Recipe question for 45ACP

[QuarterHorse]

I've ordered my press/dies etc and they are on their way. I was doing some reading about Precision Delta projectiles for plinking/target ammo and was pleased with what I saw for what I'm using. My reloading books however don't have them listed for a recipe.

This in mind what I've read is to use a recipe for a similar projectile in type/size/grain/density and go with that. Am I safe in doing so?

Thanks all

Dustin

[QuarterHorse]

Also thought about going with lead and found Bayou Bullets for a fair price. Thoughts on lead and just finding a similar density recipe for said powder?

[zippy13]

Precision Delta seems to have a typical selection of applicable bullets and .45ACP reloads. What do you have in mind?

For plinking/targets I've been happy with home cast 200 gr LSWCs. I'm presently loading with a hot lubed copy of the H & G #68.

[moxie]

Hey zippy,

"Skill and cunning will overcome ignorance and superstition."

[Sevens]

When you are working with a relatively low pressure round (like .45 Auto) and you are using a normal, popular, routine weight and composition slug for the caliber (230 grains, FMJ) you needn't worry about finding data specific to whoever manufactured your bullet.

Look at the Precision Delta 230 grain FMJ like it's any other 230 grain FMJ and you should find mountains of published load data for it.

[QuarterHorse]

Thanks guys, I'm using Bullseye powder.

[Unclenick]

Quarterhorse,

What will your shooting purpose be?

Precision Delta 230 grain FMJ bullets look typical of the type. I have no reason to think they wouldn't do fine over the old standard 5.0 grains of Bullseye, which was a military load around the time of the first world war.

Precision Delta's lead bullets are swaged, not cast. This has pluses and minuses. Swaged bullets are typically more consistent in dimensions and in lacking voids or other casting errors. But they are softer than cast, so they are more prone to deformation by tipping if your alignment is off and to leaving lead in the barrel. They are more difficult to drive to higher velocities without leading or distortion. I don't shoot them over target load velocities of about 750 fps. They can shoot a good deal faster, but not without the lead starting to build up in most guns, so I don't like them for extended firing sessions at higher velocities than that. The build-up eventually causes accuracy to deteriorate, so you have to stop and clean more often if you run them harder, or accuracy will start to deteriorate. I haven't experimented with additional lubing or re-lubing them in Lee's Liquid Alox, but that might help the leading?

Most common lead bullets sold are cast bullets that are a good deal harder than swaged. That offers better resistance to the problems I mentioned, and they can be driven to magnum revolver velocities without excess leading in a gun without a rough bore or bore constrictions or undersized chamber throats. The limitation is that some casting operations are better than others. Those who don't monitor their quality control well can have weight variations and other problems. The highest quality are not inexpensive. Beartooth Bullets are very high quality, but you are also paying for oven heat treating. The Oregon Trail Laser Cast bullets that I've had have been very good, but are not cheap, either. Mastercast bullets are about half the cost and have a return-if-not-satisfied warranty, so I would look at those as a starting place. They will probably do all you ever need at .45 ACP pressures. If in doubt, you can try something more expensive and compare? With the exception of a couple of really poor quality casters I've run into, guns and the loading method typically impose more limits on accuracy than the bullets.

BTW, I notice Precision Delta has trial packs. You could certainly get one and some cast bullets and see how you like swaged verses cast?

If you just want a load that will function a 1911 with standard springs, either full length or Commander length slide, then a cast 200 grain lead bullet of any design over 4.8 grains of Hodgdon Universal makes an economical and relatively clean load that can be used in any brand of case and with any brand of large pistol primer. It will knock down plates just fine. It may not function some sub-compact guns with very stiff recoil springs. 4.6 grains of Bullseye is the rough equivalent, but will just be more sooty.

With lead bullets, I recommend you try to headspace on the bullet rather than the case mouth. It improves accuracy and reduces leading. The only limitation is that some guns have long enough throats that a bullet seated out far enough to headspace on the bullet touching the throat will no longer fit the magazine properly. Round nose can sometimes do that, but I've not found it to be the case with SWC's or truncated cone bullets, whose flatter tips don't normally need to reach the full COL limit of the magazines. Below is how to use your barrel as a gauge. Just seat a bullet out too far, then gradually nudge it deeper until dropping the test cartridge into the barrel results in the case head being flush with the breech end of the barrel. This is shown in the third illustration from the left. It's COL becomes your new COL.

[QuarterHorse]

Good info there. Purpose for these reloads is for plinking, knocking steels down etc... I'll be running them through my 1911 5" barrel FWIW.

Thanks for all the info and keep my nose in the books 'till my loot arrives.

I'll take all the info I can get!

[WESHOOT2]

Easy: 5.0g Bullseye, sized case, OAL (w/230g RN) 1.240--1.255" (I start at 1.255"), CCI300/WLP.
Crimp to .470".

[QuarterHorse]

I was looking at that exact recipe except it was 4.8 grains WESHOOT2, so I know I'm in the ballpark!

Thanks again!

[Rig Magician]

I just loaded the same bullet you are talking about for the first time. I did load mine .010 longer for an OAL of 1.265. I started with 4.6 and worked up to 5.4g of bullseye. At 4.6 and 4.8 I found that I still had gas blow by from the cartridge not sealing in the chamber, also they were not that accurate. The seal got better at 5.0g and alittle better accuracey. 5.2g was better with no signs of blow by and 5.4 was the best. That is where I stopped. I could go up to 5.7g with bullseye but I don't see a need to, they shot and run fine in my XD the way they are and recoil is not as bad a factory loads.
Mark

[Unclenick]

Be aware that starting pressure is affected by crimp. If you look at loads from the 60's, before taper crimps became standard, the champions all swore by using a roll crimp that dug into lead bullets, with the bullet bearing surface out far enough that it prevented the case mouth getting into the throat (a high pressure danger). These guns were likely actually headspacing on their extractor hooks, but not before the leading edge of the bullet was in the throat.

It was noted long ago that military jacketed match ammo shot more accurately than commercial match ammo using the same components. The difference was finally traced to the fact that military specifications require a pitch seal that actually glues the bullet to the brass to some degree. That added start pressure turns out to improve the consistency of the burn even of fast pistol powder.

You can't glue a lubricated lead bullet. However, part of the secret of the method I showed of headspacing on the bullet is, just like a rifle, contact with the throat raises starting pressure both by presenting a static coefficient of friction, but more by preventing pressure-relieving gas blowby. The gun is starting out with the bore obturated (sealed off). If you think you still don't have enough pressure from that, try the other thing the military does with their ammo: use a magnum primer. The military does it for cold weather reliability, but it works fine in most ammo where the powder leaves a lot of empty room in the case.


Rig,

You had low pressure signs and accuracy issues with 4.6 grains of Bullseye and a 230 grain bullet? Man, you're making me think of all the 185 and 200 grain cast bullets I shot over 3.8 grains of Bullseye in matches over the years. Yeah, there was a little case mouth darkening, but it wasn't leaky enough to cause an accuracy problem. The 25 yard sandbag group below is an example of what the cast bullets and that wimp load were doing in my Goldcup. Try the seating out method (which I used then) and see if that doesn't help?

[WESHOOT2]

Some guns 'soot' more due to their chamber dimensions.....

[wncchester]

"This in mind what I've read is to use a recipe for a similar projectile in type/size/grain/density and go with that. Am I safe in doing so?"

Yes. If not, there would be precious few bullets we could use.

But, tho it's a common term, please don't think of loading data as "recipes." That implies that, like a cake, if you follow instrucions precisely you will get exactly the predicted results. That's not true.

The largest single variable in reloading is the weapon it will be fired in, no change of bullet, primer, power lot, case, etc. will have a great an impact on what happens as the gun. SO, no matter what components you use, always "Start low, only work up if....".

[QuarterHorse]

Forgive me for my terminology, what should I use when asking for a per say "forumula"? I don't need people thinking worse of a noob asking questions than normal lol.

Thanks for all of the info

[dmazur]

Forgive me for my terminology, what should I use when asking for a per say "forumula"? I don't need people thinking worse of a noob asking questions than normal lol.

I haven't been reloading for 30 years, so I'm still learning...

However, I believe the term "load" is generally used to refer to rifle / handgun data regarding components, quantities and dimensions for reloading brass cases.

I usually see the use of "recipe" to describe the components and quantities for reloading shotshells, but occasionally the term "load" is used as well.

The only difference I can see is that the combination of hull type, wad type, shot quantity and powder type and quantity has a lot of "ingredients", compared to bullet type and weight, powder type and quantity, and seated COL. (With metallic cartridge reloading, the type of case usually isn't part of the load data, except for military vs. commercial volume differences.)

So, while I don't know why, "load" appears to be OK for anything, and "recipe" seems to be reserved for shotshell reloading.

[wncchester]

"what should I use when asking for a per say "forumula"? I don't need people thinking worse of a noob asking questions than normal lol."

No sweat, no excusing needed.

Dmazer is correct, "load" is the preferred term. It's really not all that precise. Everyone knows what you mean with "recipe", or "formula", but they are more commonly used by noobs and both suggest a more clear-cut thing than saying load does. (Shotshells ARE "recipes" and nothing in them should be swapped around like we do in loads.)

I don't think anyone worthwhile looks down on noobs... maybe some near noobs that have learned a little and suddenly begin to feel superior. None of us were born knowing any more than you and most of us are here specifically to help noobs get passed that stage as quickly and safely as possible.

Good luck!!

[dmazur]

Shotshells ARE "recipes" and nothing in them should be swapped around like we do in loads.

+1 to this.

There isn't any "working up a load" procedure for shotshells, unless you are a manufacturer with a lab environment. Hulls have different internal volumes, and wads are part of the pressure curve (in addition to protecting shot.) If you can't find a recipe that matches your components exactly, you're just out of luck.

As I understand, working up a load generally means starting at minimums in the published data, looking for signs of trouble in your rifle or pistol as you gradually increase the charge.

As these signs are also far from an exact science, most reloaders work up loads very, very carefully.

[Unclenick]

There are some exceptions. Alliant presents all their reloading data as "Recipes", and they just offer one charge weight. You'd better be prepared to to treat such a recipe as just that, though, and be very careful to match all their particulars. Use their COL, their exact bullet, and their listed brand of case and primer.

The other area is loads that are safely below maximum pressure. For example, Winchester, for a long time, would publish just one load of 296 for either .357 or .44 Magnum. They are high pressure but not maximum pressure for these guns. More typically, you'll see target shooting loads as recipes, but, again, these are well below maximum pressure.

[QuarterHorse]

Thanks fellas, I'm not all about getting maximum pressures, just something consistent enough to have fun with. I don't care if velocity is less than factory ammo as long as the gun functions like it's supposed to. I'll be getting a chronograph to see if they're major or minor loads so when the time comes I can compete accordingly etc.. but other than that, I'm not looking to push the envelope.