Power Pistol Accuracy?

[38SPL HV]

What has been your experience with Power Pistol and accuracy in 38 Spl +P loads or other straight wall cartridges using lead bullets?

I found that in both 38 Spl +P and 357 Magnum using 158 gr lead bullets that it gets more accurate at the upper end of reloading manual data.

Appreciate your inputs and experiences


Thank you

 

[stu1ritter]

In MY revolvers, PowerPistol has to be at the top of the load range to exhibit any accuracy.

Stu

 

[cowboy4evr]

That's the case with most powders . Get them up near the top of their load range and they will exhibit superb accuracy . I prefer to use a faster burn powder if I want milder loads instead of down loading a slower burn powder and expecting it to perform well . I have never used PP , but have shot a fair amount of it's " near cousin " BE-86 in my 357 sig and for some mid range 44 magnum loads . I kept it right near the top of the load range and it worked well .

 

[Duckford]

That's the case with most powders . Get them up near the top of their load range and they will exhibit superb accuracy . .

I'm going to disagree with this. Some of the best Bullseye loads you can make are lower end, and I remember an old NRA article on maximizing wadcutter performance stating the old 2.8 grain load was ideal under laboratory conditions, and anything more started to see erratic performance, and I've had good luck with reduced loads with faster burning powders. I would not say "most" powders are better at closer to maximum, only some.

Its the slower powders that usually offer the worst performance at reduction, H110 and 296 being the most obvious in handguns, but it wouldn't be too surprising to hear of problems in other powders like Power Pistol and Longshot. I remember reading in a flier from BPS on Longshot stating it was a good powder for max loads, but poor at anything less; indeed, my own 10 bore loads proved this true, with patterns going from beautiful at shoulder breaking super loads but deteriorating rapidly as I tried to tone them down. People who have tried Longshot extensively in handguns can offer their notes.

That being said, there are some who have had good luck with reduced magnum handgun powders like 2400 and Blue Dot at far less than maximum. Its not just burn rate, but rather the individual characteristics of each powder that make them unique in their own way, as well as powder base and temperature, ect.

tl;dr It would make sense that PP would probably do better at maximum, because that's what it is engineered for, interesting to see what other results people may offer.

 

[TAROMAN]

6.3 grains of PP under a Bayou 160 RN gives me 955 FPS with SD of 9.
Worked up the load for hunter silhouette with this 67-3.
First time out, got 62 of 80 possible.

PP is also great in 357 Sig and 44 Special.

 

[eb07]

Not answering your question directly but I want to make a note about something else that affects accuracy: t I have fuond the lighter the crimp, the less accurate it is. I sort my fired brass by case size so I can get consistent crimps on my reloads. I like tighter crimps on my ammo. BUT I noticed over crimping has the reverse affect

You can see a speer factory 38+P on the left and one of my 357 loads on the R (not a lead bullet or a 38+P but you get my drift in terms of crimping)

You can do you own testing and come to your own conclusions but I am not the only person to make this claim after testing.

 

[cowboy4evr]

What duckford failed to mention / or realize is that the 2.8 gr load of Bullseye with a 148 gr wc worked because of the significantly reduced case capacity vs using a std 158 gr bullet in 38spl . Try that same load with a std 158 gr swc in a 38spl cartridge and the results will be much different . My yrs and yrs of reloading has given me the experience to say what I previously posted .

 

[iPac]

I have had nothing but great accuracy using PP for all the calibers I use it for. Which is mainly 9mm and 38spl/38spl+P. I have tried it in 357mag too and got good accuracy as well.

There are so many variables when it comes to loading that you pretty much just have to try different things and see what works for you. Grab a bottle of PP and give it a shot.

 

[Calliope]

Don't care for PP in 357 with 125 jacketed, a lot of noise for the power level. Worked better with the 135 Gold Dot, that bullet sits much deeper in the case than the 125's.

Unique, Universal, even Bullseye and HP38 work better with 357/125 jacketed, so I saw no need to continue experimenting with PP.

HP38 turned out to be the most accurate of the bunch FWIW.

 

[mtgianni]

I love it in the 40 S&W. push it hard with a Lee 175 gr in the Smith and light in the Kahr with a Lee 145 gr. It doesn't care.

 

[lebomm]

I got pretty good results with 8.0 gr PP behind a 200 gr. RNFP in .44 Special out of my converted M28. About 2.5" @ 25 yds. off a sandbag. Haven't tried it yet in .38 Spl.

Larry

 

[mejetski2000]

Used it in .380, 9mm (multiple weights), .38+P(multiple), .357m (multiple), 10mm(multiple) and .44mag(multiple). Was able to duplicate Speer's data in .380, 9mm and .38+P for top velocities with excellent accuracy in these calibers, and did so with the 10mm with 150gr Noslers as well. All of the guns were what I'd call "defensive" pistols and not "target" guns. The longest barrel was my Glock 20, 4.5" and good hits at 50 yards weren't hard to get off the bags. I liked it enough in many calibers to buy it in bulk, which is the only bulk powder I own. Worked great with a 240gr XTP for a buddy's .44mag Ruger Carbine last fall deer season. Bottom line: It isn't 'optimal' for some applications but works well enough 'across the board' for this guy.

 

[Eddietruett]

What duckford failed to mention / or realize is that the 2.8 gr load of Bullseye with a 148 gr wc worked because of the significantly reduced case capacity vs using a std 158 gr bullet in 38spl . Try that same load with a std 158 gr swc in a 38spl cartridge and the results will be much different . My yrs and yrs of reloading has given me the experience to say what I previously posted .

I'm jumping in not to question your findings over the years, but in 38 cases using 3gr Bullseye, I've never found any noticeable difference in accuracy going from the hbwc to the swc. I know everyones results are different due to crimping etc. I do however find significant differences in accuracy by changing brands in plated bullets all sized the same diameter. I guess that's what makes loading your own so much fun. If I found everything to be the same in accuracy in all my guns then loading would get boring.

 

[yeti]

I prefer to use a faster burn powder if I want milder loads instead of down loading a slower burn powder and expecting it to perform well . I have never used PP , but have shot a fair amount of it's " near cousin " BE-86 in my 357 sig and for some mid range 44 magnum loads . I kept it right near the top of the load range and it worked well .

Its the slower powders that usually offer the worst performance at reduction, H110 and 296 being the most obvious in handguns, but it wouldn't be too surprising to hear of problems in other powders like Power Pistol and Longshot. I remember reading in a flier from BPS on Longshot stating it was a good powder for max loads, but poor at anything less; indeed, my own 10 bore loads proved this true, with patterns going from beautiful at shoulder breaking super loads but deteriorating rapidly as I tried to tone them down. People who have tried Longshot extensively in handguns can offer their notes.

....

tl;dr It would make sense that PP would probably do better at maximum, because that's what it is engineered for, interesting to see what other results people may offer.

I think you guys agree more than you disagree.

Downloading faster burn rate powders has always worked better for me in function and accuracy for mild target loads than trying it with slower burn rate powders.
I do like Power Pistol and have used several pounds of it and BE86, but accuracy/consistency was not as good when I tried it for milder low recoil (mid-range) practice loads in 45, 44spcl, 40 & 9. Heavier charge weights always yielded better more accurate/consistent results for me with those powders. More recoil and a fireball with PP, but fps were impressive.


When I could not buy a pound of 2400 to save my life, BE86 did make pretty darn nice 44mag loads.

 

[BE Mike]

What duckford failed to mention / or realize is that the 2.8 gr load of Bullseye with a 148 gr wc worked because of the significantly reduced case capacity vs using a std 158 gr bullet in 38spl . Try that same load with a std 158 gr swc in a 38spl cartridge and the results will be much different . My yrs and yrs of reloading has given me the experience to say what I previously posted .

Of course a hollow based wadcutter bullet would result in more case capacity than a solid wadcutter bullet.

 

[BE Mike]

I'm going to disagree with this. Some of the best Bullseye loads you can make are lower end, and I remember an old NRA article on maximizing wadcutter performance stating the old 2.8 grain load was ideal under laboratory conditions, and anything more started to see erratic performance, and I've had good luck with reduced loads with faster burning powders. I would not say "most" powders are better at closer to maximum, only some.

Its the slower powders that usually offer the worst performance at reduction, H110 and 296 being the most obvious in handguns, but it wouldn't be too surprising to hear of problems in other powders like Power Pistol and Longshot. I remember reading in a flier from BPS on Longshot stating it was a good powder for max loads, but poor at anything less; indeed, my own 10 bore loads proved this true, with patterns going from beautiful at shoulder breaking super loads but deteriorating rapidly as I tried to tone them down. People who have tried Longshot extensively in handguns can offer their notes.

That being said, there are some who have had good luck with reduced magnum handgun powders like 2400 and Blue Dot at far less than maximum. Its not just burn rate, but rather the individual characteristics of each powder that make them unique in their own way, as well as powder base and temperature, ect.

tl;dr It would make sense that PP would probably do better at maximum, because that's what it is engineered for, interesting to see what other results people may offer.

I've gotten great accuracy (sub 3" six shot group) at 50 yards with my S&W 629 Classic with 5" barrel. That is using 2400 at less than maximum charges with a 240 grain lead semi-wadcutter bullet. I tested, hand held, off a bench rest, so I know that the revolver and ammo will group better than I held.

 

[BE Mike]

What has been your experience with Power Pistol and accuracy in 38 Spl +P loads or other straight wall cartridges using lead bullets?

I found that in both 38 Spl +P and 357 Magnum using 158 gr lead bullets that it gets more accurate at the upper end of reloading manual data.

Appreciate your inputs and experiences


Thank you

At what distance are you wanting to test accuracy and what are your standards (group size)?