45colt and #9

[FLINT]

Hey guys,

I got a new Ruger blackhawk bisley in 45 colt and really love it.

I loaded up some rounds sat night with the two powders I had - H110 and AA #9. I used new starline brass, 250gr. XTPs, and WLPP with the #9 and CCI 350s with the H110.

THe hogdgon online guide lists 25.7 gr. of H110 as being the min/starting load and listed in the upper 1300s for velocity. As I don't really want or need that kind of speed - I wanted to try to find a good load with AA #9. I was looking at something that shot decent somewhere around 1200 or so. So I searched and searched around and found several references to 19 grains of #9 going around 1250fps, and also a couple places listed 20.5 or 20.6 grains as max and in the 1300s. So, I started with 18 grains, and loaded 5 each at 18, 18.5, 19, 19.5, and 20. And then because I did have a little H110 left. I loaded 5 at 25.5, and 5 at 26 grains.

Ok, so at the range yesterday. first was the 18 grains of #9. I shot two rounds to get on paper - the recoil felt good - brisk, but not bad at all. So I turned on the chrony and fired a third and the chrony read 1479!!! I thought it was a mistake, so I shot another and it read 1485!!!! so I stopped there. removed the fired brass, which came out easily with the extractor and the primers were not flattened at all. and everything seemed fine.

so I sighted in my black powder gun, and then my .22 mag, and then returned to the .45 before going home.

I fired one of the 25.5 gr. H110 loads, and the chrony read 1361, which was pretty much exactly what it should have been. and the recoil was much stiffer than the loads with the #9.

So, what do you think? any ideas why those first two readings were so high??? I did take down the chrony after those first readings and then set it back up before the last one - could it be chrony position? I don't think the chrony was too close - probably between 5 and 10 feet away, maybe closer to 5.

I was thinking of stepping down to 16 grains of #9 and working up again. I just hope I didn't damage anything - but like i said, there were no pressure signs that I could observe. anyone have experience with #9 in similar loadings?

Thanks !!!

[BigSky56]

I have used AA#9 checking my AA book it shows a 255 cast at 17.6 grains for 1180 fps and 20100 cup and a 250 jacketed of 18 grains for 1146 fps and 20000 cup. My results where pretty close to the book with a 7.5" bbl both are listed as max loads. danny

[earlmck]

FLINT, I played with your 45 Colt loads in "QuickLoad" a bit. In the computer program I can get your 18 grains of AA#9 to give the 1400's velocities by reducing cartridge load-length to 1.3". At that point you would be getting pressures running about 30,000 psi. Your Ruger would handle those without giving any symptoms such as hard extraction to tell you that pressures were higher than the 20K level loads you were intending to build.

So it is conceivably possible you are getting those velocities with the #9. And you would probably not see anything we would think of as "pressure signs" at the 30K pressure level. But a load giving 1480 fps should not feel milder than one giving 1360 fps no matter what the powder.

You might want to redo the chrony readings. That 18 grains of #9 should be giving you the velocity range you are wanting if it is a normal batch of #9 powder and seating depths are normal.

[Pisgah]

I love chronographs, but they can be finicky. A minute position shift, a new cloud passing over (or a complete lack of clouds) -- any number of things can throw readings out of whack. No comment on the load, because I haven't used #9, but I have seen such minor changes as shifting the screens 3" further forward make huge differences in readings. Moving a chrony from bright sun in to shade one day took a mid-range .357 load I had used for years from showing an alarming 1580 fps out of a 3" Security Six down to a believable 1080.

[FLINT]

I forgot to mention - the overall length was just shy of 1.6" - I think my caliper read 40.4mm - so the length should have been fine.

and yeah, I know the Accurate manual is a little more conservative with their 'ruger / contender' loads than some others, but I felt 18 or even 19 grains of AA #9 should have been well below 30,000 cup.

i remember thinking that I wondered if it mattered that the chrony wasn't perfectly level - maybe I set it up better the second time to get the H110 velocity - as that seemed right.

So do you think I'm safe in trying those 18 grain loads again??? or do you think I should drop down to 16 and work back up? I guess at this point I would just worry that something is wrong with the powder - but I just bought it new last week.

Thanks

[earlmck]

do you think I should drop down to 16 and work back up? I guess at this point I would just worry that something is wrong with the powder

I'd be tempted to drop down to 16 grains and try it. Just 'cause -- "QuickLoad" says that if you somehow got AA#5 instead of AA#9, those high 1400's would be about the velocities you might get but pressure would be over 25K. 18 grains of #9 should be upper SAAMI pressures of just over 14K psi and barely 1200 fps velocity at the normal length of 1.58" (says the "QuickLoad"). If that happens to be AA#5 then 16 grains of it would still give around 1400 fps. 16 grains of #9 should be just a bit over 1000 fps.

Probably the chronograph just did a hiccup, but it is unusual to get a second shot confirming velocity if the chrono messed up the first one.

And I wouldn't worry that a few shots going 30K psi did your Ruger any damage. Lots of Ruger folks run those sorts of loads regularly; the Ruger Blackhawk is tough.

[FLINT]

Earlmck,

Thanks so much for checking out those loads in QuickLoad, that is very helpful!! also interesting that those velocities would be achieved with AA #5. When I get home, I'll be sure to check the can, but I'm sure I bought #9. That would be a very dangerous thing to have powder shipped out in the wrong can!!!

If I get time, i'll load some up tonight at 16gr and give those a try at the range.

I wonder though, since you mentioned it, if there is any way I can tell for sure that the powder is really #9 - by appearance I mean. The powder was very fine - looked very similar to the H110 if I remember correctly.

[earlmck]

if there is any way I can tell for sure that the powder is really #9 - by appearance I mean.

There may be. Just in the last few weeks (I think) somebody on here posted powder pictures that were really good. I thought I bookmarked the website he got 'em from, but I can't find it (I am semi-senile). Maybe our good fellow LeverGunner will see this and find us some AA#9 and AA#5 pictures. I have never used either one so don't know if they are visually distinguishable.

But I'll bet a few shots at 16 grains will tell you for sure what you have -- mislabeled powder or hiccupping chronograph.

[JohndeFresno]

As a matter of fact, I will be loading up a Barnes .45 Colt bullet for my Blackhawk using #9 some time in the next month or two - for future California Condor Zone hunting. I checked out the Barnes manual (#4) which shows 18-20.0 grains; but after running QuickLoad I decided that the "minimum" load of 18.0 was hot enough for the longevity of my hand cannon.

The odd appearance of this data is due to the fact that I use my own database (MS Access) after determing a load, so that I can print out any selections at a later time; and besides it does some calculations for me to save time.
The following if for Ruger and T/C class handguns only!
Barnes shows 1.588" COAL, so the pressure might change a bit after I see how the bullet seats.

[FLINT]

That is helpful - so 18-20 grains with the lighter bullet - although it does also verify that I should not get over 1400fps with 18 grains and a 250 gr. bullet.

I've finally loaded up some rounds at 16, 16.5, 17, 17.5 grains of #9 and hopefully will get out to WV this evening to work my way back up and try to find something that shoots good and is under max.

[JohndeFresno]

That is helpful - so 18-20 grains with the lighter bullet - although it does also verify that I should not get over 1400fps with 18 grains and a 250 gr. bullet.

I've finally loaded up some rounds at 16, 16.5, 17, 17.5 grains of #9 and hopefully will get out to WV this evening to work my way back up and try to find something that shoots good and is under max.

FYI - so that you don't get the wrong message:
Your Hornady XTP bullet #45200 is .665" long, if QuickLoad got that right.
The Barnes 225 grainer XPB #45120 is .810" long (per my measurement)

So - the Barnes is seated more deeply, changing the pressure. I threw in the Barnes figures in case you are interested in using an all copper bullet in some of your loads for your Blackhawk. Remember, an all-copper bullet is lighter, so a longer bullet is needed to reach the weight range of lead or jacketed bullets. You don't want to compare the Barnes load with the Hornady load as far as pressures go.

By the way, Earl - check your QuickLoad and see if the Barnes 'X' PB bullet is listed as .890 inch in length (#45120). If it is, then it was not something I accidentally changed - QuickLoad has this bullet all wrong. Another argument for checking the length of every bullet before relying on ANY software of this type.

[JohndeFresno]

VERY TROUBLESOME - EarlMck has verified that yet another Barnes bullet is erroneously catalogued for bullet length. Since this is a thread stealer, see new "QuickLoad WARNING #2" thread. Bottom line - "Trust but verify." All Barnes bullets are now suspect. OK - back to our regular programming.

[FLINT]

Ok, the problem was definitely with my chrony. Finally got to the range yesterday. Started with 16gr. #9 and the velocities ranged from 2200 - 4500 fps. so I shut that puppy off and enjoyed some range time without it.

Worked up from 16 grains all the way to 19 grains with absolutely no pressure signs and the brass just fell right out of the cylinder (or occasionally with a little tap from the ejector). I didn't go any further than 19 grains as I don't think I would ever need any more than that. It was starting to bark a little, but still not bad, definitely manageable recoil and definitely less than the min H110 load.

I also had just installed the one hole rear sight on the gun and definitely like it. I really like this gun, and I like the bisley grip for sure. Am looking forward to shooting it some more.

[Charles]

I have used AA9 in both the 357 and 44 Magnum rounds and had good luck in both. I have noticed that it can be touchy and have the pessures take off skyward all of a sudden when you hit or get near the red line. It is not a powder you would want to use for max loads, at least I do not.

[FLINT]

I have used AA9 in both the 357 and 44 Magnum rounds and had good luck in both. I have noticed that it can be touchy and have the pessures take off skyward all of a sudden when you hit or get near the red line. It is not a powder you would want to use for max loads, at least I do not.

Cool, and yes, that is exactly my intention with #9. I don't want to max out the .45 - just warm it up a bit, and I think it will work out well for my uses. I think that 18 or 18.5 grains will more than do what I want and should still be not that close to max.