Whatever happened to three old-timey powders...800X, Herco, and 4227?

[Nemo288]

4227 rocks in supermag revolver rounds

(IMR)4227 is the only powder I now use in the .445 Supermag.
It's a great powder for all the supermags where the pressure can run up into the break-action/lever-rifle range and above (45kpsi).
No you won't get all the velocity of 110/296 but you do get amazing accuracy and a much friendlier pressure curve.
For several reasons I have given up on ball powders in general.
Safety and accuracy are more important to me than that last (potential) 100 fps.

I always wanted to try Herco in the 44 Special but have been getting nice results with the usual suspects: Universal and Unique.
Universal meters way better than Unique so it usually gets the nod.
Consequently the very few times I have seen Herco on the shelf I passed it by, having a fair stock of powder already.
Having also developed loads using some more obscure propellants like N105 and CSB1 for the Special,
Herco fell even further behind on my interest and time scale.

N105 may be the most efficient powder for the 44 Special.
It will deliver the highest velocities at 15-20 kpsi of any powder I have tried or modeled using QuickLoad.
It falls between Herco/Blue Dot and 2400 in burn rate and burns pretty clean even at the low special pressures.
Too bad Vihtavouri has almost priced themselves out of the American market.
Their powders are famous for burning clean.
I got several pounds of N105 during warehouse scrounge and clearing sales during the last big powder shortage.
There were a lot of small batches of odd-ball powders that appeared when the regulars went away.

 

[scooter123]

Take a look at Accurate #5, there is load data for BOTH 38 special and 357 Magnum. So, whats the big deal about being listed for these two calibers? It's simple, this means the powder is safe to use for the FULL RANGE between the 38 spl. starting weight and the max weight listed for 357 Magnum. Bet you will find you 900 fps load somewhere in that range. BTW, all of the Accurate handgun powders meter superbly with a SD of only 0.07 grains.

BTW the 3 powers that you were mourning about are still in common use with the calibers they were originally designed for, that being Shotgun loads where a SD of 0.17 or a bit more is acceptable.

 

[Luke Duke]

During the component drought of 2010-14 I needed powder. I dug
out the Speer, Hornady, and Lyman books. 38spl, 45.acp and
9mm was what I wanted to load.

I found something in the burn rate range of Unique would be good.
At the Sportmans Warehouse off I-25 & 84th Ave in Thornton CO (Denver)
I saw they were out of about everything. They had heavy rifle
powders and a few shotgun powders.

There was a 8lb can of Herco for $104.00. One of the 38spl loads listed
6.0gr of it as a full power load. I bought it.

Taking my treasure home and researching it more, Herco was a
go to powder for 9mm in the 80's. And there were loads for 45ACP.

I ended up setting 6.0 grains of Herco as my standard powder for:

38 Special 158gr cast
9mm Luger 124gr cast
45 ACP 230gr cast

I did this so I could set up 1 Dillon 550 Powder measure with it
and just move the measure from tool head to tool head.

As it turns out, 6gr of Herco also runs the Shields & SIG's in 40 S&W
with 180gr cast.

Now that I powder coat I suppose next May when the snow's off
the ground I should chronograph this load with all my guns and
see what the actual velocities are.

Before I close and the whiners start their keening:
This load works in MY GUNS. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH.
It's for CAST LEAD Bullets


It's a shame when you have to Lawyer up in a discussion forum
so a Coprophagic Pin Worm won't try and feed off your input and
you have to color it Yellow & Magenta like it's radioactive.

Hey a fellow Coloradoan, bought all my reloading supplies there for years. Live in Grand Junction now. I remember those years. Had to take a vacation day to wait there in morning for the powder to be delivered so you could get first dibs!

 

[cowboy4evr]

The comment above about avoiding the Speer #8 is usually from someone that doesn't have it and just goes by what he was told , or read . I have #8 . I bought it just to see for myself about these " super hot loads " . What I found , basically is load data that is equal to , and in some cases less than today's load data . Yes, it has a page on hot 38spl loads and it also says these are for guys in LE that are working in dangerous areas and need more power in their handgun . Remember , it was published back when many many LE agencies allowed the officers to " roll " their own . I have never had a problem with the starting loads published in Speer #8 and have gone beyond that many times . I reference to my Speer #8 a lot , especially when looking for load data using powders not listed today . My hand guns are as tight today as the day I bought them . Regards, Paul

 

[rockquarry]

The comment above about avoiding the Speer #8 is usually from someone that doesn't have it and just goes by what he was told , or read . I have #8 . I bought it just to see for myself about these " super hot loads " . What I found , basically is load data that is equal to , and in some cases less than today's load data . Yes, it has a page on hot 38spl loads and it also says these are for guys in LE that are working in dangerous areas and need more power in their handgun . Remember , it was published back when many many LE agencies allowed the officers to " roll " their own . I have never had a problem with the starting loads published in Speer #8 and have gone beyond that many times . I reference to my Speer #8 a lot , especially when looking for load data using powders not listed today . My hand guns are as tight today as the day I bought them . Regards, Paul

I agree with you that most who reference Speer #8 likely have never seen a copy, let alone studied or used it. I bought a new #8 in about 1971 as an update to #6 that I bought about 1965.

Many of the loads in #8 and other Speer books and other handloading manuals may not have been pressure tested at all. The loads where pressure was measured was done so with equipment that may not have been as accurate as what is available today. While I don't know for sure, I suspect there was more in the way of operator discretion and interpretation of readings in comparison with what is done currently.

As is so often the case with conventional wisdom, many of our quasi experts blame lawyers and liability concerns with the reduction of published powders charges in current data. Such points may be valid, but to a much smaller extent than most of us realize. Improved technology probably has more to do with current published load data than lawyers.

Speer #8 did have some "warm" .38 Special loads. Of course I had to try them, particularly those with #4756 powder. Few had chronographs in 1971, so we assumed the velocities in the loading books were right. I never damaged any revolvers by using the data, but there's some data I wouldn't use today except maybe in my Outdoorsman or a .357, certainly not in a J-frame gun or Detective Special.

 

[oddshooter]

As cowboy4evr and Nemo said:

There is no better powder for 357 Maximum and the SuperMags in general than 4227. Silhouetters swear by it at the winner's circle.

I'll trade awesome accuracy for a few unburnt granules any day.
I use the small rifle primers in my revolver loads.

I try 4227 in almost every caliber I handload. .455 Webley, 45 colt, 44 mag, 44 special, 40, 10mm, 38 spl, 357mag, and 357 Maximum.
Now trying it in 327fm, 32-20wcf, 32 H&Rmag, and 32 spl.

It just seems friendly and versatile. 4227 downloads safely and is not spiky like 296/H110.

I find 4227 everywhere.
I have over 20 handgun powders in inventory, but my goto's are 4227 and VV N340. I enjoy the testing.


Prescut

 

[Nemo288]

There is no better powder for 357 Maximum and the SuperMags in general than 4227.
I'll trade awesome accuracy for a few unburnt granules any day.
I use the small rifle primers in my revolver loads.

Since my first .445SM rounds were made from rifle brass, I started using the large rifle primers right away.
Since then I have trimmed down all the Starline .445 primer pockets to accept them.
They work fine in the Dan Wesson and also the Encores.
Once you get up to (and above) magnum pressures, there is very little to no unburnt powder with 4227.
Some ash maybe but no granules.

 

[Bill Lear]

Frankly 800X is a powder I never had any use for because it seemed uncommon compared to more available brands. Then came the big components shortage some years back when many of us couldn't get our regular brands and started considering alternative powders which is how I happened to come into possession of a half-dozen cans of 800X. The only load I tried for it was 7.0 grains under a 230gr. Rainier plated RN in .45 auto and that turned out to be spot on to factory at 845fps/365fpe. Little did I know at the time that fate had plans for me.

Along the way I got into the .460 Rowland, first in a Glock conversion with long slide, 6.61" barrel and steel LWD comp, then a RIA 1911FSA1 with Clark conversion barrel and a host of other mods. Being such a hot round I never planned to shoot many of them despite the way the compensated pistols really tamed the 40K psi cartridge, but then California was nice enough to pass a law prohibiting mail-order ammo purchases so I had to consider rolling my own. I did some reading and discovered some decent loads in a few official places, but then I discovered a huge "underground" of .45 Super/.460 Rowland enthusiasts who were collectively pushing the boundaries on "magnumized" .45 auto loads. A powder that jumped off the page was 800X. Granted none of this came with an official stamp on it, but I've been reloading enough decades to be able to ascertain what might be safe or insane. I knew how my .45 auto load performed at 7.0, and I saw much larger numbers being touted by others so I ended up dipping a few toes in and working up some 800X loads for both .45 Super and .460 Rowland. The results were and still are impressive. Certainly I did comparison loads against other powders - one of my favorites being AA7 which meters with precision from my Redding 10X, and I could throw large charge weights which really worked for the comp, but even AA7 was no match for 800X in the .460 Rowland. Laddering up I settled on 14.3gr. of 800X under a Hornady 185gr. XTP for 1,580fps/1,026fpe from the 5.4" Clark 1911 barrel and 1,634fps/1,097fpe for the Glock long slide. This powder and bullet combo works perfectly with the comps and recoil of this load is surprisingly mild. With 230 grain Berry's I got 1,408fps/1,013fpe from the 5.4" and 1,457fps/1,084fpe from the 6.61" barrel using 12.8gr. of 800X. Again, this load delivers surprisingly little "kick" thanks to the semiautomatic actions combined with fully functioning compensators. During my load testing I found myself shooting dozens of strings because the loads are so tame compared to my 37 ounce S&W M69 which kicks so hard that by shot #3 it's time to swap hands for a moment between rounds! In comparison the Glock long slide only weighs 34 ounces empty, and the RIA 39 ounces.
Using 800X for the Lehigh Xtreme Defender 120gr. I got right at 1,900fps/958fpe using 15gr.
Speer 260 grain JHP over 10.5gr go 1,180fps/804fe from the 5.4" and 1,212fps/848fpe from the longslide.

The 5.4" barrel's comp certainly makes better use of the 800X charge weight in the 260gr, which is why there isn't a huge jump in speed with the added 1.2" of barrel.

Of course 800X meters like tree leaves and demands each charge be weighed for accuracy and safety, but for cartridges like the .460 Rowland where one isn't likely to shoot thousands, it's a worthwhile trade-off. If I wanted to load more rounds quickly I'd opt for AA7 which I can safely dispense from the 10X, and accept less than maximum performance in terms of velocity, though the comps would probably work better due to heavier charges.

Brand new Starfire .460 Rowland brass comes out looking very "unstressed"

 

[Rogeronimo]

800X is my go-to 9mm powder for 124gn JHP. Nothing else compares.