COL for Rainier TCJ bullets?

gregjc9 · January 10, 2010, 09:51 PM

I received an order of Rainier 45ACP 200g TCJ RN bullets. I realize these are plated and need to use a load for lead bullets, so I plan on using the load data from Hodgen, I will be loading with W231:

200 GR. CAST LSWC Winchester 231 .451" 1.225" 4.4 771 11,000 CUP 5.6 914 16,900 CUP

My question is, do I use the same COL as the LSWC? or use the COL for a FMJ RN of a different weight?

gregjc9 · January 11, 2010, 08:28 AM

Anyone?

SL1 · January 11, 2010, 09:21 AM

I don't load .45 ACP. But, I can tell you that you want to keep the seating depth the same if you intend to keep the pressure the same, which is a good idea if you are aiming for max loads. With bullets of the SAME WEIGHT, to keep the seating depth the same, you need to know the bullet lengths for both your intended bullet (easily measured) and the bullet used to produce the pressure data (NOT so easy if you don't have one of those handy). Then you adjust the COL from the data to get the COL for your load by the difference in the bullet lenghts. Because the bullet in the data you have is a cast SWC and the bullet you intend to load is a RN without any grooves, it is not likely that they are exactly the same length.

Of course, the COL that you derive that way may or may not feed reliably in YOUR pistol. After all, the COL in the data was developed for THEIR pistol using a DIFFERENT bullet shape. Maybe the COL they listed for a different weight bullet with the same nose shape as the bullet you have will work in your gun better than the COL you just derived. It is not uncommon to need to adjust your COL from published data, even when using the same bullet as the data, especially if you are using a different brand of pistol or barrel.

But, when you stray from the seating depth for a published load, you are departing from the pressure data as well. So, it is best to do that with less than maximum loads.

It would be helpful if load data was published with some additional information, such as seating depth and fired case capacity. But, it isn't. In some examples, when the bullets are precisely specified (such as "Hornady XTP/HP") it is possible to figure-out the seating depth in the data, because you have a known bullet in that data and can get its length in some way. But, when Hodgdon says only "cast LSWC" or Lee says only "lead bullet", without specifying a mold number, there is no way of knowing WHICH bullet they used and how long it was. So, THEIR seating depth is a mystery and their load data is less useful than it should be.

The result is, that many people start with a COL that seem to be what others have used for the same nose shape, and start with reduced loads. Working up the charge until you get reliable ejection tends to keep you in safe pressure range (assuming you are using an appropriate powder to begin with). Then, adjusting COL to get reliable feeding is the next step, if needed. Just remember, reducing COL increases pressure, sometimes by surprisingly large amounts.

SO, if you need to reduce COL to get reliable feeding, it is always a good idea to consider what you are doing to pressure. People on this forum with additional load references or the QuickLOAD computer program can help you if you are willing to provide some measurements such as the length of your bullet and the length and capacity of your fired cases.

SL1

gregjc9 · January 11, 2010, 10:46 AM

SL1, thanks for the information!! I am aware of the perils of reducing the OAL and the impact increased pressure. Agreed, it would be nice if more information were provided by some of the site/manuals. I just subscribed to loaddata.com, and rather disappointed in the general lack of OAL (at least for the 9mm and 45ACP loads). I will continue to dig and see if I can find.

I have been using 1.260 OAL for my 45ACP 200g FMJ-RN loads in my Kimber, with 6.1g of Power Pistol and 6.5g of WSF, with extremely accurate results. I may use the same OAL on a few W231 loads. Thanks again.

dfe2240 · January 11, 2010, 11:50 AM

Have you considered measuring the bullet length of the 200 grain FMJ-RNs and the length of the Rainier bullets and adjusting for the difference? If you subtract bullet length from COAL, you get the distance between the base of the bullet and the base of the cartridge. If you adjust COAL so that the base-to-base dimension is the same with two different bullets, pressures should be very close if not identical. Feeding problems at the different length may or may not be a problem. Check out the thread "How Important is Handgun COAL?". It lists COALs for some factory-loaded 9mm ammo and they vary quite a bit. I haven't checked the lengths of different brands of .45 ACP, but my guess is that they also vary considerably. That should give you some insight into the range of COALs that feed reliably in a variety of guns. (I don't hear much about feed problems with factory ammo-- don't know whether that's because they're rare or because no one talks about them.)
Dave

gregjc9 · January 11, 2010, 12:10 PM

Thanks Dave, execellent suggestion. Feel dumb I didnt think of that. Sometimes it's hard to see the forest for the trees, with all the different data out there.

I think I looked at the thread you referenced, if not, I will definately re-read it.

dfe2240 · January 11, 2010, 12:51 PM

PM sent

gregjc9 · January 11, 2010, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Have you considered measuring the bullet length of the 200 grain FMJ-RNs and the length of the Rainier bullets and adjusting for the difference? If you subtract bullet length from COAL, you get the distance between the base of the bullet and the base of the cartridge. If you adjust COAL so that the base-to-base dimension is the same with two different bullets, pressures should be very close if not identical.

Dave, I did as you suggested. I measured the length of 10 Rocky Mountain Bullets FMJ-RN ENC and 10 bullets from Rainier TCJ-RN, both 200g. I then averaged the 10 measurements of each.

RMR avg length = .5619"
Rainier avg length = .5986"

The Rainier bullets on average are .0367" longer than the RMR bullets.

The COL used with the RMR bullets (with good results) was 1.260. This means the seating depth with the RMR bullets should have been .6981". Adding this to the avg length of the Rainier plated bullets, yields a COL of 1.2967". Longer than the max of 1.275

Does this look right? If it is, obviously I cant use this COL.

gregjc9 · January 12, 2010, 10:13 AM

Amazingly, I have yet to find a recommended COAL for 45ACP using 200g FMJ or Plated RN, with W231. I can find COALs for every other kind of round made, but a FMJ RN.

I have tried Lyman, Speer, Sierra, Hornady, Loaddata.com (they dont list COALs at all), Handloaders.com, Hodgon/Winchester load center. I thought the 200g would be a good and economical target/practice load. I may have to try something else.

Since I know my COAL of 1.260 feeds and ejects well in my Kimber, I'll probably keep this COAL and just keep the charges on the low end.

gregjc9 · January 12, 2010, 12:40 PM

Searching for COALs for my 200g bullets, I found an interesting post on 1911forum.com.

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?p=2394680 Post #3, also #30 on page 2.

Quote:

Not all 200gr SWC's are created equal. When initially setting up, I load dummy rounds and drop them in the barrel (removed from pistol) and seat the bullet until the case head is flush with the barrel hood. If you change brands of bullets, you should to do this again. Actually, this advice would apply to any bullet you may want to load. You just can't take published COAL's as gospel. I load my Lyman 452630 200gr SWC's to a COAL of 1.24 for my D.W. CBOB. I could load this same bullet to 1.25" in my Springfield's.

Think I may do this tonight with my plated 200g bullets and see what I come up with.

spacecoast · January 12, 2010, 02:28 PM

Try

http://www.handloads.com/loaddata/de...Powder&Source=

I see some LRNs in there at 1.19" and the Rainier at 1.265" using Clays. I would start at the low end of your powder recommendation and do a few with various charges and/or lengths. Using the 230 gr. RN length parameters with the lighter (and therefore shorter) bullet should be safe enough as a starting point.

gregjc9 · January 12, 2010, 05:32 PM

Maybe I've gone off the deep end on this subject, but I just got through doing several measurements. Now my eyes and my head hurt.

First off, I measured some of the rounds I had already made with a COAL of 1.260, by placing the round in the clean barrel of my Kimber (after it's been field stripped), and measuring whether the headstamp was above or below the barrel hood, and by how much. These bullets were 200g FMJ-RN from Rocky Mountain Reloading (RMR).

The rounds I had made were above the hood by approx .0125" It also tended to stick in the chamber, so I know the headspace was not on the case mouth as it should be.

Then I took an empty case and ran it through all the resizing dies, including the FCD. I placed it in the barrel, and it was .0250" below the hood. I know the empty case headspaced on the mouth as it should, and now I have a measurement to work from.

Next I made a dummy round using a 200g FMJ-RN from RMR. I started with the COAL at 1.260 and measured the distance between the headstamp and the barrel hood. Below are the numbers:

COAL
1.260 above hood by .0125
1.250 below hood by .0005
1.240 below hood by .0175
1.230 below hood by .0175
1.220 below hood by .0175
1.210 below hood by .0175

So, it looks like for the bullet above, the optimum COAL is approx 1.235. This should allow for deviations in case length, bullet length, and bullet jump.

I did the same thing using 200g TCJ-RN from Rainier (plated). Below are the numbers:

Empty case was .0190" below barrel hood.

After seating bullet:
COAL
1.260 above hood by .0145 **
1.250 below hood by .0175
1.240 below hood by .0175
1.235 below hood by .0175
1.200 below hood by .0175

** This COAL felt like the case was headspacing like it should, it did not stick in the chamber. So there must be a difference in the shape of the RN bullet between the two mfgrs.

So, I think it looks like a COAL of 1.235 would also be good with this bullet? I'm very interested in any feedback, if I've gone about this wrong, I certainly want to know.

SL1 · January 12, 2010, 07:16 PM

If the COL's you found to headspace on the rifling feed well in your pistol, then I think you have good COLs to work with. Working-up loads from start looking for reliable ejection and then best accuracy should give you the optimum powder charges.

SL1

gregjc9 · January 12, 2010, 07:56 PM

I've probably run about 25-50 rounds through with the longer COL with no FTF/FTE, and accuracy was great. I didnt think the headspacing on the rifling was correct, possibly causing high pressure if I loaded too hot a charge - which I dont do. I just reseated a few rounds at 1.235 and will see how these behave over the weekend.

January 10, 2010, 09:51 PM	#1
gregjc9 Senior Member Join Date: June 30, 2008 Location: Northern Va Posts: 501	COL for Rainier TCJ bullets? I received an order of Rainier 45ACP 200g TCJ RN bullets. I realize these are plated and need to use a load for lead bullets, so I plan on using the load data from Hodgen, I will be loading with W231: 200 GR. CAST LSWC Winchester 231 .451" 1.225" 4.4 771 11,000 CUP 5.6 914 16,900 CUP My question is, do I use the same COL as the LSWC? or use the COL for a FMJ RN of a different weight? __________________ ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ Greg

January 11, 2010, 08:28 AM	#2
gregjc9 Senior Member Join Date: June 30, 2008 Location: Northern Va Posts: 501	Anyone? __________________ ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ Greg

January 11, 2010, 10:46 AM	#4
gregjc9 Senior Member Join Date: June 30, 2008 Location: Northern Va Posts: 501	SL1, thanks for the information!! I am aware of the perils of reducing the OAL and the impact increased pressure. Agreed, it would be nice if more information were provided by some of the site/manuals. I just subscribed to loaddata.com, and rather disappointed in the general lack of OAL (at least for the 9mm and 45ACP loads). I will continue to dig and see if I can find. I have been using 1.260 OAL for my 45ACP 200g FMJ-RN loads in my Kimber, with 6.1g of Power Pistol and 6.5g of WSF, with extremely accurate results. I may use the same OAL on a few W231 loads. Thanks again. __________________ ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ Greg

January 11, 2010, 12:10 PM	#6
gregjc9 Senior Member Join Date: June 30, 2008 Location: Northern Va Posts: 501	Thanks Dave, execellent suggestion. Feel dumb I didnt think of that. Sometimes it's hard to see the forest for the trees, with all the different data out there. I think I looked at the thread you referenced, if not, I will definately re-read it. __________________ ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ Greg

January 12, 2010, 10:13 AM	#9
gregjc9 Senior Member Join Date: June 30, 2008 Location: Northern Va Posts: 501	Amazingly, I have yet to find a recommended COAL for 45ACP using 200g FMJ or Plated RN, with W231. I can find COALs for every other kind of round made, but a FMJ RN. I have tried Lyman, Speer, Sierra, Hornady, Loaddata.com (they dont list COALs at all), Handloaders.com, Hodgon/Winchester load center. I thought the 200g would be a good and economical target/practice load. I may have to try something else. Since I know my COAL of 1.260 feeds and ejects well in my Kimber, I'll probably keep this COAL and just keep the charges on the low end. __________________ ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ Greg

January 11, 2010, 09:21 AM	#3
SL1 Senior Member Join Date: November 8, 2007 Posts: 2,001	I don't load .45 ACP. But, I can tell you that you want to keep the seating depth the same if you intend to keep the pressure the same, which is a good idea if you are aiming for max loads. With bullets of the SAME WEIGHT, to keep the seating depth the same, you need to know the bullet lengths for both your intended bullet (easily measured) and the bullet used to produce the pressure data (NOT so easy if you don't have one of those handy). Then you adjust the COL from the data to get the COL for your load by the difference in the bullet lenghts. Because the bullet in the data you have is a cast SWC and the bullet you intend to load is a RN without any grooves, it is not likely that they are exactly the same length. Of course, the COL that you derive that way may or may not feed reliably in YOUR pistol. After all, the COL in the data was developed for THEIR pistol using a DIFFERENT bullet shape. Maybe the COL they listed for a different weight bullet with the same nose shape as the bullet you have will work in your gun better than the COL you just derived. It is not uncommon to need to adjust your COL from published data, even when using the same bullet as the data, especially if you are using a different brand of pistol or barrel. But, when you stray from the seating depth for a published load, you are departing from the pressure data as well. So, it is best to do that with less than maximum loads. It would be helpful if load data was published with some additional information, such as seating depth and fired case capacity. But, it isn't. In some examples, when the bullets are precisely specified (such as "Hornady XTP/HP") it is possible to figure-out the seating depth in the data, because you have a known bullet in that data and can get its length in some way. But, when Hodgdon says only "cast LSWC" or Lee says only "lead bullet", without specifying a mold number, there is no way of knowing WHICH bullet they used and how long it was. So, THEIR seating depth is a mystery and their load data is less useful than it should be. The result is, that many people start with a COL that seem to be what others have used for the same nose shape, and start with reduced loads. Working up the charge until you get reliable ejection tends to keep you in safe pressure range (assuming you are using an appropriate powder to begin with). Then, adjusting COL to get reliable feeding is the next step, if needed. Just remember, reducing COL increases pressure, sometimes by surprisingly large amounts. SO, if you need to reduce COL to get reliable feeding, it is always a good idea to consider what you are doing to pressure. People on this forum with additional load references or the QuickLOAD computer program can help you if you are willing to provide some measurements such as the length of your bullet and the length and capacity of your fired cases. SL1

January 11, 2010, 11:50 AM	#5
dfe2240 Member Join Date: January 7, 2010 Posts: 56	Have you considered measuring the bullet length of the 200 grain FMJ-RNs and the length of the Rainier bullets and adjusting for the difference? If you subtract bullet length from COAL, you get the distance between the base of the bullet and the base of the cartridge. If you adjust COAL so that the base-to-base dimension is the same with two different bullets, pressures should be very close if not identical. Feeding problems at the different length may or may not be a problem. Check out the thread "How Important is Handgun COAL?". It lists COALs for some factory-loaded 9mm ammo and they vary quite a bit. I haven't checked the lengths of different brands of .45 ACP, but my guess is that they also vary considerably. That should give you some insight into the range of COALs that feed reliably in a variety of guns. (I don't hear much about feed problems with factory ammo-- don't know whether that's because they're rare or because no one talks about them.) Dave

January 11, 2010, 12:51 PM	#7
dfe2240 Member Join Date: January 7, 2010 Posts: 56	PM sent

January 12, 2010, 02:28 PM	#11
spacecoast Senior Member Join Date: October 14, 2009 Location: Sunshine and Keystone States Posts: 4,461	Try http://www.handloads.com/loaddata/de...Powder&Source= I see some LRNs in there at 1.19" and the Rainier at 1.265" using Clays. I would start at the low end of your powder recommendation and do a few with various charges and/or lengths. Using the 230 gr. RN length parameters with the lighter (and therefore shorter) bullet should be safe enough as a starting point. Last edited by spacecoast; January 12, 2010 at 02:36 PM.

January 12, 2010, 05:32 PM	#12
gregjc9 Senior Member Join Date: June 30, 2008 Location: Northern Va Posts: 501	Maybe I've gone off the deep end on this subject, but I just got through doing several measurements. Now my eyes and my head hurt. First off, I measured some of the rounds I had already made with a COAL of 1.260, by placing the round in the clean barrel of my Kimber (after it's been field stripped), and measuring whether the headstamp was above or below the barrel hood, and by how much. These bullets were 200g FMJ-RN from Rocky Mountain Reloading (RMR). The rounds I had made were above the hood by approx .0125" It also tended to stick in the chamber, so I know the headspace was not on the case mouth as it should be. Then I took an empty case and ran it through all the resizing dies, including the FCD. I placed it in the barrel, and it was .0250" below the hood. I know the empty case headspaced on the mouth as it should, and now I have a measurement to work from. Next I made a dummy round using a 200g FMJ-RN from RMR. I started with the COAL at 1.260 and measured the distance between the headstamp and the barrel hood. Below are the numbers: COAL 1.260 above hood by .0125 1.250 below hood by .0005 1.240 below hood by .0175 1.230 below hood by .0175 1.220 below hood by .0175 1.210 below hood by .0175 So, it looks like for the bullet above, the optimum COAL is approx 1.235. This should allow for deviations in case length, bullet length, and bullet jump. I did the same thing using 200g TCJ-RN from Rainier (plated). Below are the numbers: Empty case was .0190" below barrel hood. After seating bullet: COAL 1.260 above hood by .0145 1.250 below hood by .0175 1.240 below hood by .0175 1.235 below hood by .0175 1.200 below hood by .0175 This COAL felt like the case was headspacing like it should, it did not stick in the chamber. So there must be a difference in the shape of the RN bullet between the two mfgrs. So, I think it looks like a COAL of 1.235 would also be good with this bullet? I'm very interested in any feedback, if I've gone about this wrong, I certainly want to know. __________________ ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ Greg

January 12, 2010, 07:16 PM	#13
SL1 Senior Member Join Date: November 8, 2007 Posts: 2,001	If the COL's you found to headspace on the rifling feed well in your pistol, then I think you have good COLs to work with. Working-up loads from start looking for reliable ejection and then best accuracy should give you the optimum powder charges. SL1

January 12, 2010, 07:56 PM	#14
gregjc9 Senior Member Join Date: June 30, 2008 Location: Northern Va Posts: 501	I've probably run about 25-50 rounds through with the longer COL with no FTF/FTE, and accuracy was great. I didnt think the headspacing on the rifling was correct, possibly causing high pressure if I loaded too hot a charge - which I dont do. I just reseated a few rounds at 1.235 and will see how these behave over the weekend. __________________ ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ Greg