Differences of loads

MDS · January 17, 2009, 12:10 AM

What do you make of this? Granted I'm still learning
From Hogdon's manual
.45ACP
230gr. Hornady FMJ-FN
col 1.200
Win231- 4.2grns. 751fps
From .45 loaddata manual Hornady section
.45ACP
230gr. Hornady FMJ-FN
col1.200
Win231- 5.0grns. 700fps
Why so different? Same bullet, 5" barrel.

**Unclenick** · January 17, 2009, 12:15 AM

Case and primer brand difference can do some of that, though it seems like a bit much here. A lot of chronographs don't do much better than 50 fps at rifle velocity, but are not usually that bad at lower velocity. The word "misprint" comes to mind.

For what it's worth, QuickLOAD predicts the 4.2 grain load producing 755 fps, which is pretty good agreement, and the 5.0 grain load being right on SAAMI max and producing 861 fps. I think the QuickLOAD prediction is probably pretty close. 5 grains of Bullseye or 5.4 grains of 231 are old standby hardball loads. They push a 230 gr. RN FMJ at around that same speed, but using 1.270" COL and lower pressure than the FN load. The pressure difference is due to the 0.070" difference in seating depth (which affects peak pressure quite a lot in the .45 ACP). You need more powder to get to the same velocity with the bullet base further out.

MDS · January 17, 2009, 12:21 AM

Hornady used WLP and Hogdon used Federal 150. I'm not familiar at all with the Federal primers. Cases- Hogdon,0.888 trim, Hornady-.893

MDS · January 17, 2009, 12:30 AM

Yeah, the Hogdon manual shows 5.3 as max pushing 832fps and 16,800cup

MDS · January 17, 2009, 12:31 AM

Thank you, I live to learn.

**Unclenick** · January 17, 2009, 12:33 AM

Always happy to help.

The trim won't matter, except to headspace and crimping. The COL determines how much space the powder has behind the bullet. 0.898" is the SAAMI standard case headspacing and case length (because the design headspaces off the case mouth), and .45 ACP usually shrinks half a thousandth or so with each loading cycle, so trimming isn't normally needed unless you have to even the cases out for roll crimping for use in a revolver.

MDS · January 17, 2009, 12:41 AM

I'm still a little confused. Where did the 1.270 come from? These both had 1.200 col. or are you saying the one must be a misprint?

**Unclenick** · January 17, 2009, 12:57 AM

No. That flat point bullet normally gets a 1.200" COL. The SAAMI max COL for magazine compatibility is 1.275", however, and most round nose bullets are loaded to about 1.270" to approach that number with a small margin to ensure they don't go over.

The reason I mentioned the difference is that when you use a 230 grain RN full metal jacket with its longer ogive instead of the FN, you seat to that greater length, leaving more room for powder in the case. That extra room causes the higher 5.3 grain load you cited to produces less pressure and velocity with the RN load than the lower 5.0 grain charge is predicted to do with the FP at 1.200" COL.

I believe it was the velocity number for the 5.0 grain load that was the misprint.

MDS · January 17, 2009, 10:41 AM

Great explanantion, Thanks for sharing your knowledge.

WESHOOT2 · January 17, 2009, 11:31 AM

Since EVERYTHING is different, I never expect what I make to do anything other than what actual testing proves.

(Speer #13, page 443)

Ozzieman · January 17, 2009, 12:53 PM

230gr. Hornady FMJ-FN
col 1.200
Win231- 4.2grns. 751fps

I’m a little surprised at that load, when I first read it I thought it was on the light side, in fact of what I have read it"s well below minimum load.
I don’t have a Hogdon's manual so I can only go from what I do have and for
Hornady with 230 GR #45187 FMJ-FP and W231
Min is 5.0 @ 700 fps, Max is at 5.7 @800. fps
That was tested in a Colt government 5 in.
I have checked all my manuals and in all 5.0 is the minimum 231 charge load for a 230 GR bullet.
The only one below 5.0 is Hornadys. It lists 4.9 as minimum charge of 231 for lead RN bullets.
You might want to check your manuals again.
I have been reloading 45 ACP for years and W231 is my favorite mainly because it’s the cleanest powder I have ever tried in autos and that includes 9mm and 40.
“Why so different? Same bullet, 5" barrel.”
Same barrel but different gun?
Many companies don’t use guns but test barrels. You could see difference from a 1911 5 inch than what you would see out of a bolt action with a 5 inch ACP barrel. I’m not saying this is the reason since I don’t own a Hogdon manual but I have found this difference in other companies reloading data for long guns where some use AR’s for 223 and others use test barrels and I can never get the performance out of my AR that they report with test barrels using the same powder and bullets and primers.
I use and have for over 25 years, 5.4 GR of 231 for all bullets of 230 GR and with lead I chronograph at 750 +/- 30fps.
Remember below minimum loads can be as dangerous as over max loads.

WESHOOT2 · January 20, 2009, 02:00 PM

After confirming correct chrono operation I ran a 230g LRN / 5.6g W231 / OAL 1.255" / CCI350 / "U"-sized cases load through Kart- and Bar-Sto-barreled 5" 1911s.
866fps in one, 853fps in the other. At 15F.

So then I made some with 5.0g W231 and got 801.9fps between the two.

Odd, isn't it, how guns perform so differently?
Or is it the ammo?
Or both?

(I know the right answer....)

January 17, 2009, 12:15 AM	#2
Unclenick Staff Join Date: March 4, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 21,063	Case and primer brand difference can do some of that, though it seems like a bit much here. A lot of chronographs don't do much better than 50 fps at rifle velocity, but are not usually that bad at lower velocity. The word "misprint" comes to mind. For what it's worth, QuickLOAD predicts the 4.2 grain load producing 755 fps, which is pretty good agreement, and the 5.0 grain load being right on SAAMI max and producing 861 fps. I think the QuickLOAD prediction is probably pretty close. 5 grains of Bullseye or 5.4 grains of 231 are old standby hardball loads. They push a 230 gr. RN FMJ at around that same speed, but using 1.270" COL and lower pressure than the FN load. The pressure difference is due to the 0.070" difference in seating depth (which affects peak pressure quite a lot in the .45 ACP). You need more powder to get to the same velocity with the bullet base further out. __________________ Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle Last edited by Unclenick; January 17, 2009 at 12:29 AM.

January 17, 2009, 12:33 AM	#6
Unclenick Staff Join Date: March 4, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 21,063	Always happy to help. The trim won't matter, except to headspace and crimping. The COL determines how much space the powder has behind the bullet. 0.898" is the SAAMI standard case headspacing and case length (because the design headspaces off the case mouth), and .45 ACP usually shrinks half a thousandth or so with each loading cycle, so trimming isn't normally needed unless you have to even the cases out for roll crimping for use in a revolver. __________________ Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle

January 17, 2009, 12:57 AM	#8
Unclenick Staff Join Date: March 4, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 21,063	No. That flat point bullet normally gets a 1.200" COL. The SAAMI max COL for magazine compatibility is 1.275", however, and most round nose bullets are loaded to about 1.270" to approach that number with a small margin to ensure they don't go over. The reason I mentioned the difference is that when you use a 230 grain RN full metal jacket with its longer ogive instead of the FN, you seat to that greater length, leaving more room for powder in the case. That extra room causes the higher 5.3 grain load you cited to produces less pressure and velocity with the RN load than the lower 5.0 grain charge is predicted to do with the FP at 1.200" COL. I believe it was the velocity number for the 5.0 grain load that was the misprint. __________________ Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor NRA Certified Rifle Instructor NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle

January 17, 2009, 11:31 AM	#10
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	guides only Since EVERYTHING is different, I never expect what I make to do anything other than what actual testing proves. (Speer #13, page 443) __________________ . "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"

January 20, 2009, 02:00 PM	#12
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	so just the other day After confirming correct chrono operation I ran a 230g LRN / 5.6g W231 / OAL 1.255" / CCI350 / "U"-sized cases load through Kart- and Bar-Sto-barreled 5" 1911s. 866fps in one, 853fps in the other. At 15F. So then I made some with 5.0g W231 and got 801.9fps between the two. Odd, isn't it, how guns perform so differently? Or is it the ammo? Or both? (I know the right answer....) __________________ . "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"

January 17, 2009, 12:10 AM	#1
MDS Senior Member Join Date: September 9, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 492	Differences of loads What do you make of this? Granted I'm still learning From Hogdon's manual .45ACP 230gr. Hornady FMJ-FN col 1.200 Win231- 4.2grns. 751fps From .45 loaddata manual Hornady section .45ACP 230gr. Hornady FMJ-FN col1.200 Win231- 5.0grns. 700fps Why so different? Same bullet, 5" barrel.

January 17, 2009, 12:21 AM	#3
MDS Senior Member Join Date: September 9, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 492	Hornady used WLP and Hogdon used Federal 150. I'm not familiar at all with the Federal primers. Cases- Hogdon,0.888 trim, Hornady-.893

January 17, 2009, 12:30 AM	#4
MDS Senior Member Join Date: September 9, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 492	Yeah, the Hogdon manual shows 5.3 as max pushing 832fps and 16,800cup

January 17, 2009, 12:31 AM	#5
MDS Senior Member Join Date: September 9, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 492	Thank you, I live to learn.

January 17, 2009, 12:41 AM	#7
MDS Senior Member Join Date: September 9, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 492	I'm still a little confused. Where did the 1.270 come from? These both had 1.200 col. or are you saying the one must be a misprint?

January 17, 2009, 10:41 AM	#9
MDS Senior Member Join Date: September 9, 2005 Location: Ohio Posts: 492	Great explanantion, Thanks for sharing your knowledge.

January 17, 2009, 12:53 PM	#11
Ozzieman Senior Member Join Date: December 14, 2004 Location: Northern Indiana Posts: 6,117	230gr. Hornady FMJ-FN col 1.200 Win231- 4.2grns. 751fps I’m a little surprised at that load, when I first read it I thought it was on the light side, in fact of what I have read it"s well below minimum load. I don’t have a Hogdon's manual so I can only go from what I do have and for Hornady with 230 GR #45187 FMJ-FP and W231 Min is 5.0 @ 700 fps, Max is at 5.7 @800. fps That was tested in a Colt government 5 in. I have checked all my manuals and in all 5.0 is the minimum 231 charge load for a 230 GR bullet. The only one below 5.0 is Hornadys. It lists 4.9 as minimum charge of 231 for lead RN bullets. You might want to check your manuals again. I have been reloading 45 ACP for years and W231 is my favorite mainly because it’s the cleanest powder I have ever tried in autos and that includes 9mm and 40. “Why so different? Same bullet, 5" barrel.” Same barrel but different gun? Many companies don’t use guns but test barrels. You could see difference from a 1911 5 inch than what you would see out of a bolt action with a 5 inch ACP barrel. I’m not saying this is the reason since I don’t own a Hogdon manual but I have found this difference in other companies reloading data for long guns where some use AR’s for 223 and others use test barrels and I can never get the performance out of my AR that they report with test barrels using the same powder and bullets and primers. I use and have for over 25 years, 5.4 GR of 231 for all bullets of 230 GR and with lead I chronograph at 750 +/- 30fps. Remember below minimum loads can be as dangerous as over max loads.