[olfarhors]

Actually, I was about 150 fps slower with the revolver and about 150 fps faster than Hodgdon with a 20" Rossi Model 92. No idea what Hodgdon used.hod

Possibly a dreaded 24 inch test barrel, shot on a 68 degree day, at an altitude of 12,000 feet , and the target was down in a valley at sea level??
thats the way everybody was testing their published loads back in the 70's when the velocity wars was going on!-Griiin.
the testing apparatus makes alot of difference.
A lot of uniiversal recievers seem to be used now days.
I would be loking at variations in the velocity, if close then be content that its likely correct with you setup.

 

[olfarhors]

MadKaw, why do you say that much HP-38 can't be burnt in a 4" barrel. I think of HP-38 as a fairly fast powder, and expected pretty full burn even up to low .357 Magnum levels. Hodgdon lists 8.5 gr of HP-38 as max for .357 Magnum, and I was planning to try some rounds in the 6.0-6.5 gr levels. They don't say what length barrel, and I don't think I would try that much in a 2" snubbie, but 4" is pretty respectable.
.

OK Not Mad Kaw and not answering for him but!
No powder is going to burn in that length of barrel or with that charge!
Simply the only time that any powder is going to completely burn is when you get a squib from such a seriously under loaded projectile!
IF you have muzzle flash then you have unburned powder , simple as that.
what the object is to get a powder, charge rate that will burn as completely as possible in a certain barrel length and produce as much FPS as posisble with the lowest chamber pressure.
all projectiles should still be accelerating as they leave the muzzle, therefore you still have powder burning.
Sorry to interupt the discusion but had to throw that in.