Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns 2400 in 357mag

Thanks NVhntr, but nobody cares how you go on this one and I really don't care how you go on anything. In fact, you can go to hell and I still don't care.

Elmer Keith designed many of the cartridges some of you boys are talking about here, and if you read his many books and articles that spanned a half century, he used 2400 powder to load them. Some of you fellas seem to think that you know more about how to make those cartridges perform than the man who originally designed them. To paraphrase NVhntr, I am going to go with Elmer on that one.

Now as soon as you boys write as many books and articles and design as many cartridges, bullets, revolvers, and rifles as he did, THEN you can say he was wrong. Until then, no knowledgeable shooter is going to listen to your negative comments regarding 2400 powder.

I do remember Elmer writing he tried H110, but went with 2400.. But Elmer only shot 250 grain slugs.. They are plenty for me.

Elmer also stated over and over again that all he was looking for in his loads was 1200fps.

Bob, 2400 is a faster powder than H110. Matching velocity with both leaves lower pressure in the H110 load, and room to go up. Lyman's old data is about the last data I'd trust for a reference on this, but you probably don't want to hear that.

You also didn't read what I wrote about Unique.

Correct Hunter. I also tried H-110, and 296, and others, but found out Elmer knew what he was doing and he had good reason to shoot 2400. But none of that matters here. The OP asked about 2400 and he got good answers.

But as USUAL, the USUAL SUSPECTS all chime in and try to deflect the topic of the thread to their favorite pistol/rifle/powder/bullet/primer/ and tell you what they have and how they do it and if you are doing it differently, then you are doing it wrong.

It reminds me of the bumper stickers seen on cars and trucks all across the south that reads: We don't care how you do it up north. Those bumper stickers are there because of all the smart assed yankees coming down here and telling us that we are doing it all wrong and that we need to do it the way they do up north. You see some of those kinds of stickers in Texas and for the same reason.

Well now, leomort said he was going to be shooting a 4 inch barrel Ruger revolver. You can get all a four inch revolver is capable of giving with 2400 powder. That being the case, there is no need to go up in pressure. You make an interesting statement when you say
Since velocity is caused by pressure and you can't have velocity without it, and velocity is corrolated and varies directly with the pressure, how can you have the same velocity with lower pressure using the same weight bullet in the same 4 inch barrel? What you meant to say, but did not say, is that the pressure curve is longer with H-110 because it burns slower than 2400, which means H-110 is not very efficient in shorter barrels because it doesn't reach maximum pressure in them. But 2400 will give you all you can use.

Leomort didn't ask about Unique, but he said he had some which is good because it is such a versitle powder in hand guns and cast bullet rifle loads. It is an intermediate powder between Bullseye and 2400 and more versitle than either of those. I always keep an 8 pound jug on hand unless I have two 8 pound jugs.

The Lyman reloading manuals were around before any of the others even thought about it and they have more experience doing that than all the others combined. Lyman is the standard manual for reloaders and it has been for over a half century. The data in them is accurate and if it were not, they would have been sued out of business a long time ago. I have several other manuals and I update them about every two years or as soon as a new edition is made available, but I just use them as a cross reference. If I work up a new load for a cartridge I have not loaded before, I lay out four or five DIFFERENT manuals on the bench to be sure I am in the ball park and then develop the load from there. I have been casting bullets and reloading for 55 years and still have all my fingers and hair, so I must be doing something right.

That's just plain scary crazy, putting Unique in the same velocity category as 2400 and H110. You'll blow your gun up trying to match Unique velocities with the other two.

Don

Now Don, there you go with the facts. You are not supposed to use them around here because some of these boys have favorite loads that strike like a thunder bolt thrown from the hand of Zeus himself. If you can believe some of these guys, their favorite loads NEVER miss and ALWAYS kill big critters dead instantly.

I believe them. But I also believe that pigs can fly.

So Bob, what is the best accuracy and velocity you've achieved in the 357 with 180 and 200 gr cast with 2400?

I like 2400 , it's a very versatile powder. But if you want top accuracy and velocity with heavy for caliber bullets in magnum handgun rounds, you're leaving something on the table by not using H-110/W-296.

You really don't understand internal ballistics do you? Does the barrel length have anything to do with the optimum powder burning rate and pressure curve? Would you load a 2 1/2 inch 357 revolver with H-110 and expect to get top velocity from it? Why do you think we load heavy magnum rifles using heavy bullets with slow burning powders? Why do we usually see at least 26 inch barrels on those magnum rifles? Do we expect to lose velocity if we use a shorter barrel on them? What would cause such a loss of velocity?

Some of you boys need to do your home work because it is obvious that you failed physics and chemistry, both of which are intergral to the understanding of internal and external ballistics. Pay attention to both Boyle's and Charles's Laws.

A simple I've never done it would suffice. And I do have a degree in engineering so have a passing knowledge of chemistry. I also have enough life experience to spot a blowhard.

And any engineer with a passing knowlege of chemistry would be able to answer the basic questions I asked you, but you can't do it and you have the balls to call me a blow hard after you called me a [bleep]. I didn't call names. I just asked questions.

Let's try to bury the hatchet here and start over. Reasonably intelligent people ought to be able to find a way to at least be civil to each other.

Bob,

Interesting how you have gone back and edited out some of your more offensive comments.

Funny how many of the threads you are involved in go this way.

It's really to bad because it's evident you have some knowledge worth sharing, but the juice ain't worth the squeeze listening to all your BS.

I did that in an attempt to make peace with 458, which is something I see that you don't want to do. So I'll ask you a question. What have I said that is BS? What is not correct? Be specific.

You don't understand Boyle's or Charle's laws do you? You don't understand internal balistics do you? You are a troll who likes to jump in a thread with comments that have absolutely nothing to do with the subject of the thread and that is because you don't know enough to make an intelligent comment. This stuff is waaay over your head.

Go shine you trophies and calm down.

Hell boy, I am calm. I'm 74 years old and I have the world by the tail. I have a new 4 WD V-8 pick up with a full tank of gas, a 44 magnum Smith, I own a nice hunting camp, and I don't care if the sun don't shine. You are the one without any trophies and you probably never will have any unless they give one to people who make accusations but can't back them up.

So what did I say that is BS?? What did I say that is wrong? Be specific.

Other than the evident fact that you are a blowhard BS'r who likes to invent everyone else's back story so you can belittle them, Bob, what accusations are you referring to?

I promise I won't edit any of my comments out. Go for it.

Leomort,
I apologize for the hijack of your thread.

In an effort to put this thread back in line with the OP:



Great powder. Best used with heavy for caliber bullets when high velocity loads are desired.



The Speer manual and others that state to use a magnum primer in any cartridge that has the word "magnum" on it's headstamp are not doing there homework. The use (or not use) of a magnum primer is dependent upon the degree of difficulty in igniting the powder. Ball powders like W296/H110 need the extra spark of a magnum primer, flake powders like 2400 do not.



Have never been able to understand the concern for "clean burning". So many young guys talk about this without even mentioning accuracy. I clean my guns in any case, so if one particular powder leaves a little more fouling than another, it's of no concern to me, as long as it delivers accuracy. Recoil? While you will get about 50fps more velocity from W296/H110 as opposed to 2400, I defy anyone to perceive a noticeable recoil difference between a 1300fps load and a 1350fps load. And, anything shot with these two loads will not notice anything either - dead is dead. Personally, I won't use W296/H110 due to the inability to adjust the charge weight to my suiting. With W296/H110 you are pretty much relegated to a full throttle load and nothing less. With 2400 I can drop back the charge weight to see if it's more accurate. One more powder that hasn't been mentioned, but I really like, is 4227. It also will deliver high velocities with heavy for caliber bullets. Oh, but it's a bit dirty. Hope that helps, Leo.

Don