Shot a couple today in my CZ 550. They (500 gr. solids) were zinging at about 2240 fps.

Anyone doubting that a 458 WM can't make the original, nominal 2150 fps in a 22" barrel should doubt no more.

What was your load, and did it you have to use a ball peen hammer to set the bullet?

With 75 gr. Varget, it is barely compressed. I need to back 'em down. Warning! Hold on for dear life!

Use at your own risk.

Please do post the load you did this with.

I would think the 450 grain Barnes TSX at 2250 fps would be sufficient.

Also, what solid did you use. If it was a mono, then I'll really be impressed!

500 Gr. Hornady Encapsulated solids.

Although it is currently fashionable to bad mouth the 458 Win it has always been capable of safely reaching 2150fps ( which is all Jack Lott stated he was after) With the newest powders can even be pushed higher but I assure you a 500gr bullet at 2100 fps will not bounce off any game animal.

Everyone is now talking about how great the 450/400 is on buffalo and in reality it is only throwing a 400 grain bullet at 2,050 fps. I would much rather have the .458 500 grain bullet at 2050 to 2150 fps. Like Will, I have also been able to easily get 2100 t0 2250 fps in the .458 Win Mag with today's powders.

Tim

Hmm- Something smelled bad! I just ran that load thru quickload and its 76K PSI in a 22 inch barrel with 11 % compression. Didn't have the exact 500gr bullet but doubt that would make this a safe load. Oh yeah Quickload predicts it will do 2250fps in fact it should do a little more. Now there is a good load to share! Oh Yeah them computer programs dont work, This load is perfectly safe in my gun! KaBOOM!-Rob

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
... need to back 'em down. Warning! Hold ...
Use at your own risk.

+1

warning is a good label for this one..

quote:

Originally posted by Robgunbuilder:
Hmm- Something smelled bad! I just ran that load thru quickload and its 76K PSI in a 22 inch barrel with 11 % compression. Didn't have the exact 500gr bullet but doubt that would make this a safe load. Oh yeah Quickload predicts it will do 2250fps in fact it should do a little more. Now there is a good load to share! Oh Yeah them computer programs dont work, This load is perfectly safe in my gun! KaBOOM!-Rob

Actually, if he is using this bullet: .458, 500, Hornady FMJ RN ENC 45077 and 75grains of Hodgdon Varget, I get 129% filling, 2340fps and 99,317psi assuming normal seating depth and OAL.
If he is seating the bullet out to OAL of 3.5" then fill raio is 117%, 2240fps and 74,638psi.

Pretty hot loads no matter how you look at it.

Paul- surprised the bullet made that much difference, but will assume your right. WOW!Will has to have brass balls to shoot those loads. Sure you remember what powder you loaded old boy? Sure it was a .458 win mag? Just teasing you!
Will- Just curious, where did the extractor land? New worlds record for distance travelled?-Rob

quote:

Originally posted by Robgunbuilder:
Paul- surprised the bullet made that much difference
Rob

Rob, I agree - rather interesting. Using Varget at 75grains, a 22" barrel and an O.A.L. of 3.34" the data I get is as follows:

.458, 500, Hornady RN InterLock 4504
110% fill ratio, 2185fps and 64,193psi

.458, 500, Hornady RN InterBond 45049 115% fill ratio, 2229fps and 72,214psi

.458, 500, Hornady FMJ-RN 4507 127% fill ratio, 2325fps and 95,370psi

.458, 500, Hornady FMJ RN ENC 45077 129% fill ratio, 2338fps and 99,318psi

All same powder and OAL, just changing bullets from same manufacturer. Just serves as a reminder that all reloaders know; always work up when changing any component.

Anything new cooking on the CNC in .620?

In another 458 WM I had with a 22" barrel that same load gave me 2150 fps, which is why I was surprised. The Hornady encapsulated solids are faster than other solids I have tried for some reason.


No pressure signs, no extraction problems. Makes me doubt the accuracy of the computer simulation programs, though I admit 2239 is too fast, and probably too high a pressure, but it was the Hodgdon published load, afterall, for the encapsulated solid.

Also the recommended/published load from Accurate with A2230 for 2150 fps was only squeaking out 1980 fps. So go figure.

quote:

Makes me doubt the accuracy of the computer simulation programs

quote:

Originally posted by Will:
In another 458 WM I had with a 22" barrel that same load gave me 2150 fps, which is why I was surprised. The Hornady encapsulated solids are faster than other solids I have tried for some reason.

Will, the Hornady solid might be the reason or you might have less free bore in the CZ than your other rifle thus increased velocities and of course higher pressures. I have tried the Hornady solids in 375 and I am so far impressed with them I'll let you know after my son wacks a buff with it in a couple weeks.

Dirk

Dirk

Dirk,

Let me try to keep the story straight. I was using the now old encapsulated (brass/lead core) solids.

I assume your son will be using the new steel jacketed solids with the little flat nose.

quote:

Originally posted by jackfish:
I would think the 450 grain Barnes TSX at 2250 fps would be sufficient.

I have been trying the Barnes X flat base, and I cannot make it work for me. Too darned long. I cannot get it much over 2000fps.

Frank
A 458 AR reamer in the 458 winmag chamber will fix that problem!

My Lott flat shoots those old 4504 standard soft nose 500 grainers. Can get about 1.2" 3 shot group with them when I don't cut my nose too bad before the third shot. I plan on whacking a few deer this year with them. Came across about 200 of them cheap in fall of last year.

Will- if you doubt the computer programs, your common sense should be warning you there is a big problem going on here. That load is a hospital trip just waiting to happen. Another Kaboom just waiting to happen. I would trust quickload any day over the famous" its safe in my gun" BS. I know you want to believe this is OK but sorry its just plain crazy. Many guns will take a few rounds at 75-85KPSI and not come apart ( consider proof rounds), but a steady diet? No way! As you remember, I proofed the CZ550 at 85 Kpsi and it stayed together, but that was two rounds not more than that Back off 7-10 grs.-Rob

quote:

Originally posted by Frank Martinez:

quote:

Originally posted by jackfish:
I would think the 450 grain Barnes TSX at 2250 fps would be sufficient.

I have been trying the Barnes X flat base, and I cannot make it work for me. Too darned long. I cannot get it much over 2000fps.

John La Sala
http://www.safariarms.com/pictures.htm

quote:

Originally posted by Robgunbuilder:
Will- if you doubt the computer programs, your common sense should be warning you there is a big problem going on here. That load is a hospital trip just waiting to happen. Another Kaboom just waiting to happen. I would trust quickload any day over the famous" its safe in my gun" BS. I know you want to believe this is OK but sorry its just plain crazy. Many guns will take a few rounds at 75-85KPSI and not come apart ( consider proof rounds), but a steady diet? No way! As you remember, I proofed the CZ550 at 85 Kpsi and it stayed together, but that was two rounds not more than that Back off 7-10 grs.-Rob

I'm not srguing; the load is way too hot. I was just surprised that it was that hot!

quote:

.458, 500, Hornady FMJ RN ENC 45077 129% fill ratio, 2338fps and 99,318psi

Maybe it's only 99,317 psi?

Will got 2240 fps, and the software predicted 2338. This alone tells you the software is way off.

QuickLoad is a very useful tool, but it is known to miss pressures by over 10,000 psi at times, and this appears to be one of them. QL is great for predicting trends, and it indicates it will be difficult for factory ammo to send 500 gn 2150 fps from 24", and indeed the factories don't try to.

Could also be that the chronograph is out. I once chronographed a series of Remington 405gr factory loads in my Marlin 45/70 that were within 20fps of each other ... at 1630fps!!
Cheers...
Con

Quite true. When I want to chronograph a load, I use two chronos placed end to end, one mine, the other borrowed. They're inexpensive.

My experience with a Oehler 43 with strain guage and Quickload was actually pretty impressive. I used SAAMI 30-06 rounds for calibration and found the Oehler to be within 7% of the computer predicted pressure.That is the observed pressure was within approx. 5 KPSI of that predicted by Quickload. I used that strain guage on my first .600OK barrel and used it to develop the 65KPSI top end loads for that cartridge. I really doubt there is even a 10% error. Now, when Quickload predicts ANYTHING over 65KPSI, I just don't go there. Period. As you know, statiscally, Individual cartridges will show higher and lower pressures which is scary enough in itself.. It doesn't take much to skyrocket pressures, like short throats, poor leads, copper fouled barrels etc. and the guns generally give no warning before catastropic dissassembly occurs. Sometimes youll get lucky and the receiver locking lugs will set back or a bolt lug will crack. The cases also usually let go before the receiver fails but not always( particularily with belted magnum cases).
As for chronographs, the high end Oehlers have been quite reliable as long as the guns muzzel is far enough away from the first screen. 75 KPSI is way too hot for a steady diet for nearly all modern guns and not a smart place to be. Will is a experienced reloader and good guy and i respect his efforts to show what a .458 win mag can do, but that load is simply way too hot and approaching dangerous and I think he will agree with me on that chrono or computer prgm aside.-Rob

I use Quickload a quite a bit, but it does have a problem with straight wall cases like the 458 Win Mag, 416 Rem Mag, and 470 Capstick. It states in Quickload's operations manual that it tends to predict higher pressures and higher velocity than those actually obtained. I have found this to be true with my 416 Rem Mag and 470 Capstick, but not near as much disparity as is suggested by the load specified in the above posts. I would agree that these loads are too hot. I only use Quickload as an additional source of info for loading along with published loading manuals that are derived from actual load testing and not from predictive software.

quote:

Originally posted by asdf:

quote:

.458, 500, Hornady FMJ RN ENC 45077 129% fill ratio, 2338fps and 99,318psi

Maybe it's only 99,317 psi?

Will got 2240 fps, and the software predicted 2338. This alone tells you the software is way off.

QuickLoad is a very useful tool, but it is known to miss pressures by over 10,000 psi at times, and this appears to be one of them. QL is great for predicting trends, and it indicates it will be difficult for factory ammo to send 500 gn 2150 fps from 24", and indeed the factories don't try to.

500grs at 2150fps from 24" barrel isn't the problem and is actually easy to get, but 2239fps is the problem.

Not needed anyway.

JPK

and will has the rest of these bullets for sale... at a good price, I might add...

quote:

Originally posted by asdf:

quote:

.458, 500, Hornady FMJ RN ENC 45077 129% fill ratio, 2338fps and 99,318psi

Maybe it's only 99,317 psi?

Will got 2240 fps, and the software predicted 2338. This alone tells you the software is way off.

QuickLoad is a very useful tool, but it is known to miss pressures by over 10,000 psi at times, and this appears to be one of them. QL is great for predicting trends, and it indicates it will be difficult for factory ammo to send 500 gn 2150 fps from 24", and indeed the factories don't try to.

I agree, a useful tool and only that. The point of my post was simply that changing just one component can have dramatic effects on pressure. In this case, changing the bullet, even to another from the same manufacturer can lead to dramatic increases (or decreases) in pressure as can changing O.A.L. (as in my previous post in this thread).
Will, Rob, you, I and anyone who reloads enough know that there is no "free lunch" or "free horsepower".

I think we all know computer loading prgms are never perfect. However ,it sure is better to err on the high side than the low side. Thats why 65KPSI is a max value I would not exceed with any load. BTW nearly all of the blown-up guns I've encountered were supposedly using data from the manuals. I've had more than one surprise myself. However if your getting 100ft/sec higher velocities than others in any given caliber its almost certain your overpressure.-Rob

I called quick load Friday 6/6/08 about just that problem… he told me there was a procedure in the Readme to fix the problem with straight wall cases and it is listed in the “read Me Fileâ€. You will see the problem if you use loads from a book and run them through the program… The pressure out of QL is much higher…

That’s why the Software is nice but it is no substitute for a Load Manual.


Also I agree with Robgunbuilder 100%... Check your Velocities… if it is too high it’s a safe bet your pressure is too.

Will: You have a PM

Here is what Hodgdon's online reloading data lists for that load using a similar Hornady bullet:

500 GR. HDY JRN Hodgdon Varget .458" 3.310" 70.0 2056 39,400 CUP 74.0C 2152 48,100 CUP

quote:

Originally posted by starmetal:
Here is what Hodgdon's online reloading data lists for that load using a similar Hornady bullet:

500 GR. HDY JRN Hodgdon Varget .458" 3.310" 70.0 2056 39,400 CUP 74.0C 2152 48,100 CUP

Which is nearly identical to the QL predictions of velocity using those chages of Varget, that OAL and the generic Hornady 500grain RN-though presents pressure data in psi - 53423psi@2062fps for the 70 grain and 63817psi@2172fps for the 74grain load.
Again, I believe that the key here is that changing to another bullet of the same weight but different construction will not necesarily be safe with the same charge of powder.
I have no stock nor interest in QL and as said before it is merely a tool to assist in the development of safe loads. I think the key is to be careful and make no assumptions of safety of any load in any gun unless you work it up yourself. Make changes in components, need to start from the beginning again. I don't need any more business - I have more than enough as it is.

The way I understand it that a different bullet then the one mentioned in a particular reloading data can change pressure is by the following. It's diameter is larger then the one in the data. It's groove bearing length is longer then the one in the data. It's alloy is harder then the one in the data. We will assume the weight is the same, that the bullet's base occupies the same seating depth in the case and that the base configuration is similar, that is flat base with sharp corners, or flat base with rounded corners, and that the full bearing diameter is the same distance from the leade in in the throat. Does this sound correct?

quote:

Originally posted by starmetal:
The way I understand it that a different bullet then the one mentioned in a particular reloading data can change pressure is by the following. It's diameter is larger then the one in the data. It's groove bearing length is longer then the one in the data. It's alloy is harder then the one in the data. We will assume the weight is the same, that the bullet's base occupies the same seating depth in the case and that the base configuration is similar, that is flat base with sharp corners, or flat base with rounded corners, and that the full bearing diameter is the same distance from the leade in in the throat. Does this sound correct?

I would only add that if O.A.L. is kept the same one can't assume that the bullet occupies the same seating depth - i.e. different bullet lengths = different seating depths if OAL is constant. Going back to my first post, you can see that if Will seated the same bullet out to 3.5" vs. 3.34". the pressure and velocity drop significantly. There are so many other variables, as Rob pointed out, that this is more academic than scientific.

quote:

500 GR. HDY JRN Hodgdon Varget .458" 3.310" 70.0 2056 39,400 CUP 74.0C 2152 48,100 CUP ... Which is nearly identical to the QL predictions of velocity using those chages of Varget, that OAL and the generic Hornady 500grain RN-though presents pressure data in psi - 53423psi@2062fps for the 70 grain and 63817psi@2172fps for the 74grain load.

Sorry, I beg to disagree. Hodgdon's 39,400 CUP is likely near 44,000 psi whereas QL predicts 53,000; and 48,100 CUP is likely near 57,000 psi vs 64,000 for QL.

quote:

I used SAAMI 30-06 rounds for calibration and found the Oehler to be within 7% of the computer predicted pressure.

What manner of SAAMI rounds are these you used for calibration? SAAMI reference ammo. only generates the stated pressure in SAAMI spec pressure barrels, more or less. Factory commercial ammo. also generates its nominal pressure in a SAAMI pressure barrel; a factory sporter can be quite different. Now, if you have chrono data which matched the factory rating, then you're getting closer.