Am I getting too hot? IMR PB and 45ACP 200gr - Page 2

g.willikers · December 14, 2013, 12:24 PM

Clark,

Eghads.
Reloading manuals are being written by the same folks who do the car owner and appliance manuals?
Say it isn't so.

ElijaTull · December 14, 2013, 02:41 PM

Bottom line is - you have a Chronograph problem. Not a velocity problem. I could be wrong??

I do not think so, as:
I tested the chronograph with a 10 round string of my standard 9 mm loads built on Winchester 231. The mean and standard deviation were in line with previous measures and in-line with the data from Winchester on the powder.
The said 10 round string had a Mean of 1087 ft/sec, SD 12.93, the reloading data from HODGDON on Win 231 powder, 115gr LRN, COL 1.100 = Start 4.3gr (1079 ft/s) and Stop 4.8GR (1135 ft/s). My chronographed velocities are right in line with the reported data. The 9mm is a glock 26
Recall I got basically the same velocities from factory ammo on the Glock G30s and a Colt Commander. So, it is probably not the chamber on my gun.
I have done a reasonable amount of research (hands on and data search), and feel reasonably sure of my findings.
Baring anyone flatly stating “I have gotten measures with 200gr LSWC 45 ACP in-line with the data from IMR on the powder.” or some reasonable suggestion for the findings; I am of the conclusion
THE REPORTED DATA FROM IMR may be INCORRECT.

ElijaTull · December 14, 2013, 03:09 PM

I would like to know if the following is reasonable: the reported data on 200gr LSWC 45 ACP includes loads with COL of 1.170 and powder charges from 5.1 to 6.0 grains PB. They also report loads with a COL of 1.225 and powder charges 5.2-5.7 GR. The COL of 1.170 (with same powder charge) will produce higher pressures than a COL of 1.225, right? So, the pressure of 6.0 grains at COL 1.170 would be higher than 6.0 grains at COL 1.225, right? If so, then why is the highest recommended charge at COL 1.225 5.7GR. Or did I get that confused?

Not to worry, I am not arguing to do anything over 5.7, blow up my gun etc, just curious.

I am over fooling with 200 gr and PB. What happened was I ran out of win 231, and I had a bunch of different stuff I had gotten in trades. I have 200 gr plated, 224 gr? lead SWC, 230 gr Hornady RN, and 230gr Berrys RN and PB. Only had 800 of the 200 gr, and when loaded up will happily move on to the 230 gr and hopefully PB will produce published velocities, if the data for the powder is bad then, NEW POWDER

December 14, 2013, 12:24 PM	#26
g.willikers Senior Member Join Date: September 28, 2008 Posts: 10,442	Clark, Eghads. Reloading manuals are being written by the same folks who do the car owner and appliance manuals? Say it isn't so. __________________ Walt Kelly, alias Pogo, sez: “Don't take life so serious, son, it ain't nohow permanent.”

December 14, 2013, 02:41 PM	#27
ElijaTull Junior Member Join Date: August 28, 2013 Posts: 9	REPORTED DATA FROM IMR may be INCORRECT. Bottom line is - you have a Chronograph problem. Not a velocity problem. I could be wrong?? I do not think so, as: I tested the chronograph with a 10 round string of my standard 9 mm loads built on Winchester 231. The mean and standard deviation were in line with previous measures and in-line with the data from Winchester on the powder. The said 10 round string had a Mean of 1087 ft/sec, SD 12.93, the reloading data from HODGDON on Win 231 powder, 115gr LRN, COL 1.100 = Start 4.3gr (1079 ft/s) and Stop 4.8GR (1135 ft/s). My chronographed velocities are right in line with the reported data. The 9mm is a glock 26 Recall I got basically the same velocities from factory ammo on the Glock G30s and a Colt Commander. So, it is probably not the chamber on my gun. I have done a reasonable amount of research (hands on and data search), and feel reasonably sure of my findings. Baring anyone flatly stating “I have gotten measures with 200gr LSWC 45 ACP in-line with the data from IMR on the powder.” or some reasonable suggestion for the findings; I am of the conclusion THE REPORTED DATA FROM IMR may be INCORRECT.

December 14, 2013, 03:09 PM	#28
ElijaTull Junior Member Join Date: August 28, 2013 Posts: 9	is the following is reasonable ? I would like to know if the following is reasonable: the reported data on 200gr LSWC 45 ACP includes loads with COL of 1.170 and powder charges from 5.1 to 6.0 grains PB. They also report loads with a COL of 1.225 and powder charges 5.2-5.7 GR. The COL of 1.170 (with same powder charge) will produce higher pressures than a COL of 1.225, right? So, the pressure of 6.0 grains at COL 1.170 would be higher than 6.0 grains at COL 1.225, right? If so, then why is the highest recommended charge at COL 1.225 5.7GR. Or did I get that confused? Not to worry, I am not arguing to do anything over 5.7, blow up my gun etc, just curious. I am over fooling with 200 gr and PB. What happened was I ran out of win 231, and I had a bunch of different stuff I had gotten in trades. I have 200 gr plated, 224 gr? lead SWC, 230 gr Hornady RN, and 230gr Berrys RN and PB. Only had 800 of the 200 gr, and when loaded up will happily move on to the 230 gr and hopefully PB will produce published velocities, if the data for the powder is bad then, NEW POWDER