180gr trouble in my Model 69 .44mag

[Mike_Fontenot]

Yesterday, I shot one round of my recently purchased boxes of Underwood .44mag 180gr XTP's. When I ejected the casing, it was extremely tight and hard to eject. I got it out OK (without needing any tool, like a hammer and board), but it was difficult. I think a full 5-shot cylinder-full of casings would be impossible to eject without the help of a hammer and board ... and I certainly wouldn't be able to do a speed-reload. This contrasts with many of the other types of .44mag rounds I've fired in that gun, whose casings just fell right out. An Underwood 240gr XTP round that I fired wouldn't just fall out, but it was easy to eject. I'm not going to shoot any more of the Underwood 180gr rounds.

Has anyone else had a similar problem with these rounds in a M69 (or in a M629)? The YouTube video of Jerry Miculec shooting 180gr .44mag's (he doesn't say the brand, but Underwood is the only source that I've seen) doesn't seem to show him having any trouble ejecting the casings (after shooting a full cylinder of 5 of them).

 

[Fishinfool]

Never used Underwood ammo, but from what I understand, it is loaded to the max. You answered your own question when you stated you would no longer use that load in your gun, Not all guns work well with all ammo.

Could be a slightly rough chamber, combined with max pressures, and slightly soft brass? Just avoid it.

The Remington 180 grain 44 mag load is also a hot one, but I have never had extraction issues with it.

Larry

 

[at_liberty]

Yesterday, I shot one round of my recently purchased boxes of Underwood .44mag 180gr XTP's. When I ejected the casing, it was extremely tight and hard to eject. I got it out OK (without needing any tool, like a hammer and board), but it was difficult. I think a full 5-shot cylinder-full of casings would be impossible to eject without the help of a hammer and board ... and I certainly wouldn't be able to do a speed-reload. This contrasts with many of the other types of .44mag rounds I've fired in that gun, whose casings just fell right out. An Underwood 240gr XTP round that I fired wouldn't just fall out, but it was easy to eject. I'm not going to shoot any more of the Underwood 180gr rounds.

Has anyone else had a similar problem with these rounds in a M69 (or in a M629)? The YouTube video of Jerry Miculec shooting 180gr .44mag's (he doesn't say the brand, but Underwood is the only source that I've seen) doesn't seem to show him having any trouble ejecting the casings (after shooting a full cylinder of 5 of them).

There is more of a powder burn beyond that lightweight bullet than there would be for a nominal 240 gr.

Fortunately, I have both a single and double action 44 Magnum, so the hotter or simply problematic stuff can be run in the SAA style gun and benefit from the single ejector to poke out the case.

For me, the 180 gr bullet is a bit light even for my 44 Specials. I start at 200.

 

[Dan Christopher]

That load is too hot. Some folks swear by Underwood, but I steer clear of it.

 

[629shooter]

I think Miculec is using the Hornady 180 gr. XTP load. if you look @ 19:10 in his S&W model 29/629 video, you can see a box of Hornady ammunition under each revolver. Oddly, I can't find that load in stock online or on their website. But, I know it was produced because, I still have some.

 

[Mike_Fontenot]

Thanks for the two references to other makes of 180gr .44mag ... I had thought that only Underwood made it ... makes me feel better about Miculec not having the problem I had.

I was also surprised that the perceived recoil for the UW 180gr round was about the same as for the UW 240gr .44mag ... for equal energies, a lighter bullet will have less momentum, and it is momentum which primarily correlates with perceived recoil. And, as best I recall, the UW 180gr round is listed as having a bit lower energy that the UW 240gr round.

One other question: My ejector rod isn't long enough to clear the .44mag casings from the chamber holes ... it is even slightly too short for .44Special. Is the ejector for the Model 629 long enough to clear the casings from the chamber holes?

 

[magnumfreak]

While i love underwood for 40 and 10 i do not use it for 44mag as its not that hot. Not sure why one would shoot 180 in 44mag even my specials are 210 or more. Stick to heavier grains in 44mag. I can say ive shot tons of underwood 44 special 200 and 245 hrain and it ejected fine from my 69s.

 

[shipwreck2]

While i love underwood for 40 and 10 i do not use it for 44mag as its not that hot. Not sure why one would shoot 180 in 44mag even my specials are 210 or more. Stick to heavier grains in 44mag. I can say ive shot tons of underwood 44 special 200 and 245 hrain and it ejected fine from my 69s.

What 44 ammo do you like?

 

[steelslaver]

Thanks for the two references to other makes of 180gr .44mag ... I had thought that only Underwood made it ... makes me feel better about Miculec not having the problem I had.

I was also surprised that the perceived recoil for the UW 180gr round was about the same as for the UW 240gr .44mag ... for equal energies, a lighter bullet will have less momentum, and it is momentum which primarily correlates with perceived recoil. And, as best I recall, the UW 180gr round is listed as having a bit lower energy that the UW 240gr round.

One other question: My ejector rod isn't long enough to clear the .44mag casings from the chamber holes ... it is even slightly too short for .44Special. Is the ejector for the Model 629 long enough to clear the casings from the chamber holes?

If 2 rounds have equal energy they will have equal momentum and recoil. Muzzle energy is fps x fps x weight(gr)/450,240. that energy goes both ways muzzle and recoil. A 240 gr at 1300 has 901ft#. A 200gr at 1425 would have about the same ME and recoil in the same gun. A bullets muzzle energy and momentum are the same.

The 629 ejector is also to short to completely eject cases, but if ejected with the muzzle up they should drop the rest of the way out. N frame 357s are also the same.

 

[ironhead7544]

You will sometimes find a revolver wont "like" a certain load.

I have been handloading since 1972 and have seen this a number of times, also. I have even had the start load listing tie up a revolver.

The 180 gr loads in 44 Magnum are quite loud and can seem to have more recoil because of the blast.

I would contact Underwood and see what they say.

 

[kilowatt3]

If 2 rounds have equal energy they will have equal momentum and recoil...

No, Mike is correct - for equal energies, a lighter bullet will have less momentum.

Muzzle energy is fps x fps x weight(gr)/450,240. that energy goes both ways muzzle and recoil.

The "energy goes both ways" is a common misconception. It's usually based upon a misinterpretation of either Conservation of Energy or Newton's Third Law. It's not true.

A bullets muzzle energy and momentum are the same.

Nope, just not so.

 

[shocker]

I've shot SAAMI max handloads with 240 gr bullets from my 69 and 5 cases eject with an easy push on the rod.
I am a big fan of the 69 but it is a medium frame revolver and I don't use it for nuclear loads. That's what a 44 carbine is for.

 

[Muley Gil]

"One other question: My ejector rod isn't long enough to clear the .44mag casings from the chamber holes ... it is even slightly too short for .44Special. Is the ejector for the Model 629 long enough to clear the casings from the chamber holes?"

As stated above, the way to eject rounds from a DA revolver is to swing the cylinder out, point the muzzle to the sky and hit the rod, either with your thumb or the palm of your hand.

Those of us who wore badges and carried wheelguns learned this years ago.

 

[silentflyer]

In 40 years of playing with .44 mags, never had any luck with light 180 gn. bullets as far as accuracy. Never load anything under 225 and don't have that problem. One friend has had some luck in a 14" TC Contender barrel with the 180's.

 

[at_liberty]

Thanks for the two references to other makes of 180gr .44mag ... I had thought that only Underwood made it ... makes me feel better about Miculec not having the problem I had.

I was also surprised that the perceived recoil for the UW 180gr round was about the same as for the UW 240gr .44mag ... for equal energies, a lighter bullet will have less momentum, and it is momentum which primarily correlates with perceived recoil. And, as best I recall, the UW 180gr round is listed as having a bit lower energy that the UW 240gr round.

One other question: My ejector rod isn't long enough to clear the .44mag casings from the chamber holes ... it is even slightly too short for .44Special. Is the ejector for the Model 629 long enough to clear the casings from the chamber holes?

I don't think you should expect the ejector to carry the cases completely clear of the chambers. At some point you would run into the grips. What I get in 44 Mag is 1" ejection, leaving 1/4". I like that. because I don't have to pick up brass flying free. I don't use the guns in that caliber for anything that requires speed in reloading, but smaller calibers do the same thing. My single action 41 Mag and 44 Special, same thing...no complete ejection.

 

[Mike_Fontenot]

While i love underwood for 40 and 10 i do not use it for 44mag as its not that hot.

What brand is hotter? Of about a half-dozen .44mag brands I've shot, DoubleTap 240's and Underwood 240's seemed the hottest.

 

[Mike_Fontenot]

Thanks for all the info about ejector length. I THINK I remember that my S&W360sc will push .38Specials all the way out, but not .357's. Maybe it was all those .38 cases that I fully ejected that made me think that was the norm. (Or maybe I'm remembering wrong about the 360sc and .38's ... I'll check it next time I have the 360sc unloaded (it's my BUG)).