While going through reloading data and manuals for revolver cartridges, I had noticed some loads and testing procedures, including testing equipment, that are not representing reality in reloading.
Here are following areas that should be scrutinized:
- Bullet selection, majority of handloads listed are for jacketed bullets
- Fairly narrow velocity and pressure range of listed loads
- Some manuals do not list pressures
- Inadequate testing equipment (barrels)
- Muzzle blast level data are non-existent
1. I would like to see in reloading manuals and load data on internet much more loads for lead cast bullets. When looking at reloading manuals from powder manufacturers and distributors, the majority of listed loads are those using jacketed bullets. In all those (almost) 30 years as a shooter and reloader, I and all revolver shooters in my former clubs, never assembled revolver ammunition containing jacketed bullets, just cast bullets only. I have heard about few that loaded some ammo using jacketed bullets, but even that was on very, very limited basis.
I am aware that Lyman, RCBS and Lee have a decent data for their cast bullets, but they are not listing a number of powders from some manufacturers. In addition, some list lead alloy that very few of us use. As far as I know, almost all cast bullets are made using wheel weight, or alloy that is very similar to it.
In that respect, I would suggest loading data for following revolver calibers and lead bullets for them. Weights are in grains
- 357 Remington Magnum; 148 WC, 158 SWC or LBT, 175-180 LBT
- 41 Remington Magnum; 210-220 SWC, 250-265 LBT
- 44 Remington Magnum; 250-265 SWC, 300-320 LBT
- 45 Colt; 255-265 SWC, 280-300, 320 (high pressure loads)
As for other calibers, I am not familiar with them, so I did not list. Please feel free to add caliber and bullets you think should be on the list.
2. Pressure levels should be always listed for all loads loads. Since many shooters some time prefer lower pressure loads, even in magnum cartridges, starting loads should be in 18 000 to 23 000 CUP range.
3. Along standard SAAMI load level for 45 Colt, my suggestion is to also list more powerful loads up to 30 000 CUP, known as "for Ruger and Freedom Arms revolvers only". Those should include starting loads in 18 000 to 23 000 CUP range.
4. I would suggest listing also mid level loads with all bullets. My suggestion is 1100 fps. Please see in this thread the reasons for that muzzle velocity https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...un-hunting-another-view.903836/#post-12255542, . Also, quote: "The Extreme Meplat designs at not as accurate at super-sonic to sub-sonic velocity as our Truncated Cone designs.", https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?48098-Gates-Extreme-Meplat-Bullets , post #14. James Gates indicates that when common bullets go from supersonic to subsonic velocity, there is a problem with its stability and consequently with accuracy.
5. Also, I suggest measuring and listing muzzle blast level for each load, as the shooter will experience. Please see the thread I started regarding muzzle blast, there are some interesting data https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-from-revolvers-what-we-know-about-it.915692/ . This is important for many of those who are hiking or carrying revolvers while hunting. If they suddenly encounter an aggressive wild animal or threatened by criminals, three is no time to put on ear protection. Firing without ear protection one of those full power magnum revolvers will make ears ringing for days, and certainly make some permanent hearing damage. While lower muzzle blast would not eliminate problem completely, will definitely be easier on ears. Listing for each load a muzzle blast, shooters could choose the loads they think will work the best for them.
6. Regarding testing equipment, I think that testing barrels listed in the SAAMI specification are not reflecting reality. First, revolver cartridges are revolver cartridges, and using for their testing non vented barrels, is in my opinion, misleading and has nothing to do with revolvers. Until recently, I didn't realize that use of non-vented testing barrels to test loads for revolvers is widespread. I bet most reloaders still incorrectly assume the same.
As for vented barrels as specified in SAAMI Z299.3 – 2022 for "Centerfire Pistol and Revolver Ammunition" https://saami.org/wp-content/upload...rfire-Pistol-Revolver-Approved-12-13-2022.pdf , I disagree with the noted specification with barrel lengths and gaps shown there. In it, the gap shown is .008". This is too much in my opinion. If I find that any modern revolver I want to purchase has gap 008", I will pass it. And I am very confident that 99% shooters will do the same. Almost all Ruger and Smith & Wesson revolvers I had or handled, have factory set gap .004"-.006". Few revolvers had gap smaller than .004", but none I had seen had more than .006". I am not saying that revolvers with gaps larger than .006" do not show on the market from time to time, but that must be rare. In my opinion, manufacturers are aware of this issue, and to their credit, they have a gap issue well under control.
Here are proposals for testing barrels for cartridges 357, 41, 44 Remington Magnum and 45 Colt, since I believe that those calibers are the most used. Considering conditions as specified in line 6. in order to have realistic data, I think that testing barrels for mentioned cartridges should have following characteristics:
- Testing equipment using vented barrels
- Barrel to cylinder gap .005"
- 357 Remington Magnum, barrel length 5”, rifling twist 1 turn in 18-3/4"
- 41 and 44 Remington Magnum, and 45 Colt, barrel length 6.5", rifling twist 1 turn in 16"
Cylinder lengths (including cartridge rim):
- 357 Remington Magnum, 1.685”
- 41 Remington Magnum, 1.730"
- 44 Remington Magnum, 1.760"
- 45 Colt, 1.760"
Please see https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/revolver-cylinder-lengths-needed.916303/
As for testing barrel length for 357 Remington Magnum, I think optimum is 5”, since the most of revolvers in this caliber are 4” (lately 4.2”) and 6”.
Regarding testing barrel length for 41 and 44 Remington Magnum. I suggest 6.5" as a “happy center”, since majority of revolvers in those calibers are made by Ruger and Smith & Wesson, and the most common barrel lengths are 5.5", 6", 6.5" and 7.5". In that respect. barrel length 6.5" for those calibers is, in my opinion, optimum for testing purposes.
Regarding other calibers than those I listed, again, feel free do add to the list caliber and testing barrel length you suggest.
7. Here is suggestion how loading chart should look:
8. Last but not the least; although, I didn't list as "must do" .455" caliber, there are many of us who would like to see loads for .455 Webley Mk I (.886" long case), using .265HB bullet, and .455 Eley/Colt using Lyman 454424 or something similar. Testing barrel length for both cartridges should be 6".
Please let me know what do you think, and correct me and/or include some other cartridges and suggested loads for them.
P.S. Later on, when we have more posts, I would pass the link of this thread to a gentleman who might help us.
Here are following areas that should be scrutinized:
- Bullet selection, majority of handloads listed are for jacketed bullets
- Fairly narrow velocity and pressure range of listed loads
- Some manuals do not list pressures
- Inadequate testing equipment (barrels)
- Muzzle blast level data are non-existent
1. I would like to see in reloading manuals and load data on internet much more loads for lead cast bullets. When looking at reloading manuals from powder manufacturers and distributors, the majority of listed loads are those using jacketed bullets. In all those (almost) 30 years as a shooter and reloader, I and all revolver shooters in my former clubs, never assembled revolver ammunition containing jacketed bullets, just cast bullets only. I have heard about few that loaded some ammo using jacketed bullets, but even that was on very, very limited basis.
I am aware that Lyman, RCBS and Lee have a decent data for their cast bullets, but they are not listing a number of powders from some manufacturers. In addition, some list lead alloy that very few of us use. As far as I know, almost all cast bullets are made using wheel weight, or alloy that is very similar to it.
In that respect, I would suggest loading data for following revolver calibers and lead bullets for them. Weights are in grains
- 357 Remington Magnum; 148 WC, 158 SWC or LBT, 175-180 LBT
- 41 Remington Magnum; 210-220 SWC, 250-265 LBT
- 44 Remington Magnum; 250-265 SWC, 300-320 LBT
- 45 Colt; 255-265 SWC, 280-300, 320 (high pressure loads)
As for other calibers, I am not familiar with them, so I did not list. Please feel free to add caliber and bullets you think should be on the list.
2. Pressure levels should be always listed for all loads loads. Since many shooters some time prefer lower pressure loads, even in magnum cartridges, starting loads should be in 18 000 to 23 000 CUP range.
3. Along standard SAAMI load level for 45 Colt, my suggestion is to also list more powerful loads up to 30 000 CUP, known as "for Ruger and Freedom Arms revolvers only". Those should include starting loads in 18 000 to 23 000 CUP range.
4. I would suggest listing also mid level loads with all bullets. My suggestion is 1100 fps. Please see in this thread the reasons for that muzzle velocity https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...un-hunting-another-view.903836/#post-12255542, . Also, quote: "The Extreme Meplat designs at not as accurate at super-sonic to sub-sonic velocity as our Truncated Cone designs.", https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?48098-Gates-Extreme-Meplat-Bullets , post #14. James Gates indicates that when common bullets go from supersonic to subsonic velocity, there is a problem with its stability and consequently with accuracy.
5. Also, I suggest measuring and listing muzzle blast level for each load, as the shooter will experience. Please see the thread I started regarding muzzle blast, there are some interesting data https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-from-revolvers-what-we-know-about-it.915692/ . This is important for many of those who are hiking or carrying revolvers while hunting. If they suddenly encounter an aggressive wild animal or threatened by criminals, three is no time to put on ear protection. Firing without ear protection one of those full power magnum revolvers will make ears ringing for days, and certainly make some permanent hearing damage. While lower muzzle blast would not eliminate problem completely, will definitely be easier on ears. Listing for each load a muzzle blast, shooters could choose the loads they think will work the best for them.
6. Regarding testing equipment, I think that testing barrels listed in the SAAMI specification are not reflecting reality. First, revolver cartridges are revolver cartridges, and using for their testing non vented barrels, is in my opinion, misleading and has nothing to do with revolvers. Until recently, I didn't realize that use of non-vented testing barrels to test loads for revolvers is widespread. I bet most reloaders still incorrectly assume the same.
As for vented barrels as specified in SAAMI Z299.3 – 2022 for "Centerfire Pistol and Revolver Ammunition" https://saami.org/wp-content/upload...rfire-Pistol-Revolver-Approved-12-13-2022.pdf , I disagree with the noted specification with barrel lengths and gaps shown there. In it, the gap shown is .008". This is too much in my opinion. If I find that any modern revolver I want to purchase has gap 008", I will pass it. And I am very confident that 99% shooters will do the same. Almost all Ruger and Smith & Wesson revolvers I had or handled, have factory set gap .004"-.006". Few revolvers had gap smaller than .004", but none I had seen had more than .006". I am not saying that revolvers with gaps larger than .006" do not show on the market from time to time, but that must be rare. In my opinion, manufacturers are aware of this issue, and to their credit, they have a gap issue well under control.
Here are proposals for testing barrels for cartridges 357, 41, 44 Remington Magnum and 45 Colt, since I believe that those calibers are the most used. Considering conditions as specified in line 6. in order to have realistic data, I think that testing barrels for mentioned cartridges should have following characteristics:
- Testing equipment using vented barrels
- Barrel to cylinder gap .005"
- 357 Remington Magnum, barrel length 5”, rifling twist 1 turn in 18-3/4"
- 41 and 44 Remington Magnum, and 45 Colt, barrel length 6.5", rifling twist 1 turn in 16"
Cylinder lengths (including cartridge rim):
- 357 Remington Magnum, 1.685”
- 41 Remington Magnum, 1.730"
- 44 Remington Magnum, 1.760"
- 45 Colt, 1.760"
Please see https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/revolver-cylinder-lengths-needed.916303/
As for testing barrel length for 357 Remington Magnum, I think optimum is 5”, since the most of revolvers in this caliber are 4” (lately 4.2”) and 6”.
Regarding testing barrel length for 41 and 44 Remington Magnum. I suggest 6.5" as a “happy center”, since majority of revolvers in those calibers are made by Ruger and Smith & Wesson, and the most common barrel lengths are 5.5", 6", 6.5" and 7.5". In that respect. barrel length 6.5" for those calibers is, in my opinion, optimum for testing purposes.
Regarding other calibers than those I listed, again, feel free do add to the list caliber and testing barrel length you suggest.
7. Here is suggestion how loading chart should look:
8. Last but not the least; although, I didn't list as "must do" .455" caliber, there are many of us who would like to see loads for .455 Webley Mk I (.886" long case), using .265HB bullet, and .455 Eley/Colt using Lyman 454424 or something similar. Testing barrel length for both cartridges should be 6".
Please let me know what do you think, and correct me and/or include some other cartridges and suggested loads for them.
P.S. Later on, when we have more posts, I would pass the link of this thread to a gentleman who might help us.
Last edited: