Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Elmer Keith Load Question

Shot a load as follows:

44 Mag.

19 grains of 2400

240 grain Hard Cast SWC

4 5/8" Ruger SBH.

The notes on the handloaders box suggest 1200 FPS.

But this sucker "pops" a good bit more than my load of 10 grains of Universal--which also is supposed to get 1200 fps.

Anybody out there ever chrono 19 grains 2400 and have some idea what I might, could, possibly be getting velocity wise?

BMT

we have shot 20.7 grs of 2400 with a 240 SWC and in the 7 1/2" barrels for years and get a shade over 1350 fps IIRC. this load in my 4 5/8" SBH gets about 1250 fps but it is a very loud load due to the amount of powder and short barrel i believe it is not all burning.

cannot speak to the universal load as we either run the aobve load of a heavy dose of H110 on a 240 gr XTP or about 8 gr unique for plinking

Elmer Keith's favorite .44 Mag. load was 22.0 grains of 2400.

L.W.

Just to add to that, today's Alliant 2400 is not Elmer's Hercules 2400. Not sure when they changed it exactly, but 22.0 grains of modern 2400 would be a tad overloaded.

I used to use 21.5 gr. behind a Lyman 429215 SWCGC and that was as much bite as I ever needed.

This is subjective and folks can post all the empirical data they want about ejecta weight and all that, but I've worked with 2400 for some 38 years in all three revolver magnums and the .45 Colt and it just seems to kick harder for a given velocity than say, 296. Was out a couple weeks ago working up loads in a new .45 Blackhawk and a .357 GP-100, and the loads with 2400 definitely seemed to kick more than those that used 296 to achieve the same velocity.

Have no idea why that is, it just seems to me that it is.

FWIW - IMR4227 is an often overlooked powder for handguns. I've used it quite a bit as well and you can achieve respectable velocities combined with excellent accuracy with it. It also works very, very well in fairly reduced amounts. Used to load 20 grains of IMR4227 under that same 215 SWCGC mentioned earlier. Got about 1000 fps but mostly that load was one hole accurate. Had a target (since lost) from my .44 that put 8 of those rounds in a hole that a .45 slug would barely fit through. Only poblem is that it leaves lots of powder granules in the barrel (at reduced loads that is, no problem when approaching max loads), but I can put up with that for the terrific accuracy I got with it.

Thanx for the help guys. I guess maybe I am getting 1200 fps with 19 grains. Thats a nice stout load that is also not "too much."

I am shooting laser-Cast Bullets and Boy howdy they are accurate.

Should be a great all around game getter.

BMT

Mr. BMT,
In our S&W 329 Alaskan Backpacker II (4" barrel):
240gr cast lead - CCI 300 Primer - Hercules 2400
18.0gr - 994fps avg
19.0gr - 1035fps avg
20.0gr - 1161fps avg

change primer to CCI 350
17.0gr - 1095fps avg

Hope this helps for a ballpark figure.
Best Wishes

Thanx, that is very helpful. BMT

From the Alliant Powder Website:

Minimum OAL = 1.6 (inches)

Bbl Length = 5.7

Primer = Fed. 150

Powder = 2400

Charge Weight = 20.6 (grains)

Velocity = 1,510 (fps)

Chamber Pressure (psi) = 34,700

I was using alliant 2400 so I figure I was getting closer to 1350-1400 fps from the 19 grain charge, especially when you consider that the above figures are for a barrel only 1 inch longer.

BMT

a quick look at my data shows i misspsoke in my above post. It should have said we get close to 1600 fps with our 7 1/2",and about 1500 fps in my 4 /5/8"

Jim,

Glad to see that someone else is aware of the value of IMR4227. I've used a strong dose of the stuff under a .45Colt, 250gr. XTP,as a hunting load.

It works great out of a RBH.

m

OK, that helps. Looks like that is within the spec from the ALliant sit. So, those 19.0 grain loads were a little more stout than the Universal loads.

Thanx,

BMT

BMT i would agree with your theory

Thanx, BMT

for slightly reduced target accuracy type loads that still punches hard , don,t overlook BLUE DOT14 grains under a 240 grain cast or jacketed bullet is both fast and acurate in most revolvers

http://www.alliantpowder.com/reloaders/R...amp;bulletid=87

http://www.alliantpowder.com/reloaders/R...amp;bulletid=88

when your loading THOUSANDS on a progessive loader like a DILLON 650 the differance in the number of shells loaded per lb is very noticable , vs 2400,H110,ETC.

Excellent point! I may try some blue dot next go round.

BMT

Brian Pearce has made the point in print that current 2400 is a bit faster burning than the pre-1980s vintages. He fired old/new side-by-side on the same day. He suggests backing off a bit. His 2-part article on the favorite loads of Elmer Keith and Skeeter Skelton in Handloader magazine document this.

Brian also made the point that one should use standard primers with 2400 (older load books usually specify magnums). He has found noticeable pressure increases when using magnum primers with 2400.

I, too, have noticed that 2400 has a greater recoil impulse than other powders offering comparable performance. Some writers have mentioned this phenomenon.

Mainframe

To the original post, 10 grs of universal will push a 240 1000 fps (more like 950 in a short tube), not 1200. Going from 1000 to 1200 fps in a handgun comes with a healthy increase in recoil. I would not use universal if you want 1200 fps, it is too fast of a powder for that.

I think greater recoil impulse is a misnomer, perharps sharper due to it being a relatively fast powder. I've used a fair bit of 2400, and it is a great powder in certain applications.

That said with big bore pistol shooters moving towards heavier bullets, you are better off using a slower powder like H-100, W-296 or Lil-gun.

Like you and others here, 458 Lott, I've used 2400 in both old and newer forms and found it absolutely wonderful for some loads. It's noisy, though, and I can't discount the felt-recoil factor even though I don't understand it. My big mistake with it at the beginning was in assuming Mag primers were better. In his letter regarding the .41, Elmer didn't specify Mag or Std and until I read elsewhere he used Std in both the .41 and .44, I used Mags, like about everyone else said I should. Either will work, though, with some load modifications.

I really like H110 and 296, among the slower powders and have used a bunch of old shotgun powders with good success, but there are lots of newer powders I haven't used.

IMR-4227, though, is a beauty too good to be without. I bought a bunch of Nosler 210 grain .41 bullets as soon as I could after they came out. I had visions of fun with superb accuracy dancing around in my head. The only problem I found in using them was that I could not get them to shoot decently. After burning up a lot of stuff I came to IMR-4227 and found not only 1 load that was good, but an actual range spanning over 1.5 grains or so with the best being closer to the top, which suited me okay because that's where I like it anyway.

Hmmm . . . .

Lots of good data there.

I just inherited 350 Lead boolits, gonna load up a mess of rounds with the universal and preactice, practice, practice.

BMT

I have been using Blue Dot exclusively for several years now in .38 Sp , .357 Mag , .401 Herters PowerMag , .41 Mag , .44 Special , .44 Mag. Works for loads mild to wild. A bit more accurate and less erratic than H110/W296 , which are very dependant on a good firm roll crimp. Besides , it works with a range of barrel lengths too. H110/W296 and 2400 work better with longer barrels.

BTW , the classic Elmer load , the one that paved the way for the .44 Mag is;

18.5grs of 2400 , a 250gr hard-cast 'Keith-style' SWC in 44 Special cases.