The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 19, 2012, 11:42 PM   #1
j357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 25, 2009
Location: Liberty Twp, OH
Posts: 222
45ACP work up observation and question

Had some fun working up 45ACP loads for my SW 1911 this weekend. I loaded up some Hornady 200 grn LSWC and LCT (12208 and 12108) rounds over 4.6 g and 5.0 g of Titegroup another set over 5.6 g and 6.0 g of Clays Universal. As a note, the gun was great, one failure to chamber near the end after about 90 rounds, which has been typical for the gun as I just started shooting it - 300 rounds total.

The lighter rounds were great and shot to point of aim. The heavier charges were noticeable but still good. A quick case inspection revealed no problems but an interesting observation. The heavier charges appeared to result in slightly cleaner spent cases. The 5 g of TG appeared to be the cleanest of the bunch. I am wondering if there is anything to this observation that would make me want to load the heavier charge and stick with the TG.

Any experience or insight on this would be appreciated. I plan to start loading about 200 rounds tomorrow, but I am torn as to which recipe to use.
j357 is offline  
Old February 20, 2012, 12:48 AM   #2
ScottRiqui
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
I've noticed that slightly hotter loads seem to burn more cleanly, in a variety of powders. But unless the residue is hard to remove (which is hasn't been so far), I just try to optimize the load for functionality/accuracy and don't worry if it's dirty.
ScottRiqui is offline  
Old February 20, 2012, 03:10 AM   #3
drumnhands
Member
 
Join Date: June 1, 2010
Posts: 23
I've been loading for my S&W 1911 for a few months now, probably put 1,000 or so of my own through it. I tried Clay's, but found better results with Unique. I'm loading 6.2 grains of Unique behind Rainier 230 grain plated RN bullets and they are very accurate. The bullet is seated to 1.260 and I have no feed issues. Interesting enough, the same charge shoots great in my M&P 40 pushing a 180 gn semi wadcutter plated bullet.
drumnhands is offline  
Old February 20, 2012, 09:42 PM   #4
dickttx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2011
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 494
I understand that nearly all loads burn cleaner at the higher end of their range.
I can only speak from experience for Unique and HP38. Those two definitely work better at the upper end. Low loadings of Unique leave lots of unburned powder. Low loadings of HP38 leave a yellow residue that looks like pollen.
__________________
Education teaches you the rules, experience teaches you the exceptions (Plagiarized from Claude Clay)
dickttx is offline  
Old February 21, 2012, 06:35 PM   #5
Cascade1911
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2011
Location: Dutchess County, NY
Posts: 450
I don't know if anyone has had this experience. I started out loading 230 grain LRN with Bullseye 4.5 gr to 5.2 gr 5 rounds each. I found 4.7 seemed about best. Ran a bunch of these. Decided to try 50 rounds at 4.5 grains. They functioned ok, for maybe 25 rounds. I started to get failure to go into battery. I thought it was either the head spacing (I was spacing on the bullet, not the case) or the lighter charge.

When I disassembled the firearm (Springfield Mil-Spec) I found lead back in the chamber. My belief is that the low pressure load (light charge combined with longer than normal COAL) was not forcing the case to seal the chamber and was allowing molten lead to blow back around the case into the chamber.

I'd be interested if anyone else has had a similar problem.
Cascade1911 is offline  
Old February 21, 2012, 10:01 PM   #6
Jammer Six
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 827
One of the things that brought to mind was simply this: Precision Bullets, who makes lead bullets, on their website recommends against Titegroup.

Apparently it burns too hot for their bullets.
__________________
"Huh?" --Jammer Six, 1998
Jammer Six is offline  
Old February 23, 2012, 07:07 PM   #7
Slamfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 4,130
Quote:
When I disassembled the firearm (Springfield Mil-Spec) I found lead back in the chamber. My belief is that the low pressure load (light charge combined with longer than normal COAL) was not
Four point five grains of Bullseye behind a 230 LRN the velocities in my guns is just at 800 fps. This is not a lead melting hot load.

I think the lead is rubbing off your bullets as they enter the chamber.
__________________
If I'm not shooting, I'm reloading.
Slamfire is offline  
Old February 24, 2012, 12:47 PM   #8
totaldla
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 10, 2009
Posts: 762
All powders I've used burn most completely (cleanest) at higher pressures. I choose a powder based on the velocity I want and reloading safety. Sorry to say, but TiteGroup is super-dense, soot colored, and hides in the case so well that it is too easy to miss a double-charge - so I don't use it. In 45acp, for low to mid-range velocities, I use Hodgdon Clays because it is easy to keep an eye on. For high-velocity 45acp I use AA#5, and Silhouette - both easy to spot in the case, and both burn cleanest at the higher end of their load range. Universal Clays is easier to see than TiteGroup and therefore safer in my thinking. TiteGroup is a good powder with a wide load range, but it is racking up a number of kills with double-charges. And TG seems to melt bullet bases more than other powders and that vaporized lead is gonna go somewhere.
totaldla is offline  
Old February 25, 2012, 04:13 PM   #9
Cascade1911
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2011
Location: Dutchess County, NY
Posts: 450
Quote:
I think the lead is rubbing off your bullets as they enter the chamber.
Interesting idea Slamfire and one I'd not considered. I had run maybe 200 of the 4.7 loads through this pistol without noticing a problem. Possibly the lead had been building up but I would hope I would have noticed it during cleaning. Possible I missed it.I also don't recall where in the chamber the lead was building up. If your idea is correct it should be at the top of the chamber I would think. Thanks for the idea.
Cascade1911 is offline  
Old March 4, 2012, 01:24 AM   #10
j357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 25, 2009
Location: Liberty Twp, OH
Posts: 222
Thanks to all for the information. The comments on observing the TGroup in the case are well taken. I did note some interesting/bad case mouth nicks with the higher range of Tite group as well. I loaded up 200 I loaded up 200 over 5.6 g of Clays Universal, as it shot well. Happy loading and shooting
j357 is offline  
Old March 4, 2012, 01:52 PM   #11
Edward429451
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2000
Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado
Posts: 9,494
My experience has been that if you have lead back by your chamber, then your boolit is likely undersized. You did not mention what size your boolits were, or if you had slugged your barrel.
Edward429451 is offline  
Old March 4, 2012, 09:38 PM   #12
noylj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2007
Location: Between CA and NM
Posts: 499
TightGroup is a VERY hot powder (high NG percentage?), so it may be more likely to burn off the soot. TiteGroup is not the first choice of powder for cast lead bullets or moly-kote bullets because of this high flame temperature.
However, please remember, soot is not bad and can ease the expander step.
Some benchrest shooters have used the same cases so long that they actually can get chunks of "soot" being knocked out of the case. Again, it never was an issue on target, but I think that, like all the OCD case prep rituals, they decided to eliminate that as another variable.
TiteGroup should be used for light target loads (725-825fps), while Universal will perform better for ball-load milspec rounds (I keep hearing about it being the clean alternative to Unique).
I recommend AA2 and AA5 for these applications, but you have the powders you like.
Side note:
For clean-case OCD types--why isn't PB being used? That was the single cleanest burning powder I have ever used. Virgin brass, after firing, was still totally clean and shiny on the case interior. I didn't keep using it because:
1) I don't care about case shine
and
2) It wasn't as accurate as 452AA or AA2 or Unique.
noylj is offline  
Old March 6, 2012, 05:40 PM   #13
Cascade1911
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2011
Location: Dutchess County, NY
Posts: 450
Edward, if you were responding to my post, the lead was not near the chamber, it was in the chamber. Bullet is .452. Have not slugged the barrel.
Cascade1911 is offline  
Old March 6, 2012, 06:36 PM   #14
markt99
Member
 
Join Date: January 18, 2012
Posts: 53
I always used bullseye for my 45. Last weekend I tried Hodgden Clays at 4.1 gr behind rainier 230 gr rn played. Coal was 1.263.

It measured consistent in my dillon 550 but the velocity was highly variable. I had 30 fps standard deviation where as I usually get 15-20 with bullseye.

It didn't perform from a reliability perspective either but it was maybe too light (710 fps average). That put it under 700 often with the standard deviation. My Kimber custom ii had a 5% FTE rate and my Glock 30 was 100% failure to even knock back the slide. That was weird as the Glock has never malfunctioned before and my Kimber is usually the **** (a gunsmith has it running well enough for IDPA but not for carry)
markt99 is offline  
Old March 6, 2012, 06:40 PM   #15
markt99
Member
 
Join Date: January 18, 2012
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by markt99 View Post
I always used bullseye for my 45. Last weekend I tried Hodgden Clays at 4.1 gr behind rainier 230 gr rn played. Coal was 1.263.
Darned iPhone. I meant 230 gr RN plated.
markt99 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09031 seconds with 7 queries