I first visited White Sands Missile Range in the mid-1970s when I was in the Army stationed at Fort Bliss, Texas. I visited two places that day 50 years ago: The White Sands Missile Range, and White Sands National Park. I did the same most recently (i.e., hitting both spots on the same day) with Joe Gresh and Susie. We recently posted about White Sands National Park. Today, the focus is on the WSMR Missile Park, a display of military equipment just inside the White Sands Missile Range main gate.
WSMR is a place with history. It doesn’t go back that far…it was created in July 1945, right at the end of World War II, when we grabbed all those Nazis for our space program (the Russians were doing the same). A lot of them were sent to White Sands, along with a hundred German V2 rockets. We cut our space program teeth on them, launching two thirds of our V2 stash and studying the rest before we started building and testing American versions. Our first atomic bomb was tested on the northern edge of White Sands Missile Range. When I was based at nearby Fort Bliss to the south, we heard stories about missiles launched from White Sands that went a bit wide of their mark and landed in Mexico (as in Old Mexico, not New Mexico). Like I said, there’s a lot of history here.
It used to be that you could just drive onto White Sands Missile Range and visit the missile park. In those days, they had a German V2 on display along with perhaps a dozen or so other US missiles. But that was then, and thanks to Osama Bin Laden, this is now. Now, you have to park outside the main gate, show ID to the minders, fill out a form saying you’re not evil, and get permission to walk onto the base. From the main gate, it’s maybe a couple hundred yards to get to the missile park. The indoor stuff (including that old V2) was locked up when we visited, so all we could see was the stuff on display outside. But that was good enough, at least until the skies opened up and the rains came down.
The photo ops were fantastic…military missiles, gun systems, and aircraft against the bright blue New Mexico sky, with a bit of cloud cover to soften the shadows. We had a blast. Figuratively speaking, of course.
Joe Gresh, asking what would happen if he pushed that button.The Fat Man (I am referring to the atomic bomb). Gresh has been dieting, and doing pretty well at it.The mulitple launch rocket system, or MLRS.There are all kinds of cool missiles on display here. It’s free, too. We used to build plastic models of these things when I was a kid.A US Navy 5-inch gun. Gresh climbed inside the turret when it started to rain.A Nike Hercules anti-aircraft missile, successor to the Nike Ajax. The Nike Hercules could carry a nuke. Although designed as an anti-aircraft weapon, the nuclear-armed Hercules could be used against ground as well as airborne targets. Don’t ask me how I know.When it started to rain, Susie and I jumped beneath the wing of an F-4 Phantom.
We only stayed about an hour at the White Sands Missile Range, our visit shortened by the rain and the fact that the indoor displays were closed. But that’s okay. We’ll hit this place again on the next visit to New Mexico.
This is our third and final blog on the Lee .44 Magnum Deluxe 4-die set. We posted an initial blog on the four dies and their components, and then a second blog on how to setup each die in the reloading press. This last blog on the .44 Magnum Deluxe 4-die set shows how my reloaded ammo performed and wraps up my thoughts on the Lee 4-die set’s advantages.
Keep us afloat: Click on those popup ads!
Here’s the bottom line: The Lee Deluxe 4-die set is easy to set up, it makes accurate ammo, and it positively prevents bullet pull under recoil. Lee’s locking, crimping, and decapping pin retention approaches are superior and the Lee dies cost less. It’s a better product at a lower price.
That said, let’s take a look at the specifics.
.44 Magnum ammo loaded with Lee’s Deluxe 4-die set. It’s good looking, consistent, and accurate ammo.
I used my Turnbull Ruger Super Blackhawk for this test series. It’s the gun you see in the big photo at the top of this blog. I fired 5-shot groups at 50 feet from a bench, using a two-hand hold and resting my hands on the bench. No other part of the revolver was supported and I did not use a machine rest. I held at 6:00 on the orange bullseye.
Superb Accuracy
This, to me (and I imagine to most reloaders) is the most crucial aspect in evaluating any reloading equipment, and in my experience, Lee’s Deluxe 4-die set provides superior accuracy. I was more than pleased with the results. The targets below speak for themselves. My preferred .44 Magnum load of 6.0 grains of Bullseye with a 240-grain cast semiwadcutter bullet, reloaded with Lee’s Deluxed 4-dies set worked well. It was accurate, and barrel leading and recoil were minimal. I know you can load hotter .44 Magnum loads. Read that sentence again, and put the accent on you. A 240-grain projectile at just under 1000 feet per second (which is what my load provides) works fine for me.
A one-hole, 5-shot group brought to you by Lee’s Deluxe 4-die set.Typical .44 Magnum groups at 50 feet with ammo loaded on Lee’s Deluxe 4-die set.Modest barrel leading after 50 rounds of .44 Magnum ammo with cast bullets.
Groups that tore one ragged hole were typical. That speaks highly of the Lee die set’s ability to produce consistent ammo.
Consistent Crimping
The Lee factory crimp die is just a better approach than any other die maker’s. It gives a better crimp, it assures cartridge chambering, and I believe it maintains better bullet alignment in the case. Yeah, you can crimp in a separate step with the bullet seating die, but then you wouldn’t have the carbide straightening and alignment features you get in the Lee factory crimp die. It’s a better approach that better aligns the bullet in the case and guarantees reliable chambering.
A beautiful and consistent crimp.
Simply put, with the Lee factory crimp die there is no bullet movement under recoil. None of the cartridges in this test series experienced bullet pull under recoil. The Lee crimp die does a great job in locking the bullets in place. In similar testing using a Lee Deluxe 4-die set in .357 Magnum, I found that regular crimping (i.e., not using the Lee factory crimp die) allowed bullet pull, but crimping with the Lee factory crimp die did not. This .44 Magnum reloaded ammo performed similarly.
Easy Die Adjustability
The Lee dies are easy to adjust and they stay in adjustment. I like Lee’s incorporation of orings for holding the locknut in place and for locking the die position in the press.
Lee uses orings extensively for lockrings and other adjustments. The approach works.
When I first encountered Lee’s oring approach 40+ years ago, I thought it was a bit sketchy, but I’ve come around. I believe this is better than using a standard locknut, even when the locknut uses a set screw to lock it in place on the die body. The Lee approach is easier to use. You can remove the die and preserve the adjustment without damaging the die body threads. I’ve never had a Lee die go out of adjustment, and to my surprise, none of the orings on any of my Lee dies ever deteriorated or otherwise failed (and some of my Lee dies are more than 30 years old). Even if an oring did fail, based on my prior experience with Lee Precision I’m pretty sure if I (or you) called Lee, they’d ship a replacement for free.
Free Shellholder
As mentioned previously in one of the blogs in this series, I like the fact that a Lee die set includes the shell holder.
Lee provides a free shellholder with their dies. It’s the right thing to do.
With most (maybe all) other die manufacturers, you have to buy the shellholder separately. That’s an inconvenience and an added expense. I like Lee’s approach better.
Better Decapping Pin Retention
I like Lee’s approach for securing the sizing die decapping pin better than the approach used by the other guys.
The Lee decapping pin retention approach is a superior engineeirng design.
With other manufacturers’ dies, if something obstructs the decapping pin, it’s easy to bend or break the decapping pin. When that happens, a reloading session is over until a new pin is installed. With Lee’s approach, an obstruction just backs the decapping pin out of the locking collet, and if that occurs, it only takes a minute to fix.
Lower Cost
Lee dies are less expensive than other dies. Simply put, you get more bang for your buck with Lee dies.
The Bottom Line
As I said above, the .44 Magnum Lee Deluxe 4-die set is easy to set up, it makes accurate ammo, and it positively prevents bullet pull under recoil. Lee’s locking, crimping, and decapping pin retention approaches are superior and the Lee dies cost less. It’s a better product at a lower price.
We recently blogged about a visit to the Pima Air and Space Museum. This blog returns to that Tucson attraction with a feature on aircraft nose art.
Aircraft nose art goes back to at least 1913, when the Italians painted a sea monster on a flying boat. The aircraft nose art concept continued in World War I and really emerged as a folk art form in World War II. On US World War II aircraft this occurred primarily in the Army Air Corps (the Air Force was not yet a separate service). Nose art emerged again during the Vietnam War and continued in the Gulf wars. Today, even some commercial jetliners have it (most notably Southwest Air).
The Pima Air and Space Museum contains numerous nose art examples, a few of which I photographed during our recent visit. One aircraft with interesting and colorful nose is a B-24 that started life as a US aircraft and was later flown by the Indian Air Force. It’s the photo you see at the top of this blog.
An Indian Air Force B-24 Liberator. The B-24s were built by Ford. By the end of World War II, we were building them at a rate of one per hour.A closer look at the Indian B-24 aircraft’s nose art.The opposite side of the Indian B-24.
This nose art on a B-29 shows a map of North America.
A Boeing B-29 Bomber.The other side of the B-29.
Political correctness today precludes pinup nose art, but it was prevalent in earlier times.
A Bell P39 Airacobra.A Lockheed S3B Viking. The Navy, for the most part, did not allow nose art during World War II. They later changed their WWII stance.A Douglas A20G with an unusual bit of nose art.
Nose art often featured animals. Here’s a interesting take on a Curtiss P-40 and an A-10 Warthog.
A Curtiss P-40 sporting an Arizona rattlesnake.A Fairchild A-10 Warthog trainer with a warthog painted on its nose.
Gaping shark’s mouths with threatening teeth have adorned many combat aircraft including fighters, observation aircraft, electronic warfare aircraft, and helicopters.
A Grumman OV-1 Mohawk.A Republic F-105G Wild Weasel.A Grumman F-14 Tomcat.A Bell UH-1 Huey.
Here’s an interesting special ops helicopter with unusual nose art. Star Wars, as interpreted by a special ops team.
A Bell OH-58 Kiowa Special Ops helicopter with a Hans Solo nose art treatment.
We’ll have another blog or three on the Pima Air and Space Museum. There’s just too much to fit into a single blog, so please stay tuned.
Please keep clicking on the popup ads. We get paid every time you do!
This is the second blog in our series of three articles on the Lee Deluxe 4-die set. The first blog focused on the dies and their components; this blog focuses on how to set up the dies in a press.
1. Shellholder
As a first step, I inserted the shell holder (No. 11 in Lee’s numbering system) into the press ram. It’s a no brainer, but I wanted to mention that Lee includes the shellholder with their dies, which is a nice touch.
I then raised the reloading press ram, and threaded in the sizing die in until it made contact with the shell holder. After the bottom of the sizing die contacted the shell holder, I lowered the press a bit, turned the die into the press a bit more, and tested it by raising the ram again. I wanted to feel just a bit of pushback on the ram.
The shellholder (lower arrow) in intimate contact with thre sizing die (upper arrow).
Once I felt resistance in the ram lever with the ram fully raised, I screwed the sizing die’s locking ring all the way down to the press head.
Screwing down the sizing die locking ring.
Once that adjustment was made, I don’t have to adjust the sizing die again for future reloading sessions. I can unscrew it by grabbing the locking ring and unscrewing it from the press head. The locking ring’s oring prevents the locking ring from inadvertently moving on the die body. All I need to do is screw the sizing die into the press.
The sizing die locking ring screwed all the way down to the press head.
At this point, I proceeded to size 50 cases. I inserted each into the shell holder and raised the ram fully. This both knocked out the old primer and resized each case.
Sizing .44 Magnum cases and punching out the spent primers.An ejected, spent primer..44 Magnum case with primer removed.
3. Expanding
After completing the resizing operation, I unscrewed the sizing die from the press and partially screwed in the expander die (just a couple of turns at this point). I placed a resized cartridge case in the shell holder and raised the ram fully.
I then continued to screw in the expander die until I felt the cartridge case touching the expander die. I then lowered the ram slightly and screwed the expander die a little further into the press, raising the ram and then lowering it again. I repeated this in minor increments to get the desired amount of flare on the case mouth. I knew I only needed a little bit, just enough to allow a bullet to start in the case mouth. When I do this part of the expander die installation, I check for adequate case mouth flare by taking a bullet and checking to see if it can start in the case mouth.
I used Missouri Bullet Company 240-grain cast bullets for these reloads.The 240-grain Missouri bullets.
I don’t put too much flare on the case mouth. All that’s necessary is enough to allow the bullet to start into the case mouth.
The case on the left has not had the case mount expanded; the case on the right has had the case mouth expanded. Only a small flare is necessary.
Once the bullet could start to enter the case mouth, I knew I had enough flare. At that point, I raised the ram with the case in the shellholder. The case is now in intimate contact with the expander, preventing any expander die rotation. I then threaded the locking ring all the way down on the expander die, locking it in place in the press.
Screwing down the locking ring after the expander die has been adjusted.The expander die lock ring locked in position.
Once I had locked the expander die in place, I proceeded to run all 50 cartridge cases through it.
50 Starline cases that have been run through the expander die. I usually reload handgun cases in multiples of 50.
After completing that operation, I grabbed the expander die by its locking collar and unscrewed it. It, too (like the sizing die) now had the locking ring in the right place, and it would not require adjustment for future reloading sessions (for .44 Magnum ammo; if I wanted to load .44 Special ammo, the shorter .44 Special cases would require making the adjustment described above again).
4. Priming
At this point, I seated primers in all 50 cases. I use an older Lee priming tool that is no longer available from Lee. My Lee priming tool is close to 50 years old, which says a lot about the quality and durability of Lee reloading equipment. I’m not going to spend too much time today talking about seating the primers, as this blog is focused on the Lee Deluxe 4-die set. I may do a future blog on the latest Lee priming equipment.
My old Lee priming tool. It still does a great job.
5. Charging
After priming, I charged the cases with propellant. My load is 6.0 grains of Bullseye powder with a 240-grain Missouri Bullet Company semiwadcutter bullet. You won’t find that load in modern reloading manuals. I have a library of old reloading manuals; this one is from an earlier Lyman cast bullet handbook.
An oldie but still a goodie. I use Bullseye powder for several different handgun loads.An older Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook with a great load for the .44 Magnum.6.0 grains of Bullseye with a 240-grain cast bullet works well in the .44 Magnum.50 Starline cases primed and charged with Bullseye propellant.
6. Bullet Seating
I next seated the bullets using the bullet seating die. The bullet seating die can also be used to crimp the bullet in place, but I don’t crimp with this die. To prevent the bullet seating die’s internal crimping ring from crimping the bullet, I screwed the bullet seater nearly all the way into the bullet seating die (I wanted the bullet seater to reach the bullet before the die’s crimping feature reaches the case mouth). I then adjusted the bullet seating depth by screwing the die body deeper into the press.
A .44 Magnum cartridge about to have its bullet seated to the correct depth. The upper arrow points to the bullet seater adjustment; the lower arrow points to the locking ring.
I adjusted the die deeper into the press until the bullet was seated to its crimping groove. This resulted in an overall cartridge length of 1.600 inches.
Having a good calipers helps reloading enormously.The 240-grain bullet seated at an overall cartridge length of 1.600 inches, but not yet crimped in place.
After I had achieved the desired bullet seating depth, with the ram raised and a cartridge with a seated bullet in the shell holder, I screwed down the die’s lock ring to lock the die in place. I then seated the bullets in all 50 cartridges.
7. Crimping
The last die is the crimping die. Here’s what it looks like.
The Lee Factory Crimp Die. This is a stellar bit of reloading equipment.
To install and adjust the crimping die, I raised the ram without a cartridge in the shellholder. I then screwed the die fully into the press head until the bottom of the crimping die firmly contacted the shellholder. At that point, I backed the crimp adjuster nearly fully out (until I knew it would not contact the cartridge case). I needed to do this step without a cartridge in the press because if I tried to do it with a cartridge in the press, I might have overcrimped the bullet in the case before I had the crimp adjustment correct.
The shellholder in intimate contact with the bottom of the Lee factory crimp die.The factory crimp die locking ring, fully screwed down on the die body.
I lowered the ram, installed a cartridge that had not been crimped into the shellholder, and raised the ram fully. I lowered the crimp adjuster until it contacted the cartridge case (I could feel when it did do by increased resistance on the crimp adjuster as I screwed it into the die body).
The crimp adjuster.
I then withdrew the ram slighly and turned the crimp adjuster in a little bit more. I backed off the ram and examined the crimp. I repeated this process (backing off the ram, screwing the crimp adjuster in a bit more, and examining the crimp) until I was satisfied with the crimp.
A crimped .44 Magnum cartridge. The Lee factory crimp die does a great job.
Once I was satisfied with crimp, I crimped all 50 cartridges.
50 reloaded .44 Magnum cartridges.Reloaded ammo in the cartridge box.
The last step for me was to label my newly reloaded box of .44 Magnum ammunition.
Labeling is critical. If I don’t do this immediately after loading the ammo, I might forget what the recipe was.
I had my 50 rounds of reloaded .44 Magnum ammo; the next step was a trip to the range to see how it shot. That blog will post in about a week. A spoiler alert…this ammo performed magnificently. Stay tuned, and you’ll see.
Keep hitting those popup ads! You’ve been helping us enormously and we appreciate it!
Never miss an ExNotes blog!
For more info on Lee Precision reloading equipment, click on the image below:
A month or so ago I wrote a blog about Lee’s .357 Magnum Deluxe 4-die set. I liked those dies so much I picked up a Lee 4-die set in .44 Magnum. I am similarly pleased with this latest set of dies. There’s too much info to fit into one blog post, so I’m presenting it in three blogs:
This first blog is about the four different dies, what each does, and the parts in each die. Lee’s engineering is superior, and this blog showcases it.
A second blog will focus on installing each die in my loading press, and how to adjust the dies to make world class .44 Magnum ammunition. Watch for this blog within the week.
A third (and concluding) blog reveals how ammunition loaded with the Lee dies performed. The ammo was stellar and I’m a believer. Lee’s Deluxe 4-die set is a magnificent product and it makes magnificent ammunition. But don’t take my word for it. You’ll see it in the groups I shot. The accuracy blog will post in about two weeks.
So, here we go. When I reload, I start with fired ammo brass cartridge cases, like you see below.
Fired .44 Magnum ammo brass cases, loaded into the vibratory cleaner. The vibratory cleaner polishes the brass cartridge cases. This makes the cases look good, but more importantly, it prevents them from slipping rearward against the cylinder walls when the reloaded ammo is fired.
And when I finish, this is what I have…newly reloaded ammunition as good as or better than factory ammo, at a fraction of the cost of factory ammo. That “as good as or better than factory ammo” descriptor is misleading. My ammo is better.
A box of reloaded .44 Magnum ammo, custom tailored to my requirements, and capable of superior accuracy.
As most of you know, a gun chambered in .44 Magnum can also shoot .44 Special ammo (just like a .357 Magnum can shoot .38 Special). .44 Magnum dies can be used for reloading .44 Special ammo.
The label for each Lee die set is a printed instruction and load data sheet. The boxes are indexed and they stack nicely.
Lee dies come in a hard plastic case with a clear cover. The cover is removed by inserting a flat blade screwdriver on either side.
The plastic cover needs a little coaxing with a flat blade screwdriver to open. The cover includes a recess for screwdriver insertion.
The Lee label unfolds to reveal directions on using the dies along with a bunch of other information, including several suggested loads. Over the last five decades, I’ve found a few .44 Magnum loads I like, and in particular, I have a favorite load I shoot in the Ruger Super Blackhawk. I will share more of that with you in the next blog in this series.
The Lee instruction sheet includes load data and other information.
Lee’s Deluxe 4-die set consists of four dies, a shellholder, and a powder cup:
A carbide sizing die.
An expander die.
A bullet seating die.
A factory crimp die.
Here’s what the die set looks like after you remove the cover.
The Lee .44 Magnum/.44 Special Deluxe 4-die set. From left to right, it’s the factory crimp die, the expander die, the yellow powder cup, the shellholder, the bullet seating die, and the sizer die.
1. Sizing Die
The sizing die is a sizing and decapping die. When this die is installed in the reloading press and a fired brass case is inserted into it by raising the press ram, two things occur:
The cartridge case is resized to its original diameter (it expanded when the cartridge was fired, so it needs to be resized to specification dimensions). The Lee die is a carbide die, which means is has a very hard carbide steel tube inside the die body. Because it is a carbide die, there’s no need to lubricate the cartridge cases for the resizing operation (like you have to do with plain steel dies). Carbide dies are much preferred for this reason.
The used primer is pushed out of the cartridge case (this is the decapping operation).
Here’s the sizing die.
The Lee sizing die. The red arrow points to the locking collar.
Here’s the sizing die from the bottom:
The top arrow points to the locking ring. It has an oring that holds the locking ring in place. The locking ring is screwed down on the threaded die body to lock the die body in place. The middle arrow points to the carbide sizing insert. The center ring points to the decapping pin, which pushes the spent primer out of the cartridge case.
Viewed from above, the decapping pin is secured by a threaded collet that screws into the die body. It’s a good approach because if there is an obstruction (if the pin hits the case bottom rather than the primer through hole, or if the primer through hole is blocked), the decapping pin simply pushes up in the threaded collet nut. This prevents bending or breaking.
The upper arrow points to the top of the decapping pin. The lower arrow points to the threaded collet that secures the decapping pin in the die body.
2. Expander Die
Once the cartridge case has been resized in the sizer die, it needs to be opened up slightly and the case mouth needs to be flared to allow a new bullet to be started in the case. This is accomplished with the expander die. Like each die in the Lee Deluxe 4-die set, this die includes a locking ring to lock the die in the reloading press. Some reloaders charge the case (add powder to the case) during the expander die operation. I don’t reload this way, and I don’t know any reloaders who do.
The Lee expander die consists of six components. These are:
The die body.
The locking ring and its oring.
An oring between the die body and the through hole insert.
An expander.
The through hole insert.
These components are shown in the photo below.
Expander die parts. The die body, the locking ring, and the oring are shown as a subassembly on the left. The arrow points to the expander. The part on the right is the powder through hole insert.
The expander slides up in the die body when a cartridge case is inserted by the press ram. When it reaches the end of its travel, a ramp in the expander plug creates a flare on the case mouth. This is what will allow a new bullet to be inserted in the cartridge case. In the photo below, the expander plug is inverted from its installed orientation to allow a better view of this ramp
The arrows point to the ramped surface that creates a flare in the case mouth.
You might wonder why there is a powder through hole component at the top of the expander die, and why the ramped expander plug is allowed to move up and down as a cartridge case is inserted into the expander die. The through hole allows inserting powder into the case with the powder cup (which I don’t use). Other Lee reloading gear uses the expander plug up and down motion to activate automatic powder dispensing devices (this is the approach used on Lee’s progressive reloaders).
The business end of the Lee expander die. The red arrow points to the expander plug as the cartridge case sees it.The cartridge case on the left has not been through the expander; the cartridge case on the right has been through the expander. Notice the very slight flare on the right cartridge case mouth. This will allow starting a bullet into the case.
3. Bullet Seating Die
The bullet seating die is the third die in the Lee Deluxe 4-die set. This one is a bit more complicated than the first two because there are two adjustments, and this die can also be used as a crimping die. With the 4-die set, I am not going to use this die for crimping. I am only going to use it for seating the bullet to its required position in the cartridge case.
The bullet seating die is shown below.
The bullet seating die. The upper arrow points to the bullet seating adjuster, the middle arrow points to the die body, and the lower arrow points to the locking ring.
Here’s Lee’s illustration of the bullet seating die.
From the outside, the bullet seating die and the factory crimp die appear to be almost identical. The easiest way to distinguish them is by the size of the knurled segment on top and by the length of the die body.
The bullet seating die is on the left; the crimping die is on the right. The bullet seating die has a longer knurled section and the die body is longer.
The bullet seating die parts include:
The die body.
The bullet-seating adjuster and its locking oring.
The locking ring and its oring.
The bullet seater.
These parts are shown below.
From left to right, this photo shows the bullet seating die body and locking ring, the bullet seater (denoted by the arrow), and the bullet-seating adjuster and its locking oring.The bullet seater.The bullet seater as seen by the bullet. The arrow points to the bullet seater.
I mentioned above that I use this third die in the Lee Deluxe 4-die seat only to seat the bullet. It can also be used to crimp the cartridge case around the bullet, but I don’t crimp with this die. I use the Lee factory crimp die for crimping.
The bullet seating die also includes a crimping ramp in the die body, as shown by the arrow.
To adjust the die to do this, I run the bullet-seating adjuster well into the die body so that it pushes the bullet to its desired seating depth before the crimping feature reaches the cartridge case. I’ll describe this adjustment in more detail in tomorrow’s blog.
You might wonder: Why not do both (bullet seating and crimping) with this one die? Some folks do, and if you have the Lee 3-die set (not the Deluxe 4-die set), that is your only option for crimping. But this approach has the bullet still being inserted into the case as the crimping operation occurs, which invites potential bullet misalignment. To get around that, I use the fourth die in the Lee Deluxe 4-die set (the factory crimp die).
4. Factory Crimp Die
The factory crimp die does three things:
It roll crimps the bullet in place.
It maintains bullet alignment in the cartridge case.
It removes any imperfections in the cartridge case to assure easy chambering.
Here’s the factory crimp die.
Here’s Lee’s illustration of the factory crimp die:
The factory crimp die has the following parts:
The die body.
The locking ring and its oring.
A carbide crimper sleeve.
The crimping adjuster and its locking oring.
These parts are shown below.
The Lee factory crimp die disassembled. From left to right, this photo shows the die body and its locking ring, the carbide crimper sleeve (indicated by the red arrow), and the crimp adjuster and its locking oring.The carbide crimper. The red arrow points to the crimping ring inside the carbide crimper. Note that this feature must point down when the die is assembled; this piece is orientation sensitive.
The carbide crimper shown above requires the cartridge case to enter the carbide crimper sleeve before the crimp is executed. This is an important feature, as it maintains bullet alignment with the case as the crimp is achieved and prevents case deformation that could interfere with chambering. Also, the bullet is not moving further into the case as the crimp is achieved, which is what would occur if I used the bullet seating die to crimp the case.
The factory crimp die as seen by the cartridge. The upper arrow points to the crimper sleeve; the lower arrow points to the crimping ring within the crimper sleeve.
There’s another carbide ring at the base of the factory crimp die, shown by the photo below.
Lower carbide ring in the Lee factory crimp die.
The factory crimp die lower carbide ring both prevents and removes any deformation in the cartridge case when the case is crimped and the cartridge is inserted and withdrawn from the die. This assures easy chambering and bullet-to-case alignment.
So there you have it. In our next blog, which will post in about a week, I’ll explain how I set up each of the dies in my press.
You might be wondering: Do these Lee dies really work? The short answer is an emphatic yes. I found when loading .357 Magnum ammo with the Lee Deluxe 4-die set that accuracy improved and bullet pull (bullets backing out under recoil) was eliminated. To jump ahead a bit, the .44 Magnum Deluxe 4-die set described in this blog resulted in stellar accuracy. I’ll cover that in a third blog, which will publish in about two weeks. Before I get there, though, here’s a teaser photo:
One of a limited run of Turnbull color case hardened Ruger Super Blackhawks, and targets shot with ammo reloaded using Lee’s Deluxe 4-die set.
If you want to make sure you don’t miss any of the upcoming .44 Magnum Lee Deluxe 4-die set blogs, grab your free ExNotes subscription here:
The Pima Air and Space Museum has an A-10 Warthog on display. That’s an impressive aircraft with impressive features. The most impressive, I think, is the Warthog’s GAU-8/A 30mm Gatling gun. “GAU” is the military abbreviation for modern Gatlings. It stands for Gun, Automatic, Utility, and it’s pronounced “Gow.”
Viewed from the front, the A-10’s Gatling gun seems like it is offset from the aircraft center line. The reason is only one barrel fires at a time as the barrel cluster rotates, and it does so when it is on the aircraft centerline. When firing at the gun’s maximum rate (4,000 shots per minute), the recoil equals the A-10’s 18,000-pound max thrust. If the firing barrel was not on the aircraft centerline, the gun would steer the aircraft when firing.
The Fairchild A-10 Warthog.
The photo below shows the A-10’s Gatling muzzle clamp, which is the device that holds the gun’s seven barrels together at the forward end. The barrels are welded shut on this display aircraft to prevent a bad guy from stealing and using the gun.
The A-10 muzzle clamp. The rifling in each barrel is visible here. 30mm is 4.6mm larger than 1 inch.
The muzzle clamp’s center bolt secures the muzzle clamp to the barrel cluster. Maintenance folks never stand in front of the gun when removing the muzzle clamp. Applying torque to the muzzle clamp bolt might rotate the barrel cluster, doing so could bring the firing barrel into position, and if the gun is loaded, it might fire. In the old days of the Civil War era Gatling guns, it was not uncommon for a soldier to inadvertently fire a round when attempting to remove the muzzle clamp.
Here’s the A-10’s GAU-8/A Gatling removed from the aircraft (another Pima Air and Space Museum display item). It’s about the same length as a Volkswagen Beetle.
The A-10 GAU-8/A Gatling gun. These guns were manufactured by General Electric in Burlington, Vermont.
This next photo shows the gun’s bolts (there’s one for each barrel). It also shows the elliptical cam path in the gun’s rear housing. The elliptical cam path that drives the bolts back and forth as the barrel cluster rotates. That was Dr. Gatling’s original idea. All Gatling guns use this concept, from the first Gatling gun in 1862 to the modern Gatlings.
The Gating gun’s rear housing assembly.
If you are interested in the Gatling gun, its history, and its current applications, you might want to pick up a copy of The Gatling Gun.
Never miss an ExNotes blog:
Please click on the popup ads…it’s how we pay the rent!
The Colt Python versus the Ruger Blackhawk: Apples and oranges? Maybe, maybe not. This blog compares the two .357 Magnum revolvers from several perspectives, including price, actions and triggers, sights, barrels, fit and finish, durability, feel, panache, accuracy, bore leading, ammo sensitivity, and extraction.
Price
The Python is a premium revolver, selling for $1500 (if you can find one) compared to a Ruger Blackhawk’s typical sell price of just under $700. I believe Ruger stopped making Blackhawks for a while; they resumed production this year and I have one of the recently manufactured specimens. Colt stopped making the original Pythons in 1999; in 2020 they reintroduced an improved version. That’s the one I have now.
Actions and Triggers
The Python is a double action revolver; the Ruger is a single action. That means that on the Ruger, you have to cock it by pulling the hammer all the way to the rear to rotate the cylinder and bring the gun to a ready-to-fire condition. On a double action revolver like the Python, you can fire it single action as described immediately above, or you can pull the trigger a longer distance to rotate the cylinder, cock the gun, and drop the hammer.
Help us bring more content to you…please click on the popup ads!
As delivered, the Blackhawk had a crisp but relatively heavy single action trigger pull. I gave mine the quick New York trigger job described in an earlier blog; now it is both lighter and crisp. It’s a good trigger, as good as you’d get with a custom trigger job. Ruger did a good job here.
A Blackhawk New York trigger job. Unhook one leg of the trigger spring, and you get a lighter trigger.
The Colt Python’s double action trigger pull is superb, far superior to the double action trigger of the earlier Pythons. It doesn’t stack; it’s a constant force trigger pull all the way to hammer drop. The Python trigger is serrated, which I don’t care for. I think it would be better as a smooth trigger, like the Ruger has. The serrations interfere with the double action trigger motion, in which I’d like my finger to be able to slide across the trigger laterally as I complete the pull. But it’s still a good double action trigger.
The Ruger and Colt triggers. A smooth trigger on the Python would make for better double action shooting.
The Colt Python’s single action trigger, as delivered by the factory, was not acceptable to me. It probably exceeded 6 pounds, it was gritty, and it actually cocked the hammer a bit more before it released. I called my contact at Colt to ask about it and he explained that it’s necessary to survive our California drop test. That requirement stipulates that a cocked gun has to not discharge when dropped repeatedly from a specified height on a concrete surface. I run with a pretty exclusive crowd (exclusive in the sense that we don’t drop our loaded and cocked guns repeatedly on concrete), so the requirement is beyond silly to me, but hey, it is what it is, and it’s why a new Python has a heavy, gritty single action trigger from the factory. It’s not Colt’s fault; it’s California.
I had TJ (of TJ’s Custom Gunworks) work his magic on the single action trigger and it’s now what it is supposed to be. Think zero creep, a breaking glass release, and 2.5 pounds, and you’ll have a good idea of my Python’s single action trigger.
Sights and Sight Radius
Both revolvers have adjustable sights. The Python has a red ramp front sight (but no white outline rear). The Blackhawk has plain black sights front and rear, which I actually prefer. The Blackhawk rear sight is click adjustable for windage and elevation (like most handguns with adjustable rear sights), the Python rear sight is click adjustable for elevation. The Python windage adjustment is a little different than most. It is infinitely adjustable for windage via a screw (with no clicks), and it can be locked in place with what has to be the world’s smallest Allen screw. Colt provides a tiny Allen wrench with the revolver for this purpose.
The Ruger Blackhawk’s front and rear sights. I prefer a plain black post and rear blade, like this Ruger has. The rear sight blade has an indented provision for adding paint to create a white outline, but I’m leaving it black.The Colt Python’s sights. The rear is click adjustable for elevation, and infinitely adjustable (i.e., there are no clicks) for windage. The front sight has a red ramp.
The Colt front sight is easily replaced with the same size tiny Allen screw that is used to lock the rear sight windage. I’ve not seen any different front sights offered to replace the red ramp front sight, but I guess they are (or will be) available.
I actually prefer the Ruger’s plain black sights to the Colt’s red ramp arrangement, but that’s a personal preference.
The Colt’s sight radius (the distance from the front to rear sight) is 7 3/4 inches. The Ruger’s sight radius is 8 1/2 inches, which should give a Ruger a slight accuracy edge.
Barrels
Both handguns have the longer version of the barrels offered by their respective manufacturers. The Ruger .357 Magnum New Model Blackhawk can be had with either a 4 5/8-inch barrel or a 6 1/2-inch barrel; I opted for the 6 1/2-inch barrel. The Colt Python is available with either a 4 1/4-inch barrel or a 6-inch barrel; I went with the 6-inch version. For me, these are target guns, and I wanted the longer sight radius.
The Colt Python has a 6-inch barrel; the Ruger Blackhawk has a 6 1/2-inch barrel. Both are large, heavy revolvers.
Colt is recently introduced a 3-inch barrel on the Python. The Python (in my opinion) is too big for concealed carry even with the 3-inch barrel; the short barreled version holds no interest for me.
The Python has a 1 turn in 14 inches left twist rate barrel; the Ruger has a slightly slower 1 turn in 16 inches right twist rate. Both barrels have recessed crowns. The Python, of course, has its signature ventilated rib and full underlug barrel. It’s a classic and unique look and I love it.
Interestingly, in the 1970s I shot handgun metallic silhouette competition with a Smith and Wesson Model 27; it had a twist rate of 1 turn in 18 3/4 inches. It was accurate, but not any more than either of the two 357 Magnums being reviewed here.
Weight
The Colt Python weighs 46 ounces. The Ruger Blackhawk weighs 45 ounces. The grip frame on the Blackhawk is a painted alloy, which reduces the weight slightly. These are both big, heavy handguns. They are not meant to be concealed carry guns.
Fit and Finish
Ah, how to be delicate here. Colt hit a home run with the Python. Ruger, not so much, at least on my Blackhawk.
The Python has a high polish, mirror-like finish on its stainless steel surfaces. It’s actually not hand buffed like you might imagine; Colt uses a vibratory polishing media approach. It really works; the finish is superb.
Ruger’s Blackhawk has an industrial grade blued finish, and on my revolver, the factory missed several spots on the cylinder. Ruger offered to reblue the cylinder for me, but truth be told, the cylinder is a fitted part and I didn’t want to chance sending it to Ruger and having them return a different cylinder. I used cold blue on mine to touch it up, and after oiling it, you have to know where the bluing shortfalls were to find them. But you shouldn’t have to do that on a new gun.
Lapses in bluing quality on the Ruger Blackhawk. This gun should have never left the factory.The fit of the grips to the grip frame was atrocious on my Blackhawk.
The grips on my Blackhawk had a very poor fit. I thought they were made of plastic, but they are hard rubber (like on the Colt Single Action Army). Ruger sent a new set of grips to me, but I couldn’t get them over the mounting posts in the grip frame and I didn’t want to screw around enlarging the holes. Instead, I installed a previous set of black laminate grips I had from Ruger (you can see them in the photo at the top of this blog). I like the look and the feel of the laminate grips, so they are staying on the gun. You shouldn’t have these kinds of issues on a new gun.
Both the Colt and Ruger rear sight elevation adjustment pivots on a pin through the revolver frame. After shooting the Colt for a couple of years, the pin is still in place. Colt uses a rolled steel pin; Ruger uses a solid pin. On the Ruger, by the end of the first range session its pin had backed out. Ruger sent me another pin with a recommendation that I bend it slightly before I install it. I’ll fix it in place with green Loctite when I get around to picking some up, but I shouldn’t have to do this.
I paid $659 for my Blackhawk, but factoring in the freight cost, the sales tax, the California DOJ fee, and the transfer fee, it was crowding a thousand dollars by the time I took it home. For that kind of money, I expect something to be perfect. That’s not what I received. On the plus side, I know if I shipped the revolver back to Ruger, they’d make it perfect. As I said in an earlier blog, Ruger’s customer service is the best in the business. But that’s a poor benchmark for a gun manufacturer (or any manufacturer, for that matter). If they got it right the first time, they wouldn’t need to be the best in the best in correcting quality escapes from the factory, and getting it right the first time is what most of us expect when we plunk down our hard-earned cash.
Durability
The older Pythons were delicate firearms, and it’s been said by people who know what they’re talking about they suffered from frame stretch and timing issues within the first 2,000 to 3,000 rounds. The new Python is a much beefier gun, and the guys I spoke with at Colt told me it no longer has these issues. I haven’t owned my Python long enough to say that’s the case, but I believe what Colt told me. I’ve shot mine a lot over the last two or three years; if anything, it’s becoming more accurate.
Ruger Blackhawks have always been built like anvils. I’m the only guy I know who wore one out, and I put many, many max loads through my old stainless steel Blackhawk. Blackhawks are tough. I think the new Pythons are, too. From a durability perspective, I’d call it a draw.
Feel
This is a subjective assessment that includes grip, balance, and ease in handling the revolver. It’s very much a matter of personal preference. I like the feel and balance of a single action better than a double action revolver, so for me, the Blackhawk takes the win here.
Panache
This is another subjective assessment. The dictionary defines panache as “flamboyant confidence of style or manner.” The Python is the easy winner here. Don’t get me wrong: Folks have approached me on the range to ask about what I’m shooting when I’ve been out there with both guns. But it happens more often with the the Python. It’s a prestige item. Pythons have been featured in movies going all the way back to the second Dirty Harry flick, Magnum Force, as well as others. I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a Ruger Blackhawk in a movie (if you have, let me know).
Accuracy
This is essentially a draw. Both revolvers are accurate, and both have their preferred loads. You may have read my recent blog on the Blackhawk’s accuracy; I shot the same loads with the Python to make a comparison.
Bullets used for this test: From left to right, the Speer 158-grain jacketed soft point, the Hornady 158-grain jacketed hollow point (also called the XTP), the Hornady 110-grain jacketed hollow point, a cast 158-grain flat point, and the 148-grain Gardner cast and powder coated double ended wadcutter loaded in .38 Special cases. The different powder charges and primers used with these bullets are shown in the table below.
Take a look at the results:
I fired the above 5-shot groups at 50 feet, using a two hand hold resting my hands on the bench. I did not use a machine rest, nor did I chronograph any of my loads.
Both the Python and the Blackhawk shot very well with 8.0 grains of Unique and the Hornady 158-grain jacketed hollow point bullet (Hornady calls it their XTP bullet).The Python did very well with a light .357 Magnum cast load: 4.3 grains of Bullseye and the 158-grain cast flat point bullet. The Ruger didn’t shoot the lighter cast bullet loads nearly as well. I need to move my Python’s rear sight to the right a bit.
The clear winner for a full power load that works well in both guns is the 158-grain Hornady jacketed hollow point with 8.0 grains of Unique. That was the accuracy load for a 158-grain jacketed bullet in the old 45th edition (1970s vintage) Lyman manual (it’s not shown in the newer manuals). Loads using 158-grain jacketed bullets and Winchester’s 296 propellant did well in both guns, too, but they are high energy, high muzzle blast, and high recoil loads.
Another known favorite .357 Magnum load is the 110-grain Hornady jacketed hollow point with a max load of Unique. These performed superbly well in the Python, but they were terrible in the Blackhawk. The accuracy was poor and the brass would not extract (I had to remove the Blackhawk’s cylinder and drive the brass out with a rod). This load had previously worked well in a stainless steel Blackhawk, but this newer one did not digest this recipe well. Every gun is different.
I also tried a few lighter loads. The Python grouped very well with 4.3 grains of Bullseye and the 158-grain cast flat point bullet. That’s an easy load to shoot and I’ll be reloading a bunch of .357 Magnum cases with it later this week. It’s an easily recoiling load, it’s very accurate in the Python, and it doesn’t lead the bore. And a pound of Bullseye will go a long with this load (1627 cartridges, to be precise). I also tried my preferred .38 Special target load in both revolvers (2.7 grains of Bullseye and a 148-grain Gardner powder coated double ended wadcutter bullet loaded in .38 Special brass). The Python did well with these; the Blackhawk did not. In general, the Ruger didn’t do nearly as well with lighter loads.
The Colt Python with 148-grain .38 Special target loads. Recoil was minimal; accuracy was good with this load in the Python but not the Blackhawk.
Overall, it’s hard to say one revolver is more accurate than the other. The table above shows amazing consistency for both guns. I averaged all the averages for each revolver, and from that statistic, one could conclude that the Python holds an accuracy edge. But you know what they say about statistics. From an accuracy perspective, both manufacturers (Colt and Ruger) got it right.
Extraction
The Python was flawless. The Ruger had extraction issues with the 110 grain bullet and a near-maximum load of Unique. Well, issues isn’t exactly the right word. Cases fired with those loads wouldn’t extract. I had to remove the cylinder and tap the cases out with a rod. All the other loads tested in the Ruger extracted normally.
The Python extracted the same load that gave the Ruger fits with no issues, and owing to the nature of a double action revolver’s extraction mechanism, it had to push out all the cases at the same time. The inside of the Python chambers have a mirror finish. The Ruger chambers do not.
With regard to extraction, the Python is the better revolver.
Leading
Neither revolver had an advantage over the other with regard to leading. When cast bullet velocities were high, both guns leaded the bore. If I loaded to get velocities below 1000 feet per second, neither revolver leaded the bore. But (and it’s an important but), the Python is more accurate than the Ruger with lower velocity cast bullet reloads.
The Python’s bore after firing 20 rounds of cast bullets with 7.0 grains of Unique.
As I mentioned in an earlier blog, my old standard .357 Magnum load turned out to not be such a good load. It leaded the bore of the Python and the Ruger significantly after 10 rounds. The first five shot group grouped well; each succeeding group grew larger. Interestingly, that group averaged exactly the same (1.555 inches) for both the Python and the Blackhawk.
When I was finished with the Python accuracy testing, I know I’d have to scrub the lead out of the barrel with a bronze bore brush. From time to time, people ask if they can just shoot jacketed bullets when the bore leads up to “push the lead out.” I knew the answer to that question is a solid no, but I fired a few jacketed bullets through the heavily-leaded Python bore to make the point.
Fire jacketed bullets through a leaded bore and you get copper fouling on top of bore leading. It still needs to be bore brushed. The copper bullets do not push the lead out.Both revolvers performed similarly with the 7.0-grains of Unique and the 158 grain cast flat point bullet. The first group was good, then as the bore leaded the groups progressively grew. This target is with the Python; the Ruger target looks the same (both revolvers averaged exactly 1.555 inches overall with this load).
Ammo Sensitivity
I’ve already mentioned issues associated with extraction, and how the Python did better than the Ruger Blackhawk.
There’s another potential issue, and that’s bullet pull under recoil. The Ruger has a longer cylinder than the Python, and if bullet pull occurs, the Ruger is less susceptible to it preventing cylinder rotation.
You can see that the Blackhawk’s cylinder is longer than the Python’s.
The Ruger has a 1.640-inch long cylinder. The Python has a 1.553-inch long cylinder. The Ruger gives you another 0.087 inches of cylinder length to play with, which would probably allow any recoil-induced bullet pull to go unnoticed (unless the cartridges had no crimp at all, the bullets most likely wouldn’t back out far enough in six rounds to affect cylinder rotation). In this regard, the Blackhawk will be more forgiving than the Python. Did Colt make the Python cylinder too short? Nope, they did not. They made it as long as it needs to be with adequately-crimped .357 Magnum ammo meeting the max cartridge overall length spec. The reason for that is accuracy. Keeping the distance the bullet has to jump to the rifling as low as it can be enhances accuracy. Colt got it right, in my opinion. I like the idea that cylinder length is minimized.
Conclusions
The bottom line to me is that you won’t be making a mistake by purchasing either handgun. I’d think twice about ordering the Blackhawk through one of the online sites; the better approach would be to purchase the gun at a store where you can see it first. On the Colt, you may not be satisfied with the single action trigger pull as delivered from the factory (I wasn’t, but it was recoverable with a trigger job).
From an accuracy perspective, it’s a draw; both guns are very accurate.
You might be wondering which of the two I prefer, and I don’t have an answer for you. I enjoy reloading for and shooting both.
Help us out, folks! We depend on our popup ads to keep us in components and chain lube. Please click on the popup ads!
Wowee, do we ever have some good stuff coming up right here on the ExNotes blog. Guns, motorcycles, adventure touring in Transylvania, and the results of a content safari through Arizona all the way to Albuquerque. Here’s an inkling of just a few of the topics coming your way.
What’s the real difference between a $1500 Colt Python and a $650 Ruger Blackhawk? Watch for our side-by-side, target-by-target comparo. It’s coming up.
Into resurrections? Hey, how about CSC’s replica of the original Mustang motorcycle! You read our recent story about the Al Simmons Mustang motorcycle collection and the origins of the Mustang. CSC’s Steve Seidner went a step further, and we’ll tell you all about it.
Ever have your well dry? I mean literally, not figuratively. Uncle Joe Gresh has, and he’ll tell you all about it. Gresh is a guy who makes MacGuyver look like an amateur. You’ll love this story.
We’re going to bring in a new writer or two (or maybe more). We have a blog loaded and ready to publish from good buddy Airborne Mike on a motorcycle ride through (get this!) Transylvania! I kid you not. Transylvania and the Transfagarasan Highway!
On that topic of new writers…Joe Gresh will tell you all about what you need to do to be considered for the ExNotes editorial staff. Watch for a blog on this topic in the near future.
The Pima Air Museum in Tucson is another treasure. Wow, that was a fun visit. There’s so much there we couldn’t take it all in during a single visit, and it’s a place that screams for more than a single blog. I need to return. The photo ops were incredible.
More good Joe Gresh stuff straight from Tinfiny Ranch, including the Gresh moto stable and the world famous Gresh project bank. Motorcycles, the MGB-GT, and more!
How about the Franklin Automobile Museum in Tucson, Arizona? Never heard of it? We hadn’t, either, but (trust me on this) it’s Tucson’s best kept secret!
White Sands Missile Range? Yep, that, too. Everything from a Nazi V-2 to current US weaponry, and we’ll have the story right here.
How about White Sands National Park? Think Sahara Desert, and you’ll have a good idea about what these rolling snow white gypsum hills look like. It was awesome!
The New Mexico Museum of Space History, with a guided tour by none other than Joe Gresh? That was a really fun visit with lots of cool exhibits. It’s coming your way.
How about sacred Native American ruins in New Mexico? We saw several and they were impressive, including the Kuaua Native American site along the Rio Grande River.
Albuquerque is quite a town, and Old Town Albuquerque is quite the place. We had a lot of fun wandering around and taking photos. It’s in the mix for a future blog.
And the Albuquerque 50th Anniversary Balloon Fiesta…wow, was that ever spectacular. The excitement and wonder of that event is one of the most impressive things I’ve ever experienced.
Stay tuned, folks. It’s quite an adventure, and it’s onging!
Click on those popup ads…we get paid everytime you do!
Finding reloading components of any kind these days (brass, bullets, powders, or primers) is a tough thing to do. Finding brass for more exotic cartridges is near impossible. One of my favorite cartridges is the famed .300 Holland and Holland. It’s a specialty item. I’ve not seen loaded .300 H&H ammo or brass in gun stores for years. I searched for two years for brass and found nothing. Prices for both ammo and brass have climbed through the roof (Nosler brass, just the empty brass, is now about $6 per round), but it’s all moot. It could be free or it could be $100 per round. Nobody has any. I know moot, and this is it.
I was recently in my local reloading shop (Phillips Wholesale, in Covina, California). I stop by there periodically just to see what Rick has in stock, and if it’s anything I might be able to use, I buy it because there’s no telling when it will be available again. While there, I was lamenting with Rick about the sad state of affairs in component availability, and I mentioned not being able to find .300 H&H brass. Rick perked up. “.300 H&H?” he said. “I might have something.”
Rick pulled a plastic box of 50 cartridges from under the counter. It contained .300 H&H handloaded ammo in virgin (previously unfired) brass.
.300 H&H ammo. It;s beautiful, isn’t it?The data label on the ammo Rick showed to me. It was loaded 12 1/2 years ago.
Rick helps folks settle estates when the estate includes reloading goodies. This was a box of ammo with that provenance. I normally wouldn’t fire someone else’s handloads. I’m a careful reloader; I don’t know that the someone else who loaded other ammo was. But I had, in my hot little hands, 50 rounds of fresh .300 H&H brass. I didn’t recognize the propellant (AA 86?), but I didn’t care. I figured I could pull the bullets, dump the powder, and load the new brass with my preferred .300 H&H load, which is 60.0 grains of IMR 4320 and a Winchester 150-grain jacketed softpoint bullet. My rifle (I’ll tell you more about it in a minute) has shot 0.25-inch groups with this load.
So I bought the ammo and proceeded to pull it apart. I removed the bullets (which mashed a few tips and scraped a few ogives), dumped the powder, and reloaded the brass cases with my IMR 4320 load. I reused the pulled bullets. The bullets weren’t perfect after the extraction operation, but I wanted to fireform the brass to my rifle and I didn’t care about their condition. Once the brass has been fireformed (fired so it conforms to that particular rifle), I will neck size only to maximize case life. The .300 H&H cartridge is known for short case life when it is full length resized.
AA 86 propellant and Remington 150-grain jacketed soft poin bullets pulled from the first box of ammo. I’m going to use that powder in .243 ammo now that I know what it is.
I weighed a few of the powder charges as I was pulling the bullets and they were exactly as labeled on the box Rick sold to me: 75.0 grains. Whoever loaded this (a fellow from Riverside who passed away) was obviously a careful reloader. The propellant was a stick powder, so I figured it was a rifle propellant, but I had never heard of AA 86. I recognized AA as most likely belonging to Accurate Arms, but there’s nothing I could initially find on the Accurate website called AA 86.
I called Accurate Arms’ customer service to see if they could shed any light on the AA 86 mystery. The kid I spoke with told me Accurate Arms had gone through an acquisition, and he didn’t know anything about their propellants before the acquisition. He specificially had never heard of AA 86. I poked around a bit more on the Internet and learned that Accurate Arms had occasionally sold surplus powders identified as Data Powder (or DP) powders, followed by a two-digit number. There was a DP 86 powder. I went back to the Accurate Arms site and found a reference to it, which said that DP 86 was essentially the same as their AS 3100 powder. The Accurate Arms customer service guy didn’t know this (he sounded like a young guy).
When I bought the box of .300 H&H ammo from Rick, he told me he might have some more. I gave him my phone number and Rick called a couple of days later. He found three more boxes. I was in the middle of doing something important (writing an ExNotes blog, actually), but Rick’s message took priority. I stopped writing and left for Rick’s shop immediately.
I told Rick about the phone call to Accurate Arms. Rick knew all about DP 86, and he told me that this ammo had indeed been loaded with DP 86. He also had canisters of the powder from the gentleman who passed away. It sold quickly, Rick told me.
After pulling the bullets, I reloaded the first box with my pet load. If I was loading for accuracy, I would measure each charge, but I just wanted to fireform so I charged each case with my RCBS powder dispenser. IMR 4320 is an extruded rod powder, but the individual rods are small and it meters well.
I mentioned above that I would tell you a bit about my .300 H&H rifle. My Dad bought it for me in the early 1970s before my US Army tour in Korea. The rifle began life as a 7mm Weatherby Magnum, but I never could get the rifle to group well with that cartridge. I had it rebarreled in .300 H&H, a cartridge I had read a lot about and learned to love in a pre-’64 Model 70 Winchester (don’t ask, it’s sold, and yeah, selling it was a dumb move on my part). I glass bedded the Weatherby action, and I stripped the rifle’s original epoxy finish and refinished it with TruOil.
A Douglas barrel chambered in .300 H&H. It has a 1 turn in 10 inches twist rate and it is accurate. The rebarreled Weatherby feeds the .300 H&H cartridges flawlessly.Rich, warm, and beautiful. There’s something about oil-finished walnut that is just right.The flip side looks just as good. About 10 years after I refinished this rifle, Weatherby introduced their Euromark line, which was the Mark V with an oil finished walnut stock. I own a couple. Both have highly figured walnut, but to me this custom .300 H&H looks better. It groups better, too. Weatherby has since discontinued making walnut Mark V rifles. They are all composite rifles now, which seems like a crime against nature.
I’ve been shooting and hunting with this custom .300 H&H Weatherby for close to 50 years now, and I’ve owned and shot quite a few other rifles during that time. This one remains my favorite. I am a big Weatherby fan and I love the .300 H&H cartridge. It is the perfect combination of power, accuracy, and manageable recoil. I greatly prefer the .300 H&H Magnum over the .300 Weatherby Magnum. The .300 Weatherby Magnum’s recoil is vicious and unpleasant. The .300 Weatherby’s recoil is aggravated by a need to load at or near maximum for accuracy. The .300 H&H is a more useable and enjoyable chambering.
I bought four boxes (200 rounds!) of this handloaded virgin brass, and I recently took two boxes to the range. One contained my reconstituted ammo with the IMR 4320 powder and 150-grain pulled Remington bullets; the other was loaded with 180-grain Nosler blemished bullets and AA 85 powder. On this blemished bullet business: Sometimes bullet manufacturers sell factory seconds at reduced prices. This was the only time I’ve heard of blems from Nosler. I’m a guy who loads for accuracy (I could care less about muzzle velocity or killing power), so the idea of using a rejected factory bullet seems silly. I’m firing this ammo only to fireform the cases, so I was okay with reusing the pulled bullets. And I felt more comfortable about firing the ammo as provided by Rick once I learned more about AA 86 and AA 85 propellants.
How did it shoot? Both the boxes I tried (my IMR 4320 load and the 180-grain Nosler load) shot very well. The 180-grain load predictably had a bit more recoil, but it wasn’t bad. The 150-grain bullet and IMR 4320 load showed no primer flattening; the 180-grain Nosler load showed just a hint of primer flattening (but not enough to be of concern).
My favorite 300 H&H load showed no pressure signs. The guy who loaded it snuck in a different primer on one cartridge.The ammo loaded with 180-grain Noslers and a near-max DP 86 load flattened the primers just a bit, but not enough to indicate excessive pressure. This load had more recoil, but it was still way below .300 Weatherby levels.
Accuracy was surprisingly good with both loads, especially considering that I dinged up the 150-grain Winchester bullets during the removal operation and the 180-grain Noslers were factory blems.
Here’s the target I shot at 100 yards with my IMR 4320 loads:
This is way below minute-of-wild-boar and more than accurate enough for ammo loaded with pulled bullets and brass that had not yet been fireformed. Next tme will be better. It’s a load that has produced quarter-inch groups in the past. I didn’t expect that kind of accuracy with this ammo due to the bullets’ condition.
And here’s one I shot with the 180-grain Noslers as loaded by the original reloader 12 1/2 years ago. You can ignore the group(s) circled in black. When good buddy Chuck gave me a target board at the range, it had a target stapled on it with usable real estate. I’m cheap so I reused the target (somebody had previously fired at the bullseyes circled in black; I only shot at the orange and blue targets).
Groups shot with the 180-grain blemished Nosler bullets and DP 86 surplus powder. It’s not bad for a dragon slayer at 100 yards. The shots circled in black were already on the target when I used it.
I’m quite pleased with this .300 H&H ammo. I picked up 200 rounds at about one-sixth what factory ammo would have cost at a time when neither ammo nor brass is available. It pays to maintain a relationship with local businesses.
I recently tested several loads for accuracy in my Ruger .357 Magnum New Model Blackhawk.
The Ruger New Model .357 Blackhawk.
The .357 Magnum Blackhawk is available with either a 4 5/8-inch or a 6 1/2-inch barrel; mine is the 6 1/2-inch version. I like a longer barrel when I have a choice.
In this test series, I fired four 5-shot groups at 50 feet and then calculated the average group size for each load. I did not use a machine rest (more on that later); I used a two-hand hold rested on the bench, with no support for the barrel or any other part of the gun.
The Loads
I tested with five bullets and three propellants:
The Hornady 158-grain XTP jacketed hollow point
The Speer 158-grain jacketed soft point
The Hornady 110-grain jacketed hollow point
A cast 158-grain truncated flat point
A cast 148-grain powder coated double-ended wadcutter
Unique
Bullseye
Winchester 296
From left to right, the Speer 158-grain jacketed soft point, the Hornady 158-grain jacketed hollow point (designated by Hornady as XTPs), the Hornady 110-grain jacketed hollow point, a cast 158-grain truncated flat point, and the Gardner 148-grain powder coated double ended wadcutter (the wadcutters are loaded in .38 Special brass).
All loads were prepared using my new Lee Deluxe 4-die .357 Magnum reloading dies, with the exception of the .38 Special wadcutter ammo. All loads were crimped. I recently did a blog on the Lee dies. I think they are the best dies I’ve ever used. If you’re considering a set of Lee dies, a good place to buy them is on Amazon.
The different load recipes are identified in the table below.
The Results
Here are the results:
The biggest variable in this test series is me. But, I’m what you get.
The most accurate load was 8.0 grains of Unique with the 158-grain Hornady jacketed hollow point bullet and a regular (non-magnum) primer. You won’t find this load in any modern reloading manual. It’s one that was in Lyman’s 45th edition manual (printed in 1970) as their accuracy load with a 158-grain jacketed bullet. Sometimes there are jewels hidden in those old reloading manuals. There are folks who say you shouldn’t use loads from old manuals. When I do, I work up to them, watching for pressure signs. Another one of my old reloading books goes up to 8.5 grains of Unique with a 158-grain jacketed bullet. I didn’t go there because I didn’t need to.
The Lyman 45th Edition Reloading Handbook. I still use it. These older books contain loads the newer reloading manuals do not.Back in 1970, the good folks at Lyman identified 8.0 grains of Unique and a 158-grain jacketed bullet as their accuracy load. They were right!
Recoil with the Lyman accuracy load identified above was moderate, and there were no excess pressure indications (extraction was easy, and the primers were not flattened). I tried 7.0 grains of Unique first, and it was so calm I had no qualms about going to the Lyman-recommended 8.0-grain load. I was impressed with the 8.0 grains of Unique and 158-grain Hornady jacketed hollow point load. One of the groups was a one-holer (five shots clustered in a single ragged hole). Was that simply a fluke? I don’t think so. The other groups with this load were larger, but that was undoubtedly me.
I wish I could do this every time. This target was brought to you by 8.0 grains of Unique and the Hornady 158-grain jacketed hollow point bullet.
The second most accurate load (which is essentially as accurate as the load above) was the 158-grain Speer jacketed soft point bullet with 15.0 grains of Winchester 296 and a magnum primer. These bullets are still listed on the Speer website, but good luck finding them. No one has them in stock. The ones I used were from a stash I picked up from my good buddy Paul. Winchester 296 is a good powder for magnum handgun cartridges and it’s been one of my favorites for years. I was a bit surprised that 296 did not take the accuracy honors, but it was pretty close. 296 is a slower burning powder, and the reloading manuals show it gives the highest muzzle velocity. Recoil (and muzzle blast and flash) are significant with this powder.
The difference in average group size between the most accurate load and the next most accurate load was only 0.004 inches (the most accurate group average was 1.087 inches, the next most accurate group average was 1.o91 inches). That’s nothing, really. And I didn’t go higher or lower with the 296 charge with the second-place load; I only tried 15.0 grains. It’s likely that variations in the 296 charge would have shown a slighly different charge to be better. Maybe Bill Jordan (who carried a .357 Magnum) had it wrong: There is a second place winner.
Surprisingly, one of my previous accuracy loads (a near-max load of Unique with the Hornady 110-grain jacketed hollow point bullet) was not a good load in the Blackhawk. Accuracy was okay, but it was a fierce load and the cases would not extract (I had to take the cylinder out and drive the cases out with a rod). I only fired two groups with this load and then I stopped. This is a load that worked well in previous .357 Magnums, including a stainless steel Blackhawk, an earlier version of the Colt Python, a Smith and Wesson Model 27, and my current production Colt Python. I had the Python with me so I fired a couple of groups with it. It worked fine (it was accurate and extraction was easy). I proved, once again, that every gun is different with regard to what it likes.
What I thought would be a good load (a 158-grain cast bullet and 7.0 grains of Unique) was not. It was just okay accuracy-wise, but it leaded the bore big time and accuracy grew worse with each group fired as the leading increased. That wasn’t unique to the Blackhawk, either. It did the same thing in the Colt Python. These cast bullets are fairly hard, but the charge (7.0 grains of Unique) is driving the bullets to approximately 1200 feet per second, and it appears that’s enough to induce leading. The bullets are sized to .358 inches, so they should be sealing adequately.
The above observation led to a quest for a load using these cast bullets that wouldn’t lead the bore, and I tried a couple that kept velocity below 1000 feet per second (4.3 grains of Bullseye, and 5.0 grains of Unique). Neither produced appreciable leading, but the accuracy was mediocre.
Mild leading after the 4.3-grain Bullseye and 5.0-grain Unique cast bullet loads. These loads kept the velocity below 1000 feet per second.
After cleaning the bore, I tried the standard .38 Special target load: 2.7 grains of Bullseye and a 148-grain double ended wadcutter. I used Jim Gardner’s powder coated wadcutters and ammo I reloaded with my Star progressive machine. Accuracy was okay, but not exceptional.
Machine Rest versus Hand-Held Shooting
On the topic of machine rests, I don’t have one. In the past, keyboard commandos criticized me for that. I was recently was in the Colt plant in Connecticut. The Colt manager took us through the famed Colt Custom Shop and he showed me one of their custom gun test targets. It looked like my targets…four shots clusted into a cloverleaf with a single flyer. I asked my Colt buddy about the distance and if Colt used a machine rest. He told me the distance was 45 feet and said they do not use a machine rest. “A good shooter will outshoot a machine rest,” he said. I thought that was interesting and I liked hearing it. I never felt a need to use a machine rest and what the Colt guy said reinforced that.
A Note on Safety
This blog describes loads I developed for use in my revolver. Don’t simply run with them. They work for me; I make no conclusions (nor should you) about what they will do in your guns. Consult a reloading manual, start at the minimum load, gradually work up, and always watch for pressure signs.
What’s Next?
I have a blog in work that compares the Blackhawk to the Colt Python, and part of that is assessing how the Python groups with the same loads listed above. I think you’ll enjoy reading it. Stay tuned, folks.
