ASSRA Forum - Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data

ASSRA Forum › General › Reloading the Single Shot Rifle › Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data

(Moderator Group: Moderator)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Page Index Toggle

Pages: [1] 2

Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies)

Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data (Read 10660 times)

calledflyer Frequent Elocutionist Online Posts: 3981 Joined: Mar 9^th, 2015	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Jul 23^rd, 2016 at 3:32pm	Print Post
	I have that list here, too. Always wondered why the Miller bullet was so much lower in pressure, even with bigger charges of powder. Anybody know what it is about that bullet? I have no knowledge of it, like so many things.


	IP Logged

40_Rod Frequent Elocutionist Offline Extremism in the persuit of accuracy is not a vice Posts: 4285 Location: Knoxville, TN Joined: Apr 20^th, 2004	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #1 - Jul 24^th, 2016 at 10:55am	Print Post
	Looks a lot to me like somebody is trying to cover their hind most parts. When the world was young and I started in the Schuetzen game. the standard starting load you would always get was 14 1/2 grains of 4227. That was for old actions in my area Ballards, Winchesters, Stevens, and a few Borchardts. I think the lawyers are getting involved by inflateing the pressure numbers. 40 Rod


	IP Logged

Schuetzenmiester Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 6707 Location: Cool Wet Side of WA Joined: Apr 27^th, 2008	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #2 - Jul 24^th, 2016 at 12:23pm	Print Post
	The 4227 listed is "H". I'm not sure what the difference is but I have always used 14 + of"IMR" in my Ballard .

	"some old things are lovely, warm still with life ... of the forgotten men who made them." - D.H. Lawrence
	IP Logged

calledflyer Frequent Elocutionist Online Posts: 3981 Joined: Mar 9^th, 2015	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #3 - Jul 24^th, 2016 at 2:28pm	Print Post
	40-rod, you may well be right. Shakespeare was right when he wrote we should start by killing all the lawyers.......mayb e. Schuetzenmeister, you wouldn't know the difference in pressure. Probably not in accuracy either- but, like you I tended to purchase more of the Dupont cans back in the day.


	IP Logged

Schuetzenmiester Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 6707 Location: Cool Wet Side of WA Joined: Apr 27^th, 2008	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #4 - Jul 24^th, 2016 at 2:39pm	Print Post
	I vaguely recall H being a little hotter than IMR 25 years ago and that the two could not be directly interchanged, but they were very close.

	"some old things are lovely, warm still with life ... of the forgotten men who made them." - D.H. Lawrence
	IP Logged

calledflyer Frequent Elocutionist Online Posts: 3981 Joined: Mar 9^th, 2015	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #5 - Jul 24^th, 2016 at 3:59pm	Print Post
	I did use each powder in revolvers without any pressure sign, using the same loads, stiff ones for silhouette. In my rifles I've never used a very stiff load, nor seen any big difference in accuracy. Whatever differences the old guys had may have been from other loading variables more than the powder difference. They are close indeed, and there were also those who swore they were the same. Makes no matter now, since we only get the one. I didn't change anything when I started getting it- couldn't see why. I still have some of all three old H4227, Old IMR4227, and new IMR. All in a row, to be used in the order bought. My take on it, for what it's worth.


	IP Logged

calledflyer Frequent Elocutionist Online Posts: 3981 Joined: Mar 9^th, 2015	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #6 - Jul 24^th, 2016 at 5:36pm	Print Post
	I always took that chart to be fixed ammo as well, John. If that's the case (from the OAL), the comparison is still mysterious to me- the larger weight of charge, and slightly heavier bullet ought to be more pressure by most folks reckoning. Since it's across the board with all powders and that bullet, it must be the slug, don't ya think? It isn't a big deal, just curious.


	IP Logged

beltfed Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 1826 Location: Central Wi Joined: Dec 20^th, 2007	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #7 - Jul 24^th, 2016 at 6:37pm	Print Post
	If one were to look broadly at the IMR vs Hodgden powder line, seems to me the "H" powders were always Slower than the IMR Examples 4895, 4350, 4831,etc. Don't know about the 4227 "H" vs IMR. Would that have been the reverse after all the trend for H powders being slightly slower than IMR? beltfed/arnie


	IP Logged

calledflyer Frequent Elocutionist Online Posts: 3981 Joined: Mar 9^th, 2015	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #8 - Jul 24^th, 2016 at 7:01pm	Print Post
	Now that ya mention it Arnie, I think yer right that the magazine writers said it that way. Again, I'm not sure just how much, if any real separation it amounted to. Like saying Chevron gas is a lot different than Arco because you got a tenth of a mile per gallon more the one time you tried it. If you know what I mean. Like I said earlier, it don't matter much nowadays anyhow.


	IP Logged

beltfed Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 1826 Location: Central Wi Joined: Dec 20^th, 2007	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #9 - Jul 24^th, 2016 at 8:45pm	Print Post
	Looking at the Hodgdon's loading manual table of burning rates the IMR 4227 is next "faster" than the H4227. Darn'ed close... maybe indistinguishable by an objective useage measure. beltfed/arnie


	IP Logged

calledflyer Frequent Elocutionist Online Posts: 3981 Joined: Mar 9^th, 2015	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #10 - Jul 24^th, 2016 at 9:28pm	Print Post
	I inherited a few dozen cans of Hodgdon powder way back. But, me being an obstinate fool, passed them along and tended to use the IMR powders of the same numbers. I thought that the cheap powder must be the inferior one. Later, I experimented more and found the "H" stuff to be just as effective. I never did come to think it superior, but it sure tended to have an attractive price tag. Mostly used the pair of 4831 numbers up until RE19 and 22 came along and came to love them above all other slow powders for my use. 4895 is a handy powder, though.


	IP Logged

Schuetzenmiester Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 6707 Location: Cool Wet Side of WA Joined: Apr 27^th, 2008	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #11 - Jul 25^th, 2016 at 2:02am	Print Post
	calledflyer wrote on Jul 24^th, 2016 at 7:01pm: Now that ya mention it Arnie, I think yer right that the magazine writers said it that way. Again, I'm not sure just how much, if any real separation it amounted to. Like saying Chevron gas is a lot different than Arco because you got a tenth of a mile per gallon more the one time you tried it. If you know what I mean. Like I said earlier, it don't matter much nowadays anyhow. YMMV I consistently get 10% better with Chevron diesel over brand "X". Maybe I have been shooting the wrong 4227 all these years?

	"some old things are lovely, warm still with life ... of the forgotten men who made them." - D.H. Lawrence
	IP Logged

Schuetzenmiester Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 6707 Location: Cool Wet Side of WA Joined: Apr 27^th, 2008	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #12 - Jul 25^th, 2016 at 2:14am	Print Post
	Them magazine writers will say anything to sell the story. I probably got my ideas about the 4227s from Sheeter Skelton. There was another guy that wrote about pistol hunting in the same magazine. After a while, I thought I recognized a deer he shot with a handgun. I had a few old copies lying around. I started thumbing through them. That deer was probably the only one that guy ever shot. He must have had a semitrailer full of clothes and guns to pose with that deer. He probably wore the hide off of one side dragging it around to pose in different back grounds. If he was lyin' about which gun and load, what else was he lyin' about?

	"some old things are lovely, warm still with life ... of the forgotten men who made them." - D.H. Lawrence
	IP Logged

marlinguy Frequent Elocutionist Offline Ballards may be weaker, but they sure are neater! Posts: 18069 Location: Oregon Joined: Feb 2^nd, 2009	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #13 - Jul 25^th, 2016 at 9:40am	Print Post
	Not to get too OT, but I often read about lower pressures with breech seated bullets, and all else being equal. Has anyone ever figured out how much lower a breech seated bullet is vs. a fixed bullet with everything else being equal?

	(You need to *Login* or *Register* to view media files and links)
	IP Logged

Schuetzenmiester Frequent Elocutionist Offline Posts: 6707 Location: Cool Wet Side of WA Joined: Apr 27^th, 2008	Re: Hodgdon 32-40 Cartridge Loading Data Reply #14 - Jul 25^th, 2016 at 12:46pm	Print Post
	marlinguy wrote on Jul 25^th, 2016 at 9:40am: Not to get too OT, but I often read about lower pressures with breech seated bullets, and all else being equal. Has anyone ever figured out how much lower a breech seated bullet is vs. a fixed bullet with everything else being equal? I have never used them, but I would suppose (notice I didn't say assume as we all know what assume spells) the ballistics load calculators should be able to calculate that pressure difference based on increased case volume of the empty case plus the gap to the base of the bullet.

	"some old things are lovely, warm still with life ... of the forgotten men who made them." - D.H. Lawrence
	IP Logged

Page Index Toggle

Pages: [1] 2

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Board Index ‹ Board Top

Top

ASSRA Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid XHTML

Valid CSS

Powered by Perl

Source Forge

Page completed in 0.6120 seconds.