The Lee manual has a compilation of pressure tested data, some identical to that published by powder companies,
it includes the Western Powders Co. data verbatim, for 24" barrel.

It is interesting to compare the 500-grain bullet loads (500-gr Hornady RNSP for the AA powders), with all COLs less than 3.340":

AA-2460 (52,864 PSI, 2192 fps, 74.0 grains, compressed)
H335 (58,841 PSI, 2163 fps, 75.5 grains, compressed)
AA-2230 (53,808 PSI, 2159 fps, 72.0 grains, NOT compressed): ROOM TO PLAY HERE.
and note that the only powder here that exceeds 60,000 psi
is H322 (60,829 psi, 2109 fps, 69.5 grains, compressed)



Any pressure tested SAAMI .458 Lott data (hard to find) can be used as starting load data in the .458 WIN LongCOL "wildcat,"
as long as you can load the particular bullet to same or longer COL than in the SAAMI .458 Lott,
then use the .458 Lott mid-level loads as starting loads in the .458 WIN LongCOL,
and work up until .458 Lott is beat.

That easiest of wildcats is simply a SAAMI .458 WIN.MAG. loaded long.
Like COL, pressure may also go higher in this wildcat,
to at least as high as the .458 Lott MAP.

Rip ...

Of course the PAC Warden knows best.
Whether you have a .458 WIN or a .458 Lott (bless yore hart),
load it down to 2130 fps and just over 5000 ft-lbs with 500-grainer for PAC work.
Pressures for the 3.34" WIN and the 3.6" Lott would probably be very close to same: Low to mid 50K PSI,
due to the throating differences.
The .458 WIN is just a little handier for that kind of work.
More DG/combat-capable for many reasons.
The SAAMI .458 Lott is no improvement over the SAAMI .458 WIN.

Rip ...

To repeat myself, for THE MISSION:

Above load (71.8 gr AA-2230 with 500-gr DGS) is non-compressed, but close to 99% fill.


The 10th Edition Hornady Manual (2016) shows a .458 WIN load using 78.3 grains of AA-2230 as maximum load with the 500-grain DGS & DGX.
MV is 2200 fps, and has to be </= 60,000 PSI, ShortCOL/SAAMI.

I would say load your ammo fresh once yearly, store in cool, dry place, and shoot it all up by year's end.
No worries.

The .458 WIN.MAG. is the best combination of power and agility.
Just like Chuck Norris.

Rip ...

RIP: Do you think Hornady’s 458 WM Superformace load is Accurate 2230?

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
RIP: Do you think Hornady’s 458 WM Superformace load is Accurate 2230?

In a word: Yes.

Why? Because if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is usually a duck.

The Hornady data of 2016 manual is same as it was in the 2002 or 2003 manual, right after they had added the .458 Lott data alongside the .458 WIN.
Bullets have changed to DGX & DGS instead of whatever it was before (soft and FMJ).
Charges of propellant have not changed with the new bullets.
Western Powders reformulated the AA-2230 and AA-2460 in 2016, selling point: Now with improved ThermoBallisticIndependence (TBI).

The Western Powders data (in the Lee table above) is closer to current reality with the DGS and DGX 500-grainers.
Hornady tested ball powders were:
AA-2015
H335
AA-2230
WIN 748
Makes sense they would use one of those.
Especially the one that gave the highest velocity of all the powders they tested, including extruded and ball powders: AA-2230

I pulled apart Hornady Superformance factory ammo with DGS and DGX bullets.

The propellant they were using has the appearance of AA-2230, no compression, and the same volume to charge weight ratio as AA-2230:
Looks like the same duck.
The velocity delivered with 500-grainer from a 24" barrel is just right for AA-2230, by Western Powders data, by Hornady ammo advertising claims,
and by my chronograph.
Thus it also quacks like a duck.

Must be the same duck.
Nothing else makes sense.

Note that the DGX-soft (with radius on the base, semi-boat-tailed) is a slightly longer bullet than the DGS-FMJ (flat-base).
Their jackets are similarly constructed, gilding-metal-coated steel.
The nose projection lengths are identical.
So in this pair of soft & solid bullets the soft must be seated deeper to give the same COL.
Thus a lesser charge of powder will be needed for the soft to generate same pressure and velocity.
That is the opposite of some other pairs of softs and solids.
There are no absolutes, everything is relative: Viking Law.

Hornady seems to have gotten this right if you want a good FMJ and a soft that acts like a hard-cast lead bullet, expanding little and penetrating deeply,
like Bob noted.
Hornady seems to always go with an odd duck soft point for a DGR bullet, bless their heart.

I would consider the Hornady Superformance loads for .458 WIN to be as good or better than what PAC Warden Mike Lagrange was so happy with.
He shot over 6000 elephant in pre-1990 Zimbabwe,
and he was happiest with a .458 WIN rifle,
using 500-gr Hornady FMJ at 2130 fps as loaded for him by A-Square.
Ron Thomson did similar conservation work (+5000 elephants) and also preferred the .458 WIN.
The .458 WIN has saved a lot of elephants from starvation that comes with exceeding the carrying capacity of habitat.

The .458 WIN is the Chuck Norris of DGR rifles and cartridges.

If one wants the best ratio of most whomp at the muzzle to least whump at the butt of the rifle, the Whomp-Whump Ratio (WWR),
and the best ratio of highest velocity to least pressure, the Velocity-Pressure Ratio (VPR),
AA-2230 is hard to beat.
AA-2230 has excellent WWR, VPR, and TBI, in the .458 WIN.

Rip ...

ALF,

Thanks for the rocket science.
But rockets do not have throating differences.
Ain't the .458 WIN swell?

Rip ...

RIP: Do you know what powder ASquare would have used for Lagrange?

I am sorry to keep asking questions. My thoughts are simply that if we know what powder Lagrange had and can duplicate his velocity at correct pressures, then I believe the argument against the 458WM becomes moot.

Or if someone has a 1950s loaded ammo and 25 inch pre 64 and wants to shoot it over a chronograph.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
RIP: Do you know what powder ASquare would have used for Lagrange?

Not revealed by Mike Lagrange.
The A-Square manual data is for their 465-grain Triad of bullets.
The powders they used for that were H-4895, IMR-3031, and RL-12.

I am sorry to keep asking questions. My thoughts are simply that if we know what powder Lagrange had and can duplicate his velocity at correct pressures, then I believe the argument against the 458WM becomes moot.

The argument against the .458 WIN is way past moot, it has been sucked into a black hole.

Or if someone has a 1950s loaded ammo and 25 inch pre 64 and wants to shoot it over a chronograph.

I think that has been done many times in the past.
60-year-old ammo is best left as a collector item. Anything less than 40 years old I might plink with if it had no significant collector value.

H-4895 would be my guess on the A-Square load for the 500-gr Hornady FMJ in the .458 WIN.
It is fully capable of 2150 fps with 500-grainer.
(See Lee table above.)

The A-Square manual shows the 465-gr Lion Load in a 26"-barreled .458 WIN:
H-4895 77.0 grains had the smallest St.Dev. & ES and very close to highest velocity: 2252 fps
and a low pressure of 44,700 CUP,
probably very little over 50,000 psi for that 465-grainer.
Ain't that .458 WIN swell?

Rip ...

Thank you. I was thinking from a historical perspective as in if the 458 WM before Accurate 2230.

It appears that the 458 did hit its numbers historically, if only through selective loading. Of course, your focus has been exceedingly those historical numbers through cartridge OAL with standard WM throat.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Thank you. I was thinking from a historical perspective as in if the 458 WM before Accurate 2230.

It appears that the 458 did hit its numbers historically, if only through selective loading.

Ah come on! Admit it! The .458 WIN was always good, even with powders of the 1950's, as long as the factory load was not "hashed."
(Pierre van der Walt terminology.)
Of course it could be made even better by handloading, just like any cartridge.
The cabal of .458 WIN deniers had nefarious motives.
(My conspiracy theory.)

Of course, your focus has been exceedingly exceeding those historical numbers through cartridge OAL with standard WM throat.

Yes, having demonstrated, again and again, how the SAAMI .458 WIN.MAG. can be "unchained" as the .458 WIN LongCOL wildcat,
using SAAMI .458 Lott maximum data as the starting load data for the .458 WIN LongCOL,
it is now time to discuss how the SAAMI .458 WIN.MAG. (ShortCOL) is often superior to the SAAMI .458 Lott.

Rip ...

Rip
Best thread ever. Best defense of a gun topic ever. Best 458 ever.
However; rockets do have throats! Just like the 458wm, good rockets succeed because of proper nozzle design.
Maybe you could name your next 458wm after one of our great rockets eh?

quote:

Originally posted by Fury01:
Rip
Best thread ever. Best defense of a gun topic ever. Best 458 ever.
However; rockets do have throats! Just like the 458wm, good rockets succeed because of proper nozzle design.
Maybe you could name your next 458wm after one of our great rockets eh?

Fury01,

You got me there. Are you some kind of Rocket Scientist?
OK, the throat is analogous to the nozzle on a rocket motor.
This IS rocket science.
No wonder shootaway doesn't get it.
The loaded rifle is the rocket, ready for blastoff.
I would appreciate any suggestions for a rocket model name to
bestow upon a .458 WIN rifle.
Great idea.

Rip ...

I figured you needed 1 more +

tsturm,

Any contribution to THE MISSION, however small,
is greatly appreciated.

The A-Square manual circa 1998 listed Governing Body for the ".458 Winchester" as "SAAMI."
Governing Body for the ".458 Lott" was listed as "The A-Square Co., Inc."
A-Square was a member of SAAMI and it is likely that Art Alphin is responsible for the throating of the .458 Lott
that got SAAMI homologation about 2001-2002, aka the ".458 Lott Not Like Jack Built."
We know this as well as we know that Chuck Norris designed the .458 WIN chamber reamer, on March 10, 1955, his 15th birthday.
That is a "Chuck Norris Fact."

Now, for shootaway's next reading lesson he might want to find an A-Square manual.

They show 77.0 grains of H-4895 as a maximum load in the .458 WIN, and a starting load for the .458 Lott,
for 465-grain bullet and 26" barrels for both rifles.

.458 WIN, 3.340" COL: 2252 fps ... 44,700 CUP (about 50,000 PSI)
.458 Lott, 3.600" COL: 2217 fps ... 49,800 PSI (about 50,000 PSI)

The .458 Lott needs more powder to catch up to the .458 WIN velocity.
Pressure will have to be increased in the .458 Lott to match .458 WIN MV.
Recoil will be greater in the .458 Lott, burning more powder to get to same MV as the .458 WIN.

No doubt a similar situation occurs with 500-grain bullet at 2150 fps.
.458 WIN pressure will be less than that of the .458 Lott, for the same velocity of bullet.
.458 WIN recoil will be less than that of the .458 Lott, for the same weight rifle, and same velocity of bullet.

Best balance of power and agility with ease: The SAAMI .458 Winchester Magnum, aka the ".458 Chuck Norris."

Rip ...

Peacekeeper:



Great unisex name for a .458 WIN rifle.

It sure won't be "Midgetman" (USA, prototype, never went into service) or "Satan" (USSR, heaviest heave, great name for a .458 Lott rifle).

A test of the Peacekeeper showing 8 of 10 possible MIRV-ed warheads streaking in like meteors, time-lapse photo:



Each of the 10 MIRVs are 300 kilotons, each one 20 times the blast of the Hiroshima bomb.
14,000 Km range, and a lot of payload.
Accuracy: 131 ft 3 in (40 m) at 8,700 miles away.
Perfect namesake for a .458 WIN rifle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-118_Peacekeeper

Rip ...

quote:

hey show 77.0 grains of H-4895 as a maximum load in the .458 WIN, and a starting load for the .458 Lott,
for 465-grain bullet and 26" barrels for both rifles.

I rest my case! You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.

PMG-17 Thor (1957 - 1960)
Thor-Burner (1965–1976)

So I was a President Eisenhower baby so PMG_17Thor works for me.
Graduated HS in 1975 so the better Phrased Thor-Burner works good too!!

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
Thank you. I was thinking from a historical perspective as in if the 458 WM before Accurate 2230.

It appears that the 458 did hit its numbers historically, if only through selective loading.

Ah come on! Admit it! The .458 WIN was always good, even with powders of the 1950's, as long as the factory load was not "hashed."
(Pierre van der Walt terminology.)
Of course it could be made even better by handloading, just like any cartridge.
The cabal of .458 WIN deniers had nefarious motives.
(My conspiracy theory.)

Of course, your focus has been exceedingly exceeding those historical numbers through cartridge OAL with standard WM throat.

Yes, having demonstrated, again and again, how the SAAMI .458 WIN.MAG. can be "unchained" as the .458 WIN LongCOL wildcat,
using SAAMI .458 Lott maximum data as the starting load data for the .458 WIN LongCOL,
it is now time to discuss how the SAAMI .458 WIN.MAG. (ShortCOL) is often superior to the SAAMI .458 Lott.

Rip ...

I happily, and surprisingly admit the 458WM is always good. I hedged without 1960s confirmed load data because Alf is so adamant the WM did not make the stated Ballistic grade when introduced.

whew, what a read
glad i'm just a simple DR shooter with a 450NE

you know, the cartridge the 458WM was to replicate in a bolt gun

450 Nitro Express 3 1/4.

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:

quote:

hey show 77.0 grains of H-4895 as a maximum load in the .458 WIN, and a starting load for the .458 Lott,
for 465-grain bullet and 26" barrels for both rifles.

I rest my case! You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.

"hey" also showed that 77.0 grains of H4895 in the SAAMI .458 WIN (3.340" COL or less) gave higher MV than the same powder charge and bullet weight
if loaded in the SAAMI .458 Lott (3.600" COL or less).
This was very nearly at the same pressures in the two cartridges.

Also, "hey" did not show how the .458 WIN can be loaded to same or longer COL than the .458 Lott with monometal bullets
(like the 465-grain Monolithic Solid used in the .458 Lott for "hey's" data),
and thus accept more than the maximum load for the .458 Lott with that bullet.

If the bullet had been the 500-grain TSX crimped on the fifth cannelure: Impossible to chamber in the SAAMI .458 Lott.
Even at lesser COL the bullet would be jammed into the rifling due to the short throat of the SAAMI .458 Lott and add 8000 psi to the start pressure of the bullet.
That TSX can only be loaded to about 2200 fps in the .458 Lott with 24" barrel at SAAMI MAP,
and you have to trim the brass 0.025" shorter to make it fit inside of 3.600" COL of the .458 Lott.
Same bullet can easily exceed 2300 fps in the .458 WIN LongCOL (3.780") with a 24" barrel,
at pressures below the maximum safe load in the SAAMI .458 Lott.
Thanks be to the rocket nozzle on the .458 WIN.
Perfection.

Rip ...

ALF,

Thanks for THE MISSION support.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Ken Waters:

Winchester 510 gr Factory load @ 2035 FPS
@ 2090 fps in Ruger with 24 inch barrel

Org Ehlers Man Magnum 2002

PMP Factory 500 gr Barnes-X @ 1870 fps
Winchester Factory 510 SP @ 2040 fps

Guns and Ammo 2000
Ruger no 1 24 inch

Winchester Super X 510 @ 2007 fps
Remington Safari grade 450 gr A frame @ 2165
Federal Premium Safari 400 Trophy bonded @ 2397

Matunas:

Remington FMC 500 @ 2035
Winchester FMC 500 @ 2010
Fed Safari FMC 500 @ 1995
Remington 510 SP @ 1995

Anyway it matters not because my experience always has been that of a loss of snot and enamel on both sides of the 458 Win

I bet that if no one originally made claims as to what this thing was "supposed to shoot at" or what it actually did in the field they still would have been satisfied !

For the same velocity and pressure, the SAAMI .458 WIN.MAG. will kick less and thus preserve more snot and enamel on the shooter's side of the rifle.

Add to the limited studies above:

In 2002 I fired some 1980's-vintage 510-gr Winchester Super X factory ammo, 5 shots:

25" CZ barrel, .458 WIN.MAG., 84* degrees F
5-yard chrono reading:
2014 fps average of 5 shots,
ES =29 fps, St.Dev. = 12 fps.
Factory hashed?
All of it is water under the bridge.

Rip ...

Stop posting nonsense and focus on what you yourself posted....and I quote you...

" They show 77.0 grains of H-4895 as a maximum load in the .458 WIN, and a starting load for the .458 Lott,
for 465-grain bullet and 26" barrels for both rifles."

If this is true, 126 pages of waisted time.

What we are reaching for here is not an argument-- off/on-- how close a wanna be 460 lott is to the power and utility of a big boy 460 weatherby magnum, George

we are striving for a balance-- elegance simplicity ''uter reliability'' equilibrating the rifle, the cartridge and the shooter in to one automatic repeating killing machine six shots one right after the other-- in proper good time


for most of us-- if not all of us-- it's a lighter so faster to battery [but not a too light] rifle

more down not less -- less recoil not more

a quick honest [first effective, then efficient] return to battery after recoil recovery

dead accurate so a ''soft ball size 5 shot group'' every time at about 100 yards ---in a running battle

not the-- my gun is bigger than your gun-- bullshit sprayed around the campfire --in a ''lott'' of the too much hat not enough cattle, african safari camps spread like good fertilizer on a BAD corn crop

when you think about it that way it's the the ''not biggest'' that counts, it the best for the job at hand

and yes they all work, still you don't always know which one is ---just right--- for you -- less you do a little personal tuning up -- not the bottom -- not the top

somewhere in between, and for some of us that have --in fact done the work-- almost always not a lott

thats all---- seeking the elusive sweet spot


too much gun is not always a winning strategy

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Stop posting nonsense and focus on what you yourself posted....and I quote you...

" They show 77.0 grains of H-4895 as a maximum load in the .458 WIN, and a starting load for the .458 Lott,
for 465-grain bullet and 26" barrels for both rifles."

If this is true, 126 pages of waisted time.

Shootacow telling someone to "stop posting nonsense"!!

I don't care who you are, that's funny right there!

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
If this is true, 126 pages of waisted time.

Would that be an hourglass waist?

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Stop posting nonsense and focus on what you yourself posted....and I quote you...

" They show 77.0 grains of H-4895 as a maximum load in the .458 WIN, and a starting load for the .458 Lott,
for 465-grain bullet and 26" barrels for both rifles."

If this is true, 126 pages of waisted time.

That A-Square pressure data has the .458 WIN-3.340" "maximum load" at same pressure as the .458 Lott-3.600" "starting load."
And the short .458 WIN has a higher velocity than the long .458 Lott.
Same barrel length.
Same bullet weight.
Same powder charge.

Thanks to shootaway for drawing our attention to this fact.
These special cases where the .458 WIN beats the .458 Lott are growing more numerous.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Stop posting nonsense and focus on what you yourself posted....and I quote you...

" They show 77.0 grains of H-4895 as a maximum load in the .458 WIN, and a starting load for the .458 Lott,
for 465-grain bullet and 26" barrels for both rifles."

If this is true, 126 pages of waisted time.

That A-Square pressure data has the .458 WIN-3.340" "maximum load" at same pressure as the .458 Lott-3.600" "starting load."
And the short .458 WIN has a higher velocity than the long .458 Lott.
Same barrel length.
Same bullet weight.
Same powder charge.

Thanks to shootaway for drawing my attention to this fact.
These special cases where the .458 WIN beats the .458 Lott are growing more numerous.

If it has a higher velocity it most likely has higher pressure and the long throat serves just to load long monometals and nothing else.

quote:

Originally posted by stradling:
What we are reaching for here is not an argument-- not the -- my gun is bigger than your gun-- bullshit sprayed around the campfire --in a ''lott'' of the too much hat not enough cattle, african safari camps spread like good fertilizer on a BAD corn crop

I like that.
Sounds like something Chuck Norris would say.

WHEN jacxx s Lott invented the lott

he did not need to

the 458 worked

he wanted material to write about

and nothing else - a wildcat as a feather in his legacy

the less people knew, the more they succumbed to baby spoon moma feed me, the more they enjoyed momas gurber grub - even with the teeth to eat bloody, middles juicy, red steak

you need to get off the canned food George-- it will help your thinking of things through -- projects

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:
Shootacow telling someone to "stop posting nonsense"!!

I don't care who you are, that's funny right there!

Priceless!

Rip ...

quote:

Originally posted by xausa:

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
If this is true, 126 pages of waisted time.

Would that be an hourglass waist?

Bill,
Waisted time: An hourglass.
Time in a bottle: Jim Croce.
Range time in a shooting helmet: shootaway

Spelling is the least of shootaway's problems.
Thanks for trying to be nice to shootaway.
It is good for THE MISSION.

Rip ...

quote:

Range time in a shooting helmet: shootaway

RIP

you might think ''you are not all that'' funny

did not work

YOU ARE

WASTED TIME

the new metaphor-- for it

it's for certain you draw out the worst in me


but thats not all that funny

now that I have ''laughed myself happy''

I am going to get the hell out of this

and go to work

stradling channels Chuck Norris stream of consciousness:



Rip ...

For interest's sake: Latest report of tests for my Ruger Tropical .458 Win in today's blog.

Bob
www.bigbores.ca

Ole Ugly, my 458, is packed and ready to leave for Zimbabwe next week.