CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The High Road, nor the staff of THR assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.
I was trying to illustrate that it was an overload with Hercules powder and even moreso with Alliant.
It is a given that it is an overload but you are incorrect in that the pressures are unknown. The pressures given are no more or less credible than for any other handload developed in pressure testing equipment and published in a loading manual. I don't know where you read what you read but I have to doubt the credibility of the source. All irrational fears aside, the data is well-proven over 80yrs of continual use and we know what guns such loads can be used in. Believe it or not, .44Spl sixgun fanciers still utilize this data and to date, I know of not a single gun that was damaged or destroyed using this data appropriately. If it was such the safety concern that 'some' would have you believe, we would not see any of this in print over the last 20yrs. But we see it quite often.
Yes, we are. Keith worked up those loads in his guns.
...and had them tested at H.P. White labs. Just like Brian Pearce did decades later.
We can't know the quality or the condition of the gun that will be used by persons with unknown expertise to try these loads in.
It is the responsibility of the handloader and always has been. Fact is, any time this load data is listed in print, all the caveats are also presented, as are the appropriate guns for such loads. If folks who do not understand all the ins and outs of this stuff read this, then it is our responsibility to educate. Not keep them in the dark by NOT talking about it or arbitrarily dismissing it all simply because we have the .357 and .44 magnums. This is not a taboo subject. As with anything, education is the key.
It's unnecessary and ill-advised...and so is Keith's heavy .44 Special data.
That's a matter of opinion. How about we simply educate the OP and let him make the decision as to what is and isn't necessary? As I said before, some .357's lack the cylinder length to utilize the Keith bullet in Magnum brass. The solution? Using
published .38-44 data. It is safe and well-proven and actually results in less pressure than .357 loads.
The modern revolvers that are so chambered are proofed at 20-25% above standard...not at 26,000.
So what??? The .45Colt is also proofed with anemic loads based on SAAMI-spec pressures but we apparently have no issues whatsoever with "Ruger only" loads. Loads that are tailored to a specific set of guns with particular strength levels far above that of those originally chambering the cartridge. Same with the .44Spl. The heavy Keith load was never intended to be used in the Charter Arms guns, as it should also never be used in original Triple Locks or early SAA's. However, there is a plentiful supply of appropriate guns suitable for such loads incluing post-war S&W N-frames, post-war Colt SAA's, USFA replicas and now we even have medium frame .44Spl's from Ruger.
We don't need to encourage that mindset.
Who's encouraging that mindset?
As far as the "just buy a .44Mag" crowd, why? Why should you restrict yourself? If a 36oz .44Spl can do everything you need it to whether with Skeeter's 950fps load or Elmer's 1200fps load, why not? Why carry a sixgun capable of launching a 355gr at 1200fps if all you need is available in a smaller and lighter package?
With respect to pressures, I have to defer to John Linebaugh. That pressure signs in straight-walled pistol cases are not reliable.
Keith's data was neither safe nor sane.
It was indeed safe AND sane for the guns he utilized. He experimented and those experiments led to some of the most important developments in handgunning in the last century. He experimented so future generations of shooters didn't have to. Despite irrational fears displayed here, the results of those experiments are just as safe and viable today as they were when written. As stated previously, the data is well-proven over 80yrs of continuous use and when used in the proper guns, the safety margin is 100%.