The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 4, 2008, 08:49 PM   #1
GringoLoco
Member
 
Join Date: November 9, 2008
Posts: 60
Charge differences between books - 45ACP

Ok, I'm getting ready to load my first batch of 45ACP, and I'm getting conflicting info from the different sources. I expect them to all be off of each other a 1/10th of a grain or so, but this is ridiculous. I'm putting 230gr FMJ bullets (Armscor) together with Hodgdon HP-38 and CCI primers. My Lee info sheet that came with my dies agrees exactly with the Hodgdon website (I'm assuming they just got info there), and I'm thinking I should just stick with that site. But my Speer #14 book and Lyman 49th edition disagree completely. The Speer book even lists the STARTING load as over the MAX load on the Hodgdon site. Here's the ranges:

Hodgdon site / Lee info sheet: 4.2 - 5.3
Lyman manual: 5.2 - 5.8
Speer book: 5.6 - 6.2

The only thing I can think of is that the Hodgdon site lists charges for FMJ bullets, while the Speer and Lyman book only list for TMJ bullets of the same weight. I'm assuming they're the same? The two books are also for 231 instead of HP-38, but that shouldn't matter. I'm confused, and don't have a clue where to start.
GringoLoco is offline  
Old December 4, 2008, 09:01 PM   #2
cchardwick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 574
HP-38 is a slightly faster burning powder so it makes sense that you would use a bit less powder. But I see where you are confused. I'm also planning on usine 231 with cast bullets and I found the mold I want to buy:

6 Cavity Bullet Mold, 45 ACP, 230 Grains

The only problem is that I can't find ANY load data for this cast bullet, not in the Lyman manual or on the Hodgdon site. I was thinking of targeting about 5.0 grains for my loads, somewhere in the middle of all the maddness you are experiencing.

The closest I've found for my 230 grain round nose cast is a 225 round nose cast in the Lyman manual. The range of 231 is from 4.0 to 5.8 grains!
cchardwick is offline  
Old December 4, 2008, 09:03 PM   #3
Don P
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2005
Location: Swamp dweller
Posts: 6,187
45 charges

Go with who ever's powder you are using. The Lee book is is what I have been using for my data with comparing it to Alliants specs. I use Alliant powder. You can.t go wrong using Lee's info. I have found this book to be a very valuable tool in reloading. Heres the link
http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpag...eitemid=484416
__________________
NRA Life Member, NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, NRA Certified Pistol Instructor,, USPSA & Steel Challange NROI Range Officer,
ICORE Range Officer,
,MAG 40 Graduate
As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be.
Don P is offline  
Old December 4, 2008, 09:09 PM   #4
GringoLoco
Member
 
Join Date: November 9, 2008
Posts: 60
Quote:
HP-38 is a slightly faster burning powder so it makes sense that you would use a bit less powder.
Not according to their (Hodgdon) website. They list the exact same charge for HP-38 as 231. So even if I go by the data for 231 for consistency, it's still WAY different from the Speer book. I agree I should be using the Hodgdon info, especially since it's on the safe side, but come on, how could the Speer book list the minimum starting charge as OVER the Hodgdon MAX charge? Either I'm not getting something or my Speer book can't be trusted.
GringoLoco is offline  
Old December 4, 2008, 09:17 PM   #5
Shoney
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2002
Location: Transplanted from Montana
Posts: 2,311
GringoLoco
When looking at the powder weight data, you are seeing only 1/3 of the information you need. You must also look at the weapon they are using, the barrel length of that weapon, and the bullet.

Those factors above and a lot more will determine the max load. Use the books as a guide not a gospel. If my weapon/bullet differs from the listed data, I have always started my load development at or above the highest minimum charge; loading ten cartridges with that charge, then loading ten more with an increase of 0.3 grains, and then again ten more with another 0.3 gr increment, until I am at max.

At the range I use a well marked target for each seperate load, starting with the lowest charge and working up, looking for pressure signs.
__________________
I pledge allegiance to the Flag - - -, and to the Republic for which it stands….Our Forefathers were brilliant for giving us a Republic, not a democracy! Do you know the difference??? and WHY?http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissue...les.asp?id=111
Shoney is offline  
Old December 4, 2008, 09:50 PM   #6
GringoLoco
Member
 
Join Date: November 9, 2008
Posts: 60
Quote:
You must also look at the weapon they are using,
Oh yeah, I knew I was missing some info. I'm going to be looking for a load that works well in both a 5" 1911 and a H&K USP45 Compact. So if I were to start at the highest minimum charge, that would start me at 5.6gr, which is already .3 above the max charge on the Hodgdon site. The Hodgdon site doesn't list what weapon they used, the Speer book used a 4.4" Sig P220, and the Lyman book used a universal receiver with a 5" bbl. I know I need to be finding my own load through trial and error instead of recipe shopping, but this just doesn't seem right. I simply can't see that much variation with the same powder/bullet combo, regardless of what it's fired out of. How about this, what's closest pressure-wise to your garden variety (WWB, etc) factory 230gr FMJ factory load?
GringoLoco is offline  
Old December 4, 2008, 10:13 PM   #7
GringoLoco
Member
 
Join Date: November 9, 2008
Posts: 60
Well, after 5 pages of google searching, it seems that nobody is using below, or much below, 5gr of 231 or HP-38 with a 230gr FMJ, and most seem to use around 5.4gr. I'm about to start up 4 batches, probably 20 each of 5gr, 5.3, 5.6, and 5.9. I'll see how those go. If anybody sees any problems with those upper limits please let me know, they won't get shot for a day or so.
GringoLoco is offline  
Old December 4, 2008, 11:18 PM   #8
Unclenick
Staff
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 21,022
GringoLoco,

At a COL of 1.270", 5.4 grains of 231 will fire a 230 grain RN FMJ bullet at the same pressure and velocity as 5.0 grains of SR 7970, the military hardball loading. The higher charges will be well into +P or even +P+ pressure territory, as the military hardball load leaves a bit of headroom.


Cchardwick,

Due to early obturation, sometimes lead bullets can actually cause higher peak pressure than jacketed bullets over the same powder charge. Not knowing your bullet alloy I can only advise working up from a load on the low end. 4.5 grains of 231 will roughly imitate commercial semi-wadcutter target load levels with a 185 or 200 grain bullet. With the Lee 230 grain tumble lube even less will still function most guns. I would start with 3.9 grains under the 230 grain cast bullet and check for function and accuracy. Add. 0.3 grains and check again. Keep going up, watching for pressure signs, until you have the lightes load that shoots and functions the gun well enough to test your skills when you are not using the sandbags.

I wouldn't exceed 5.4 grains without a particular reason to. Even that is enough to begin to exaggerate the slight bulge that is normal for .45 ACP brass ejected from a standard 1911 or other unsupported barrel design. It isn't dangerous, but it shortens case life and I can't see a reason to waste the brass. If you want a hotter load for IPSC power factor, it won't be built on 231 anyway. Maybe Power Pistol or something like that?
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Rifle Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle
Unclenick is offline  
Old December 5, 2008, 12:03 AM   #9
GringoLoco
Member
 
Join Date: November 9, 2008
Posts: 60
Unclenick,

Perfect, thanks for the info, that's exactly what I was looking for, some sort of comparison to military ball and factory ammo. I loaded a batch of 5.3gr tonight, didn't go any higher until I checked back here. Tomorrow I'll load some 5gr and take both batches to the range to see if I notice a difference between the two. I'm not looking for +P+, just a good reasonably stout load equivalent to something like WWB.
GringoLoco is offline  
Old December 5, 2008, 12:38 AM   #10
Gun 4 Fun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 3, 2008
Posts: 956
GringLoco- HP-38 is 231! Hodgden owns both powder companies. Give them a call. These are exactly the same powder, just marketed under different names. Same goes for 296 and H-110. If you talk to them they'll tell you so.
Phone:
913-362-9455

Fax:
913-362-1307

E-mail:
[email protected]

They are great people.
You need to own at least three loading manuals of current release.
Differences in lot numbers of powders can cause a big difference in results. Bullet hardness, jacket type i e; plated [like TMJ] vs. FMJ which is usually harder in that it is a thin steel jacket covered in a copper wash to help ease passage down the bore, whereas TMJ is electroplated with pure copper or copper alloy. Differences in chamber specs.,bore dia., throat and rifling can all affect velocity and pressure.
I don't know if your new to loading .45 acp or reloading in general, but it's always wise to have several sources to cross reference. There are plenty of good load data sources on the web.

http://www.reloadersnest.com/index.asp
http://forums.accuratereloading.com
http://www.riflemag.com/ click on the LOADDATA link.
Gun 4 Fun is offline  
Old December 5, 2008, 12:48 AM   #11
GringoLoco
Member
 
Join Date: November 9, 2008
Posts: 60
Gun 4 Fun,

Yeah, I've read that 231 is the same as HP-38, I even saw that it has the same data on the Hodgdon website. That's why I was confused about there being so much difference between the different books load data. Now I realize that it's probably mostly due to the differences between FMJ and TMJ, I was just assuming they'd behave the same.

I am new to reloading in general. I've loaded up a few test batches of .223 and now a test batch of 45ACP, but haven't shot anything yet. I do have a couple books, the Speer #14, Lyman 49th edition (both current as far as I can tell), and then I use the Hodgdon website. I was confused because with my .223, all 3 sources gave almost identical load ranges, maybe off by .5 grains. Then I look up .45 and all a sudden I have one source quoting the starting charge as higher than my other sources max charge. Just seemed to go against common sense, and I didn't know who to believe. On one hand everybody on here hypes the Lyman book like it's the bible, and on the other hand you have the powder company's own website. I think I got it figured out better now though, thanks.
GringoLoco is offline  
Old December 5, 2008, 01:28 AM   #12
Gun 4 Fun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 3, 2008
Posts: 956
Keep a positive attitude and be open to learning, cause you never stop learning when you get involved with loading your own. Also, while everyone here for the most part will try to give you good advice and load info, remember that every gun is an indivdual unto itself, and as such has it's own unique characteristics.
I've loaded hundreds of thousands of rounds ranging from the .17 Rem. to the .458 Lott, and I never stop learning.
GOOD LUCK and if I can ever assist you somehow, PM me or e-mail me.
Gun 4 Fun is offline  
Old December 5, 2008, 09:34 PM   #13
Shane Tuttle
Staff
 
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: Montana
Posts: 9,442
Quote:
Originally Posted by 22-Mag
Go with who ever's powder you are using. The Lee book is is what I have been using for my data with comparing it to Alliants specs. I use Alliant powder. You can.t go wrong using Lee's info.
The boldfaced statement isn't exactly the best advice. If it were, most reloading manuals wouldn't be in print right now. I'd keep in practice to use several sources, IMHO.

Also, I've found more accurate load data in my experience using the bullet manufacturer's charts. Problem is, some bullet companies aren't willing to publish their opinions.

I've found 5.2gr of HP38 with Winchester 230gr FMJ flat base to work well in my Springer Loaded 5in. barrel and XD45 Service model in 4in. barrel. This has been an easy shootin' range load.

Along with HP38, HS6 has been amongst my favorite powders for handguns.
__________________
If it were up to me, the word "got" would be deleted from the English language.

Posting and YOU: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting
Shane Tuttle is offline  
Old December 5, 2008, 10:05 PM   #14
Shoney
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2002
Location: Transplanted from Montana
Posts: 2,311
GringoLoco
On the Hodgdon site, at the top right of any data page, you will see E-Mail. If you e-mail yourself a copy of the data, they include primer info and weapon info.
__________________
I pledge allegiance to the Flag - - -, and to the Republic for which it stands….Our Forefathers were brilliant for giving us a Republic, not a democracy! Do you know the difference??? and WHY?http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissue...les.asp?id=111
Shoney is offline  
Old December 5, 2008, 10:11 PM   #15
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 11,061
Here's a noval approach. Forget the reloading manuels, pick a safe starting load, then adjust up and down, changing components and come up with an accurate load that fits you and your pistol.

As far as gang molds, they are fine for 25 yards, but I use a single mold for my 50 yards matches. In my eye, there is too much differance in bullets that come out of the gang molds to suit me for 50 yards. But can be slopped in at 25.

45s do not need to be hot to shoot. My go to load is 3.8 grns of bullseye pushing a 230 gn cast bullet. Not hot, but sure is accurate. Actually below the min. listings in most manuels. I dont care, its what works in my gun that counts.

By the way that load also knocks down every steel popper target I hit in multi gun matches.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old December 5, 2008, 10:22 PM   #16
Stumper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 438
Loading manuals use a little science and a lot of alchemy. Variables play hob with the realities of internal ballistics-which, I suppose is part of the reason that much published data has become super conservative. FWIW I have found that most of the manuals DO provide workable loads at least for plinking. Starting low and working up (except with 296/H110) really does work.-And if you just want bangs and holes in paper and pop cans you need not work up very much.
__________________
"Let us speak courteously, deal fairly, and keep ourselves armed and ready." Theodore Roosevelt

"If only God has magic, how does Santa get down the chimney?" Natalie Peters age 4
Stumper is offline  
Old October 29, 2009, 06:17 PM   #17
Dutch1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: October 29, 2009
Posts: 4
HP 38, ww231

Don't forget, if you were to buy a lb of 231, it probably wouldn't be of the same lot # as a lb of HP 38. The bullets from the tests done by the different manuals are of different lot numbers, if not different bullets altogether. They would have different strengths as well as friction coefficient. The chambers of the test barrels would have to be of different sizes as would the barrels be.
An exception to some of this would be if the same everything was used by the same tester except the brand of the powder, which brings us back to Hodgdon. That is probably the only tester that can get the two from the same or similar burn rate lots, if not the very same lot#. Go with Hodgdon's data
Dutch1 is offline  
Old October 30, 2009, 09:57 AM   #18
Slamfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 5,261
From a recent issue of Handloader, the powder companies finally admitted that HP-38 is the same as W231.

Something that I find humorous, as I have a Ken Water’s article from Handloader, where he “gave up” on W231, but ballyhooed HP-38.

Even though powder companies blend the powders we use, I understand they only blend to a tolerance of 10%. You would expect different lots to give different peak pressures.

Also, smokeless propellants have an exponential slope to their burn curve. Which means that the burn rate increases incredibly fast.

A tenth of a grain difference don’t mean nothing, considering all the tolerances you have to the various articles under test.

Here is my W231 data. I am happy with a load that is just about 800 fps with a 230. My 230 FMJ GI 2nd’s function the pistols and shoot just fine.

Colt M1911 Stainless,



230 FMJ GI 5.5 grs W231 Mixed Military WLP
9-Oct-05
1.265" OAL T = 64 °F

Ave Vel = 792.4
Std Dev = 15.87
ES 70.15
High 825.5
Low 754.9
N = 24



Kimber Custom Classic


230 FMJ (GI) 5.5 grs W231 Mixed Brass WLP
18-Mar-07 T = 62 °F OAL 1.265" taper crimp .469"
Ave Vel = 780.5
Std Dev = 14.17
ES = 51.66
High = 798.7
Low = 747
N = 23

Slamfire is offline  
Old October 30, 2009, 02:49 PM   #19
totaldla
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 10, 2009
Location: SW Idaho
Posts: 1,280
GringoLoco: Always look at the pressure numbers. Of late, Hodgdon will post a "max" load that is way below the SAAMI max pressure. I've noticed this with their AutoComp load data for 45acp.
totaldla is offline  
Old October 30, 2009, 04:37 PM   #20
benzuncle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 31, 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 357
Gringo, I use HP-38 and 230gr ammo. When I began loading for my SIG P220 Compact, I tried the minimum load recommended by Lee so as to be on the safe side with my first loads. Those 4.2 grains had my first rounds almost skipping off the floor on the way to the paper. But they made it out of the barrel and didn't blow my gun up! I was glad I didn't build 50 of them. I then laddered my way up and now use 5.5gr. When I'm working up loads, I usually load 2 mags worth of each charge. Here's wishing you success with those loads!
benzuncle is offline  
Old October 30, 2009, 10:10 PM   #21
Shane Tuttle
Staff
 
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: Montana
Posts: 9,442
Since GringoLoco hasn't even responded to this thread since December of LAST YEAR, I think your voice isn't being heard.....
__________________
If it were up to me, the word "got" would be deleted from the English language.

Posting and YOU: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting
Shane Tuttle is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 03:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.11853 seconds with 10 queries