Accurate Arms #9 with .44 Special

The 16-AA9 is pretty damn stout. I would use it only on an *as needed* basis.

I used CCI300 (standard) primers on my HS-6 load. I sure like that load in this gun.

Yeah I was surprised the Uniue load didn't do better. I must have done something wrong, don't know what though. I'll try the Keith bullet with it and see how it goes.
 
My old Rossi 44 Magnum rifle got 21.3 gr with a 250 GC swc. The redhawk magnum gets 19.2 gr. I guess that 16 gr in a 44 special would be rather stout.
 
I have never read anything documented from Smith & Wesson regarding N-frames having specific heat treatments for different calibers.

There is no doubt that cylinders receive heat treatment and I believe that is across the board.

The determining factor in strength has a great deal more to do with the thickness of the cylinder walls than any other factor. I am the owner of a Ruger Redhawk in .357 that was made for a very short time in the eighties, I have never seen a cylinder with more metal thickness than this revolver displays’ and I have still never exceeded top posted loads for this caliber.

I have complete faith that Smith & Wesson designs their N-frames to comfortable exceed any SAAMI standards developed for the respective calibers.

I agree completely. I was a machinist for about 25 years and it just makes no sense that they would heat treat 44 spl frames differently than
the .44 mag frames. Mistakes do happen when raw material is pulled and sent to the machines. Pulling the wrong heat lot is one that could be totally eliminated by heat treating them identically. Also lets them make whatever caliber they need if they have a "surprise" order for one caliber or the other come in. Ditto for the cylinders.
 
Here's a pic of the revolver.

I took the combat grips off and stored them. They seem to be worth some money and I don't want to scratch them. These are from gungripsupply.com. I like them.

I also took the stock flash chromed trigger and hammer out (theyr'e stored with the original grips) and installed a .500" target hammer and .500" trigger.


624002.jpg
 
Last edited:
I have read on several occasions that Smith & Wesson may have started heat treatment on some of their firearms as early as the 1920 era, as I am under no circumstance a historian of Smith & Wesson there may well be some on this site that could confirm the facts of that issue.

The reason for heat treatment of Stainless steel metals is as follows:

Stainless steels are often heat treated; the nature of this treatment depends on the type of stainless steel and the reason for the treatment. These treatments, which include annealing, hardening and stress relieving, restore desirable properties such as corrosion resistance and ductility to metal altered by prior fabrication operations or produce hard structures able to withstand high stresses or abrasion in service.
 
In post # 7 in the link I cited, it suggested that a different heat treatment was given to 44 mag vs the 44spl. If I had a S&W chambered in 44spl I would certainly want to know whats all about it.
My vice-principal in jr high warned me about ***-u-me-ing things.
 
AAC No 7 in 44Spl

I use AAC-7 for my .44 Special loads. Its a fairly hot load (I don't have the numbers in front of me because I'm writing from work).
Just happened to have a tub of AAC-7 and want to use it for reduced target load in a Marlin 1894 carbine with 240gr RNFPL in magnum cases
Would like to hear if your load was accurate(Ha!) with what bullet wt/gr and how much No 7 powder. Also, what length barrel?
Tks
Dave
 
Don't overlook Longshot for standard-to+P loads in big cases. It was the single best powder I found for a 44/40 Model 544 and 200 grain JHPs. I use it instead of Unique for 40 S&W as well.
 
Back
Top