Glock Forum - GlockTalk banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,262 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I’m trying to understand the substantial difference in published load data for the 240 grain lead bullet. Modern Reloading second edition shows 20.6 gr @1510 FPS but Lyman‘s 49th has 20.6 @ 1258. I noticed Lyman‘s states the load is for handguns. Modern Reloading doesn’t state what test gun was used. Previously I worked up my loads and ended up at 19.1 gr in my S&W 629. I now have a second pistol in 44 magnum which is a LAR Mark IV Grizzly in semi auto. Looks like I’m going to have to develop a different load for it. Any ideas why these two manuals differ so significantly? I have not been able to Chrono my loads yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,224 Posts
The Lee manual is a compilation of data & imo, not really put together well. Bbl length matters, test platform matters. Having shot maybe 400# of 240-250gr lswc out of 44mags over the years, mostly with h110 but quite a bit of 2400, you are a lot closer to 1300fps vs 1500fps, even in 8" bbls.
From my 7 1/2" Rbhh, I am getting 1270fps with 18gr under a 250gr lswc. In a 4", 1120fps. As a benchmark, I shot some fed 300gr lfp factory, 1185fps in the Rbhh
 
  • Like
Reactions: byf43 and Taterhead

·
NRA Life Member
Joined
·
5,795 Posts
Alliant 2400 using 19 grains with a 240 jacketed bullet gives me all I can handle, but makes a good hunting load for my uses. Out of a handgun (629- 6”) this gave me 1236 FPS on my last test.

right now I’m shooting 16 grains of AA#9 with a 240 grain lead bullet. AA#9 seems to be similar to 2400. This gives me 1081 FPS. If I bump up to 19 grains with a jacketed bullet I get 1250 FPS, almost identical to 19 grains of 2400.

I really like 8 grains of Unique for a mild plinking load (933 FPS)
 

·
Venor ergo sum
Gun control is about CONTROL.
Joined
·
4,320 Posts
I use 19.5 grains of 2400 for a velocity of 1250 out of a 6 1/2” model 29. Very accurate load.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Different components and guns. Here's a few loads using 2400.

Gun: S&W Model 29 6 1/2 inch

Bullet: Montana Bullet Works/Lyman 429244 255 gr. SWC-GC (.430)
Powder: Alliant 2400 20.2 grs
Primer: Federal 150
Case: PMC
Velocity: 1323.05 fps

Bullet: Montana Bullet Works/Lyman 429244 255 gr. SWC-GC (.430)
Powder: Alliant 2400 20.8 grs
Primer: Federal 150
Case: PMC
Velocity: 1333.16 fps

Gun: S&W Model 629 6 inch

Bullet: Hornady 240 gr. XTP-HP
Powder: Alliant 2400 20.7 grs.
Primer: Federal 150
Case: PMC
Average Velocity: 1290 fps
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Just a little info from Sierra Reloading Ap V6.
44 Mag:
Bullet: Sierra 240gr JHC
Powder: 2400 19.1 grs. Listed as High Pressure load
Velocity: 1430 fps.

I thought this was a misprint and called Tech support. He told me whatever was printed was the result from the testing for the New manual. Sierra V5 listed 19.5 as the minimum load. Can there be that much difference between the Hercules 2400 and the Alliant 2400. Just curious because we've been shooting the Sierra 44mag. 240 gr. JHC on top of 22 grs of Hercules 2400 since '76. All of my shooting was done out of a Ruger Super Blackhawk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,224 Posts
Just a little info from Sierra Reloading Ap V6.
44 Mag:
Bullet: Sierra 240gr JHC
Powder: 2400 19.1 grs. Listed as High Pressure load
Velocity: 1430 fps.

I thought this was a misprint and called Tech support. He told me whatever was printed was the result from the testing for the New manual. Sierra V5 listed 19.5 as the minimum load. Can there be that much difference between the Hercules 2400 and the Alliant 2400. Just curious because we've been shooting the Sierra 44mag. 240 gr. JHC on top of 22 grs of Hercules 2400 since '76. All of my shooting was done out of a Ruger Super Blackhawk
Not likely much diff in the powder lots but testing platforms are wildly diff, which accounts for a lot of the confusion with data from book to book.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taterhead

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,464 Posts
Not likely much diff in the powder lots but testing platforms are wildly diff, which accounts for a lot of the confusion with data from book to book.
I loaded a tin of Hercules Unique from the 1950s last year or the year before. While there were some slight visual and density differences, I can't detect any difference over the chronograph vs contemporary Alliant Unique. I'm with you that I'd doubt much difference in the actual powder.
 

·
...
Joined
·
18,968 Posts
2400 is a flexible powder that works well at different load increments. But I find that the same is true for AA9 and both AA9 and 2400 are of a similar burn rate. I actually like AA9 better even though I had used 2400 for many years in the 357, 41, and 44 magnums. I've been reloading since 1968.

For moderate to mid-range loads, I like Unique, Power Pistol, AA7, and Blue dot. AA7 and AA9 are both flash-suppressed and I now use AA7 in place of Blue dot, as both are a similar burn rate.

For the hottest loads, I've always liked WW296. 296 and H-110 are supposedly teh same powder and I've used both and compared them side by side and I liked 296 better.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top