Try 22.5 grains of 296 to spice things up . So at 63years old you are ready to take the dirt nap? I am 79 and still hunt Elk . $100.00 for chrony is too much to know what is safe in your rifle ? You probably will not live long if you keep guessing at what is safe . Good luck,I think you need it . Huntz
Try 22.5 grains of 296 to spice things up . So at 63years old you are ready to take the dirt nap? I am 79 and still hunt Elk . $100.00 for chrony is too much to know what is safe in your rifle ? You probably will not live long if you keep guessing at what is safe . Good luck,I think you need it . Huntz
How in the in the Hell , do you even remotely come up with me wanting to take a dirt nap from this conversation ?
The chronograph is not what makes a load safe or not, it merely shows Velocities.
I am Just trying to establish which Powder is going to remain subsonic using a 200 grain RNFP bullet when shot from a carbines 16 inch barrel.
So your reasoning capability tells you that , it is a good rational thing to say that you suggest using 22.5 grains from a 44 special to spice things up ? Really, to remain subsonic? Which is the gist of the post...
Really !!
Well bless your heart
The money that I mentioned for a chronograph would be to Verify that the Bullet,case ,powder charge ,barrel length combination is indeed less than supersonic in velocity.
And the chronograph will only tell the velocities after the fact .
The safety of load data is should be established BEFORE shooting it.
Man ,your legs must really be sore ,from all the wrong conclussions you are jumping to.
More than likely, you are just a Troll or you just woke up and saw a message on your phone that demanded your input and did not read the thread in its entirety or you really dont understand what is being discussed here.
Actually my conclusion is that as long as you were talking stupid ,so should I . You ask for reloading opinions and got some good solid information and reject everything offered to you . Why ask if you have already made your mind up ?Not using a chr.If you are not willing to verify your MV and pressure you obviously have a death wish.
I am not talking stupid ,Your obvious lack of cognitive skills are why you are
not understanding and coming to your Erroneous assumption ,Which in turn leads to your irrational 'conclusion'
I have gotten some good advice from some posters.
I have not 'rejected all advice ' as you try to say.
I have not asked a question when I already made up my mind.
Just because you suggest so does not make it so.
As far as use of a chronograph or not is concerned ,when using long established load data from reloading manual's there is Little danger from not using a a $100.00 chronograph to verify the Velocity that a powder company that has a much better chronograph and actually have the ability and equipment to test pressures.
Therefore when using this type of reloading data there is no real danger to NOT using a cheap chronograph to verify the results of a powder company.
I am looking for Real data to stay subsonic using a 200 Gain or a 240 grain from a 44 Special case from a 16 inch barrel, plain and simple.
I will be using an appropiate powder and a mid range pressure as indicated by a reloading manual.
I will not be using anywhere max loads so the danger of being overpressure are slim to none.
Obviously I am NOT looking for a high velocity load so the example that you used to use the 296 load was said to prove to Yourself and others who read it that I was on a death wish.
I see that you have not commeted on this thread or offered any help or suggestions on this thread
Only things that you have commented on was your ludicrous suggestion for the 296 load and my 'Death Wish'.
I could continue to discuss these thing's
BUT that would be merely more of a waste of my time trying to communicate with you .
As It is obvious that you have not added, nor the intent to add anything of a helpfull nature to add to this thread/
Your comment's are that of the Typical Troll that has nothing to do but try to trash a thread and to do your best to stir chit.
