Reloading for accuracy in handguns

[Gene Pool]

Gentlemen,

As many of you know, all powders are not equal when it comes to accuracy in pistols. Yesterday I did some testing to determine which powder to load a batch of 45 ACP ammo with. The bullets were 230 grain Speer lead round nose that I acquired roughly 30 years ago. I had about 250 of them remaining in an old box which originally contained 500. Back in the 60's, 70's and 80's, Speer lead bullets were all I used in 45 and 38 caliber handguns. They served me well in general plinking as well in pistol matches.

So yesterday, my determination was to load 45 ACP to achieve best accuracy at approximately 750 fps velocity. My test powders were Unique, Bullseye, and W-231. I set up a sandbag and target at a distance of 25 feet and fired 5 rounds with each powder as carefully as possible using a 6 o'clock hold.

Take a look at the attached target to see the difference for yourselves. My original thinking, before I did the test, was that Unique would probably turn out to be best, and Bullseye the worst. As it turned out, the results showed exactly the opposite.

Bottom line, many reloaders don't pay a lot of attention to which powders they load for handguns. But this test highlights the fact that powder selection is important for accuracy just like it is in rifles.

Gene

[Gene Pool]

Please ignore this reply. My error.

[Sevens]

Well, that's neat and I always appreciate it when folks share their experiences and I would simply have to guess that your testing was more than simply the 15 shots shown here...

But it would seem without knowing quite a bit more that it's difficult to draw solid conclusions from what you've presented. You seem to have drawn conclusions, but I'm not so sure the conclusions you've drawn are useful or solid.

I would first ask...
What if you were to spend a lot of time and effort testing many loads with the same powder? Certainly, the 750 fps speed you picked would vary, but it seems rational to imagine that groups might tighten (or loosen) across this scale.

And then of course -- what if swapped out bullets to something different?
What if we used a different handgun?
Maybe if we simply altered the COAL we'd see different results?

And the other bit that's begging to be asked:
If you develop the finest accuracy load you can muster given the different powders that you have... you're doing it with leftover bullets from 30 years ago. Which is all well and good, I love to use up old stock also, but HOW do you repeat the feat once you've done all the testing? When that bullet supply dwindles, can you get more of them?

It's interesting but I guess I am having trouble drawing solid conclusions from it. I certainly note your bottom line and I suppose I can agree, but it's hard to be certain that your testing either proves or disproves that argument.

[Nick_C_S]

Chasing the accuracy leprechaun can be enigmatic, to say the least.

I'm going to (try to ) keep this high-level, and not dig into too much detail:

As Sevens said, your sample size is small. Even at that, I could have predicted your results. Generally, fast powders tend to be more accurate. For 45 ACP/target, W231 has been my go-to for three decades. If I had to substitute (and I may soon have no choice), Bullseye would be my next choice. I consider them equally accurate; W231 is just much cleaner.

It has been my experience - by far - that the bullet used plays a far greater role in accuracy than the powder.

The Speer swaged 230 RN's you are using are probably about as accurate as any 45 ACP projectile. Others may chime in with more accurate examples; and they could be right. But I know that Speer's swaged line of bullets (38 Spl / 45 ACP) are exceptionally accurate. There are many others out there too, no doubt. I use many others myself.

For me, once I get that "point-n-click" feel (only way I know how to describe it) of an accurate load combo, I stick with it- and don't chase that leprechaun any further. At that point, the round is going to shoot straighter than me every time - it will hit its target in any of my applications, as long as I do my part.

[45_auto]

My experience with handguns off sandbags at 25 feet has been that ANY load will put everything through one hole.

I find it surprising that you're seeing any dispersion at all at 8 yards. I would find it more likely that your technique is lacking rather that any difference in the loads. How long have you been shooting?

[Bart B.]

Are you saying that they'll put all shots inside .452" center to center at 25 feet?

That's the biggest a "one hole" group will be for .45's. And assuming "one hole" means twice the bullet diameter center to center across widest shot holes.

I find that hard to believe shooting any centerfire handgun hand held from any position.

[Gene Pool]

I might should have added that my eyesight is failing significantly in my senior years. I am sure someone younger, with sharp vision, could cut these group sizes down considerably.

And the point of bullet changes over 30 years is a good one. I am sure that bullets bought today would have to be tested again.

My main point is, powder selection when reloading for pistol is to be considered if accuracy is an issue with the shooter. Getting a bullet from point A to the general vicinity of point B can be done with about any powder.

Gene

[TMD]

I've used all three of those powders along with a few others. With 230gn lead and plated bullets I've gotten the best accuracy using 5.0gns of W231 and Titegroup coming in a close second.

[45_auto]

Originally Posted by bart b

Are you saying that they'll put all shots inside .452" center to center at 25 feet?

To be more technically accurate, I should have said "one raggedy hole". By that I mean that I would expect all shots would be touching the first hole, which would mean a max group size of just under an inch (.904" to be exact) for a .452" dia bullet.

Can't say that I've ever shot for groups at 8 yards with a pistol. Never shot for groups at any distance with any pistol (except for a scoped Contender) for that matter, I don't find that degree of precision necessary in a combat pistol.

I based my comment that I would expect "one hole" at 25 feet on the fact that several friends and I shoot the old Gunsite "skills maintenance" course several times a week. 25 timed rounds, 4 to 25 yards, center scoring ring is 2.75" x 4.5", worth 4 points.

Perfect scores are not uncommon. Anyone who did not shoot "expert" (93 and above) would be ragged unmercifully! It does not take any type of special accuracy load to shoot a perfect score, it happens all the time with many different loads.

Max group size for a perfect score (bullet hole touching ring to score) would be 2.75" + .452" = 3.202". 8 of the 25 shots are taken from 25 yards, so those 8 must be within that group.

To get 3.202" at 25 yards while shooting the Gunsite course, the gun must obviously be better than that at 25 feet. Since 25 feet is 1/3 of 25 yards, I would expect max 25 foot groups to be 3.202 / 3 = 1.07".

Since the Gunsite course of fire is a timed combat course (25 yard shots are 2 in 7 seconds, repeated 4 times), I would also expect that taking my time from sandbags, and using a precise aiming point, I would be able to significantly better my groups.

Based on the 25 yard max groups of 3.202", I would predict that I could easily achieve 1.07" groups at 25 feet. Supported off sandbags, aiming at a precise point, and taking my time, I would expect groups significantly UNDER the .904" inches required for all holes to be touching.

I've got several thousand rounds of .45 loaded with 230 LRN, 5.0 grains of 231. If I remember it, I'll give it a try this weekend and see what I get from 25 feet.

[Bart B.]

I understand your "one hole" measurement now.

It's like the definition of "mil" or "ton" or "mile" as they all have different standards.

I once saw a 25-yard 90-shot group from an S&W Model 52 in .38 Spcl. 'Twas fired from a Ransom rest and the single hole was about 2 inches. Furthest shot out barely cut into where the other 89 went, but its owner claimed that was a "one hole" group.

.9" groups at 25 feet's pretty good, though.

[TimSr]

I don't think .45_Auto is trying to take anything away from the OP shooting a good group, but with the title of this thread being "loading for accurracy" I agree completely that to make any conclusions of a particular loads accurracy, you need to take away all other variables. They should be shot in the same gun, buy the same shooter, on a rest, and at enough of a distance that variations can actually be seen. I use 75ft for a start. Also, since the OP was specifically comparing powders, its should be the same bullet, the same cases, and the same primers.

Then when you are all finished, you can only conclude that a certain powder was more accurrate with the specific combination in which it was tested. The powder that propels a soft lead bullet to accurracy will not likley produce the same superior results. When the bullet is changed to a hard cast or jacketed one, or a different weight, or in a different gun, another powder will probably emerge as superior.


When doing handgun hunting loads, something that puts them all in the black at 50 ft might shoot 5' off at 100 yards.

[Jim243]

But it would seem without knowing quite a bit more that it's difficult to draw solid conclusions from what you've presented.

^^^^^ I would have to agree with this.

Jim

[sawdustdad]

thanks for taking the time to share your results, Gene. As you've noted, it takes some experimentation to find that "sweet spot" for each gun. I tend to try a few variations, then settle on one that's "good enough" until I get an itch to try something else.

[mizer67]

25 ft. and one, 5 round groups isn't really enough to tell anything.

75 ft. and multiple 10-round groups are a minimum standard to start when loading for accuracy and the best combinations should really be pushed to 50 yards. The transition between 25 and 50 yards can often show you stability issues you can't see closer in.

That being said, the OP's point of choosing the right powder makes a bigger differnce in many calibers than is often given credit. Something like .45 ACP that will often shoot well with anything that burn can't be said for 9mm.

[buck460XVR]

Those results are only valid for your gun @ those velocities, using those bullets. Most reloaders either thru experience and/or research know that any change in components can change accuracy. They also know what works well in one firearm does not always work the best in another. This is why we all don't use the exact same components with the exact same powder charge as everyone else does.

Bottom line, many reloaders don't pay a lot of attention to which powders they load for handguns.

While some may not pay attention, I tend to think the majority of them do. This is why for the last 6 years we have seen so many posts of "where can I find some XXX powder again?". This is why so many of us still experiment with other powders long after we have found an accurate recipe. Reloading to most is more than just throwing a bunch of mediocre ammo downrange to create noise. We prefer it when the bullets hit POA.

[Clark]

On 4-3-2004 I shot the rifle I built with a .452" groove Shillen bull barrel at the range. I rapid fired a 4" 20 shot group at 100 meters with a 4 scope. I know I could do better.

The chamber is .469" in diameter. I did that because the brass springs back to .469" when it comes out of a .467" Lee carbide sizer die.

I cut the throat with a 45acp throater reamer to get the bolt to just close on a 1.275" OAL 230 gr FMJ dummy round.

This is a chamber that is tight like a 6mmPPC chamber is tight.

230 gr. FMJ 13 gr. AA#5 4" 20 Shot @100m 230 gr [460 Rowland type loads with 45acp brass... keep THAT ammo separate]

[Brutus]

All three powders listed are good for .45ACP. Quit using bullseye years ago when I started using plated bullets. I've tried lots of different powders over the years and have always gravitated back to 231 and Unique. Lean more towards 231 in .45ACP because it's cleaner burning and meters better. On the other hand I love Unique in .44mag, .45Colt and .357mag. Since the powder shortage I've run out of Unique and have had to relegate all my shotgun powders to the cause. Interestingly enough I just read an article by Mike Venturino on reloading the .45Colt. In it he listed 6.0gr of Red dot under a 255gr. SWC as most accurate in his guns. Since I have a can of Red Dot I thought I'd give it a try. Total failure in my Smith mountain gun so I'm back to using my last can of Universal Clays for that caliber, although Red Dot has proven to be quite adequate in my.38 special snubby. Sure wish this dang powder thing would end.

[DaleA]

Bullseye and 200 grain semi-wadcutters were the .45 ACP standard when I was involved in target shooting.

Of course not everybody used it but most did where I shot and I fell in line. I've tried other powders but always went back to Bullseye and now there are going to have to be *lots* of reports of something better to get me to change.

But for heaven sakes enough people like other powders like 231 and Unique that it must be 'good enough' too...so have fun, try some and pick the one YOU like just like I did and no hard feelings if it's different than my choice.

[Nick_C_S]

Quit using bullseye years ago when I started using plated bullets.

Brutus,

I'm curious what it is about plated bullets that prompted you to stop using Bullseye?

[Nick_C_S]

. . . and have always gravitated back to 231 and Unique.

A common story. Mine too. For 45 ACP, I reach for the Unique when I'm loading heavier bullets - it seems to run best when it's pushing the 230's.

Since the powder shortage I've run out of Unique.

I was almost out; then my LGS got in a few Lbs a week over several weeks. I managed to stock up on 3 Lbs - plenty for me. I even walked away from it a few times at my LGS - leaving it for others.

I lean more towards 231 in .45ACP because it's cleaner burning and meters better.

It is; and it does.

Nothing burns cleaner than W231. I did a revolver steel shoot last month with rounds loaded with W231 - rather than the usual Bullseye for that application. Wow, what a difference cleaning my revolver. Like night n day.

[44 AMP]

And assuming "one hole" means twice the bullet diameter center to center across widest shot holes.

some of us consider "one hole" to be any size where all the holes overlap each other.

I've got a Colt Govt model that, in my hands, with my handloads, produces a one hole, 5 shot group off the bench. The hole is between 2-2.5" across the widest part, but it is a single hole in the paper.

The OP's results are certainly vaild, they are what he got. The conclusion that one powder is more accurate than another, only applies to his guns and loads.

Applying that conclusion to all guns and loads is an error.