Took my 5" 625-4, my new 3.3" Springfield XDs, and 3 different types of .45 ACP ammo to the range today. Both guns seem quite accurate with all 3 loads. The higher average velocity in every case belongs to the 625.

Winchester White Box (230 gr)-----861.4-----798.3 (difference of 63.1 fps)

Winchester SD Round (230 gr.)-----896.3-----827.4 (difference of 68.9 fps)

Handload: 200 gr. cast SWC/5.3 gr. W 231-----839.6-----738.7 (difference of a whopping 100.9 fps).

My only surprise was how much greater the comparative velocity difference was with the handload than with the factory ammo.

Thoughts??

That's not too surprising. Typical you see higher velocities from longer barrels. I wonder if the 100 fps spread for the hand load wasn't caused by a relatively slower burning powder. The slower powders usually benefit more from longer barrels.

__________________
Proud anachronism

I agree - not surprising. You never know what a gun is doing with a load until you chronograph THAT gun.

I have two very similar 44 Magnums, both with 4-inch barrels, that will show a difference of 100-200 FPS, depending on the load. They were made a roughly three years apart, both are in good repair, and both have similar chamber and exit bore dimensions. A friend has a similar pair of Model 66s that will also vary around 200 FPS in their chronograph readings with the same loads. Doesn't seem to be too uncommon.

I have heard people talk about one gun shooting harder than another gun just going by how it killed game or broke a target. It makes one think they are imagining things until you chronograph different guns with the same loads and the bullet speed will really vary. If one gun shoots a bullet faster it has to be hitting harder and have a flatter trajectory. Larry

I've heard the same thing said, here, tops, and always sorta disregarded such talk as old wives' tales, but, without the benefit of a chrono, about all they had to use as a measurin stick was a gun's effective range or the effect it had on game, clays, etc......I think you're on to something as to how those old stories got their start.

Took the little XDs and my old stand-by load of 5.2 grains of Titegroup to the range today, It once again proved very accurate and kicked the 200 grain SWC along at an average velocity of 848.9 fps. That up from the anemic 738.7 fps I got with the 231 load yesterday. Recoil is very manageable even in the 21.5 ounce Springer. Didn't take either of my 625s but they shine with this load.

The cast lead bullet offers less resistance than a jacketed bullet. If you were to load a similar shaped SWC of the same weight with the same powder charge the lead would be faster.

A couple of examples I wouldn't believe unless I had used a chronograph. 10 grs. of Unique, 240 gr. SWC. 6 1/2 in. 1099 fps., 4 in. 1088 fps., 3 in. 1023. Why did the first 2 1/2 in. cost 11 fps. and the next in. cost 65 fps.? Same bullet with 18 grs. of 2400. 6 in. 1210 fps. and 4 in. 1196 fps. Only lost 14 fps. with 2 in. shorter barrel. I guess the 4 in. just shoots hard. The 6 1/2 in. is a 29-2, 6 in. Colt Anaconda, 4 in. 29-3, 3 in. 29-4. Larry

That would be my take.

I traded for an old 4" Colt .357 mostly because of its well-known local LEO provenance. I decided it wouldn't hurt if I shot it a few times before passing it on to the family of the lawman who had used it in law enforcement. I took along my chrono.

Using a favorite .357 target load, the Colt's measured velocity averaged many fps slower than the same round in my other 4" guns. Was a little disappointed to learn that the more famous of the guns I chronoed that day definitely DIDN'T "shoot hard".

Been hand-loading since '78 and rarely a week passes that I don't learn something new ref. velocities