though.

To me, sticky means that you have to give the rod a pop to get them out instead of a slight push like usual. There was still a decent bit of roundness left.. But they were beginning to flatten out which is usually a sign to stop or at least be careful. Although I've seen factory .38 +P loads that flatten out primers (cough. Speer. cough.) so mabye that doesn't mean a whole lot. Sure did make a satisfying "BOOOOM" though, sound more like a .44 than a .357

 

[Gun 4 Fun]

Flattened primers in revolvers can be a sign of a little extra headspace. The primer backs out against the recoil shield under the pressure of firing, due to the headspace issue, then the case sets back against the shield leaving flattened looking primers. It only takes a couple thousandths extra on headspace to do this BTW.

A good chrono is the best way short of a pressure gun, to check that your loads are performing in approximation with published data. I have had flattened primers and sticky extraction with loads that gave very near indentical velocities to the data I was using. That is with the same length barrel too. It really does come down to an individual gun's tolerances, smoothness of chambers, throats, forcing cone etc. You may get pressure signs, while not actually going over recommended loads, or velocities. Then again, you may get no pressure indicators, and be well over SAAMI specs. Caution is a reloaders best friend.

One other thing to consider- when your cases are seated in your chambers, are they flush with the rear face of the cylinder, or are they possibly a couple thousandths below flush? That would cause the same appearence of excess headspace. It is possible. Just something else to check for in guns with recessed chambers.

 

[Paul5388]

The image Skip posted was from the 1980 era, when it was Hercules 2400. The load I posted was using 2004 vintage Alliant 2400. That leads me to believe there isn't an appreciable difference between the two powders, at least in the lot I have.

If there was more than lot to lot variation, they would be calling the new powder 2399 or 2401, not 2400.

A little resistance in extraction can be due to minute amounts of powder residue reducing the chamber dimensions. 2400 does leave some residue, even with higher pressure loads.

 

[Vanilla Gorilla]

The image Skip posted was from the 1980 era, when it was Hercules 2400. The load I posted was using 2004 vintage Alliant 2400. That leads me to believe there isn't an appreciable difference between the two powders, at least in the lot I have.

If there was more than lot to lot variation, they would be calling the new powder 2399 or 2401, not 2400.

A little resistance in extraction can be due to minute amounts of powder residue reducing the chamber dimensions. 2400 does leave some residue, even with higher pressure loads.

In the spirit of the post about variation from one revolver to the next, I'm going to go back to try this load again in my Model 27, the one in which these loads were originally worked up, and see if there's any difference now.

I dunno, is 2400 temperature sensitive? It was damn hot the day these loads were tested in LLs Model 28.