45 Auto recipe

[leroy]

...Trial and error, started with 7.2 grains and creeped up...Unique isn't that "strong" of a powder. I've shot about 10000 rounds with that recipe.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ....

I agree with spoolie and glockster here. We've got some old loads that came straight from the old lyman, sierra, and speer manuals from the early seventies that listed 7.5 grains of Unique with the old 225 grain JHC's. We used to regularly shoot 6.5 grains of unique with anybody's 230 grain hardball rounds. Remember, the semiauto pistol basically needs the same impulse that the original factory loadings develop. Softball loads will not cycle a standard pistol (...unless you change the recoil spring...).

They are also right about the chronograph and pressure signs thing. I've burned a lot of Unique powder in a 45 ACP using these loads. More that that; the one i used is an old "frankenstein" military with a springfield armory slide and a colt frame. No telling what the barrel is or when it was made. The main thing is to use your head. There is plenty of "old" data out there that is good and looks to be way over the max for the litigation based "idiot proof" climate we now live in.

Take it from me; there will be no problem telling when loads in semiauto pistols get too hot; you can look at the primers (...despite what others may say...) and the cases and tell. Look for bulged cases.

leroy

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I have bulged plenty of brass. Not any more, but they are right up there with the load I gave.

Glocks let you know when they start bulging. Back down!

[Dolomite_supafly]

The 1911 design is a lot stronger than most think. They can run 460 Rowland with nothing more than lengthening the chamebr 1/16" and a recoil spring swap. It runs pressure that are nearly twice that of a SAAMI spec 45 ACP. If a 460 Rowland isn't hurting a 1911 I seriously doubt a hot 45 ACP load will. The 45 Super is in the same category and I gurantee my hottest loads never reached 45 Super pressures. There have even instances of a 45 Super making it into a 45 ACP gun and nothing ill happening. There are plenty of 45 Super and 460 ROwland 1911's out there that are surviving without any problems. In the days of JMB metalurgy was in its infancy compared to the advances of today and as such the cartridges were intentionally designed to use lower pressures, like the 45 ACP. But even then a 1911's lugs were set using a proof load that was 2x-3x the normal pressures expected. This forced the lugs to be set. So even back then the 1911's design would handle a lot more than JMB probably ever thought.

Even today there is different load data between certain modern firearms and calssic firearms. 45 LC is a prime example because in nearly every manual I have seen it differentiates between older guns and the more modern Ruger's and such. It isn't because of the design so much as the metalurgical advances made over the last 100 years. This is also the reason why the +P loads were developed, to update the cartridges to take advantage of the modern designs, metalurgy and tolerances.

There has been a lot of advances since the days of JMB and to think his design didn't benefit from any of them is silly. His design has and will continue to be improved upon as time goes on. I gurantee my Phillipine made 1911 is a better made pistol than those 1911's that were made early on in the previous century. Not because of design but because of the advances used in the manufacture as well as materials used. Early 1911's as I said had their lugs set using high pressure loads. This was because the tolerances achievable back then are not what they are today. These tolerances as well as modern metals are the reason the modern guns can handle the extra pressures without issue. Hell, my Phillipine made gun is a better gun than my modern Colt 1911 I own and would no doubt be hands above a turn of the 19th century Colt. The Phillipine gun shoots better and has tighter frame to slide fit than my Colt. Now I have had zero isseus with either but the COlt doesn't feel as nice as the Metro Arms I shoot all the time.

I can gurantee my guns are no worse for wear by firing hotter loads. Now if I had a original 1911 built over 100 years ago I might be worried but not with the modern advances we have now. The biggest thing people need to do is start low and work up a load and you will not have an issue. and as I said before the manuals are guidlines and should not be considered gospel because every firearm is different and each firearm should have it's own work up.

Dolomite

[gregintenn]

I can gurantee my guns are no worse for wear by firing hotter loads.

That's a pretty bold statement if it is misspelled. I know that one can exceed published load data without injury, or other mishaps. That being said, what are you gaining? Punching holes in paper a microsecond faster? I've always preferred to load on the light side. It's easier on the gun, the brass, me, etc. I can tell you that you won't exceed factory ammo ballastics by much before you will have a problem. These loads were designed in laboratories with educated people and intricate equipment. Competition between ammo companies dictate that their products produce all the performance and velocity possible. If you need more, get a bigger gun.

[Dolomite_supafly]

My hottest loads are probably +P at the most but some do exceed the SAAMI spec for 45 ACP loads listed in manuals. And yes I have done it on dozens of occasions as part of load development. When I see signs of pressure I back off and call it good and I can say that in most, but not all cases, the load I back off to is north of the max as listed in most manuals. Do I run over max loads all the time? The short answer to that is no, but as I said before I have done it dozens of times without issue. And that is with several platforms, not just the 1911.

I was just trying to say that no matter what you need to work up your loads accordingly. I wouldn't recommend my hotter loads for every gun but they have worked in mine. I will recommend people work up their loads and if they exceed max while doing it and feel safe then fine. Most guns are proofed at well beyond the SAAMI specs and easily survive all because of modern advances.

My practice loads are without a doubt hotter than my carry loads. The reason is because I wan't to shoot something at least as stout as my carry loads rather than practice with very light loads. If I wanted a light recoiling pistol to practice with I will use my 22/45 but I don't because I want to practice as I would fight.

Dolomite

[Guest spoolie]

I agree with spoolie and glockster here. We've got some old loads that came straight from the old lyman, sierra, and speer manuals from the early seventies that listed 7.5 grains of Unique with the old 225 grain JHC's. We used to regularly shoot 6.5 grains of unique with anybody's 230 grain hardball rounds. Remember, the semiauto pistol basically needs the same impulse that the original factory loadings develop. Softball loads will not cycle a standard pistol (...unless you change the recoil spring...).

They are also right about the chronograph and pressure signs thing. I've burned a lot of Unique powder in a 45 ACP using these loads. More that that; the one i used is an old "frankenstein" military with a springfield armory slide and a colt frame. No telling what the barrel is or when it was made. The main thing is to use your head. There is plenty of "old" data out there that is good and looks to be way over the max for the litigation based "idiot proof" climate we now live in.

Take it from me; there will be no problem telling when loads in semiauto pistols get too hot; you can look at the primers (...despite what others may say...) and the cases and tell. Look for bulged cases.

leroy

Exactly...i backed it down when the brass started to bulge.

[glockster157]

I know that one can exceed published load data without injury, or other mishaps. That being said, what are you gaining? Punching holes in paper a microsecond faster?

Greg, I have to disagree with you here. I have had lots of revolvers, pistols and rifles that shot their best with full power loads. I had a SW 629 that absolutely loves the old Elmer Kieth load of 22 grains of 2400 over one of his 250 SWC's but it did not like anything I tried with the mid range powders. I have also found that a lot of autos are much more consistent with at least a 90%+ pressure load as they need that to function properly. Revolvers don't have the functioning issue but I have found that low pressure loads have a tendency to dirty the gun, I have even had unburned flakes of powder get under the extractor star because the powder needs a certain level of pressure to burn properly. On that point, I know we have been talking pistols here but I want to mention that rifle powders definitely have to reach a certain pressure level to burn properly. Pistol powders are not as sensitive but if you have unburned powder left in your barrel you are probably experiencing low pressure.

[gregintenn]

Greg, I have to disagree with you here. I have had lots of revolvers, pistols and rifles that shot their best with full power loads. I had a SW 629 that absolutely loves the old Elmer Kieth load of 22 grains of 2400 over one of his 250 SWC's but it did not like anything I tried with the mid range powders. I have also found that a lot of autos are much more consistent with at least a 90%+ pressure load as they need that to function properly. Revolvers don't have the functioning issue but I have found that low pressure loads have a tendency to dirty the gun, I have even had unburned flakes of powder get under the extractor star because the powder needs a certain level of pressure to burn properly. On that point, I know we have been talking pistols here but I want to mention that rifle powders definitely have to reach a certain pressure level to burn properly. Pistol powders are not as sensitive but if you have unburned powder left in your barrel you are probably experiencing low pressure.

All good points.

[glockster157]

I have to make another post to get my post count above "666"........can't leave it there :}.

[leroy]

All:___________

This is good stuff here. I believe it is a universal truth for handloading for real ammo:

Glockster quote:

....I have also found that a lot of autos are much more consistent with at least a 90%+ pressure load as they need that to function properly. Revolvers don't have the functioning issue but I have found that low pressure loads have a tendency to dirty the gun, I have even had unburned flakes of powder get under the extractor star because the powder needs a certain level of pressure to burn properly. ....

Glockster's observations in post #32 are exactly my experience too. You need enough "oomph" or impulse (...in both rifles and pistols; but especially pistols...) to upset the bullet to the bore and tighten the seal between the bullet and bore to get good accuracy and good powder burn. He is exactly right about unburned powder too. That's why you need a heavy crimp on revolvers and a pretty stiff charge on the semiauto pistols. It also works for rifles.

leroy

[wiljen]

I am not disagreeing with glockster that most auto's do require a load that is at least 90% of max in order to function and that most cartridges fail when loaded below a certain level at which they no longer seal the bore properly. There is a huge difference in that and advocating overcharges. You all have made your case and while I understand it, I do not agree with it. I hope you remain safe and are not someday harmed by that practice but as for me, I'll stick with what I KNOW is safe and as the designers intended.

Do as you will, just please don't stand next to me when you shoot.

Edited March 10, 2011 by wiljen

[glockster157]

I think I missed making my real point. A lot of newer loading manuals have dropped the max loads so much, you will never get to where you really need to be by following them to the tee. They are guidelines, sure, but if you want your hand loads to perform their best you are going to have to learn to read pressure signs, get a chronograph, compare to factory recoil and ejection, etc. I recently traded into the latest Nosler reloading manual. After studying loads in that manual for many of the calibers I have loaded for years, and loads that have been verified for years by gun writers, older loading manuals, other reloaders, etc, I realized it was a worthless joke. I sold it for nearly nothing because that is about what I thought it was worth.

Here is another example. The older Lyman manuals all listed a 38 special +P load of 5.2 grains of 231 w/ a 158 grain cast SWC for about 950 in a 4" revolver. I have shot untold thousands of these, albeit always in 357's, for years and so have most of my friends. The standard load was 4.7 grains for about 850 if memory serves. The current Winchester load data lists 3.7 grains for 834 fps......I have verified the other 2 loads. I may load some of these and try them but I can almost guarantee that they will be in the 700's or lower. They know most reloaders will not verify load data over a chrono so they can BS you and CYA themselves with puffed data. I can give you 20 examples of recent data I have compared.

So to sum up, I agree that you should not go over max. I am convinced that the newer data for many loads are well below max and I reload for cost, fun and PERFORMANCE when I want it.

[wiljen]

I own an Oehler 43 and can tell you that by the time you read signs you are way over pressure in some cases. Primers can look perfectly normal at 20,000 PSI over pressure. If you want to talk pressure, buy something to MEASURE IT WITH and we'll talk, until then you are guessing pure and simple. Part of the reason those manuals have changed is as pressure measuring equipment has improved, it has proven that some of those old loads were hotter than thought originally. We are lucky to live in an age where strain gauges and technology have made pressure testing something an individual can do instead of leaving it to the big companies. If you don't believe their data, I suggest you buy one of the tools to do your own tests. You'd be a lot safer than using outdated methods that have proven more than once to be unreliable.

[glockster157]

I own an Oehler 43 and can tell you that by the time you read signs you are way over pressure in some cases. Primers can look perfectly normal at 20,000 PSI over pressure. If you want to talk pressure, buy something to MEASURE IT WITH and we'll talk, until then you are guessing pure and simple. Part of the reason those manuals have changed is as pressure measuring equipment has improved, it has proven that some of those old loads were hotter than thought originally. We are lucky to live in an age where strain gauges and technology have made pressure testing something an individual can do instead of leaving it to the big companies. If you don't believe their data, I suggest you buy one of the tools to do your own tests. You'd be a lot safer than using outdated methods that have proven more than once to be unreliable.

I am going to take issue with this pressure sign "myth". I believe there can be reasons that some loads can have pressure spikes....I have had it happen. But when I have shot factory ammo and my ammo side by side and compare them for " signs" and velocity and they are the same, don't tell me I could be 20K over the max with no different pressure signs. I am not buying it. There are more chances of something like that in rifles but you go 20K over on a 15 to 18K load you are going to know it. When I load a book load and I have carbon fouling 2/3rds back up the case, completely rounded primer edges, soft recoil, low velocity and unburned powder, don't try and tell me not to read pressure signs or the book max is really right and I just don't get it. If I were only using one sign as an indicator then maybe, but experience and multiple signs have kept me safe for 30 years. And I have made mistakes. I have made loads that were sticky extracting, would barely eject, in rifles I have shaved some brass, so I know signs and when I have accidentally pushed it too far and I have had to back off. Actually, every time that has happen it was simply a mistake on my part as I have never tried to make extra hot loads. Luckily those mistakes have have been very few.

Another thing, those old loads are still being used today by many many people with the same success as the original users had. One example is the old Keith load of his 250 SWC over 22 grains of 2400 with a standard pistol primer. The older Lyman manuals listed 23.4 as max. I loaded the 22 grain load for full power and 20 grains for a light magnum. I have shot that 20 grain load by the thousands in many revolvers. It always seems to run around 1250 in a 6" revolver. Now Alliant has cut their max load to 20 grains and they claim 1394fps.......BULL. That is the kind of hooey I am talking about. Don't tell me that load is over pressure.

One thing I want to point out here. I am mainly speaking of low pressure revolver and pistol rounds such as the 38spl, 45acp, 45 colt and maybe 9mm. In these types of cartridges a little powder makes a huge difference. For rounds like the 357 or 44 magnum in modern revolvers with H110 or even 2400, you have a lot more leeway. And rifles with slow burners like 4350 and 4831 you have even more. So I highly recommend not pushing any load past published data until you know what you are doing, you have reliable empirical data to back you up and preferably a chronograph to check velocities. I do agree it is better to be safe than sorry, especially with fast burning pistol powders as they are the most dangerous.

[Guest GunTroll]

Drifting badly!

[glockster157]

Drifting badly!

Right....Sorry!

[dlm37015]

well my 45 acp load is a charge of the old nitro 100 in behind a 230 grain cast or jacketed bullet at 1000 feet per second worked it up in the lab at accurate not over pressure but the new nitro 100 is not the same much too fast for pistol loading ahh i miss the old days buy i did get a life time supply when ramshot bought them out

all kidding aside that is the best load i ever worked up with a 45 for just light loads its hard to beet tight group

[mikadosoft]

Here's some of my load data.

185gr Hornady XTP with 5.8 grains of Winchester HP38 seated to 1.135 (goes approximately 850FPS)

185gr Berry's Plated with 5.7 grains of Winchester HP38 seated to 1.195 (goes approximately 750FPS)

John

Edited March 11, 2011 by mikadosoft

[Guest Ken45]

Regarding guns running better with high pressure loads, that may be. But going beyond standard pressure may hurt reliability. The Wilson Combat rep on the 1911 board commented that 1911s are designed to run at standard pressure and that +P ammo will somewhat reduce reliability because it changes the timing. He said that even increasing the recoil spring will still not bring as much reliability with +P ammo as with standard pressure. I assume he knows what he is talking about.

[glockster157]

Here's some of my load data.

185gr Hornady XTP with 5.8 grains of Winchester HP38 seated to 1.135 (goes approximately 850FPS)

185gr Berry's Plated with 5.7 grains of Winchester HP38 seated to 1.195 (goes approximately 750FPS)

John

Just a FYI for those who are not aware, HP38 is the exact same powder as W231. I personally called Hogdon and confirmed this.

John, we have similar loads. I load WW231 at

6.0 w/ 185 JHP

5.6 w/ 200 LSWC or a plated SWC

5.2 w/ 225-230 anything

[Dave Shooter]

Thanks. Recipes are all I'm going for. Not my first rodeo.

Target purpose is fine but I'm also thinking of more defensive purposes as well. I'm more of a fan of factory made PD ammo but wouldn't mind having a stock pile of reloaded as well.

primer

bullet

powder

powder amount

230 FMJ Zero, 1.25 OAL

TiteGroup

4.7 grains 780fps chrono'd 5in Colt, 4.6 grains in tight chambered Kart barrel gives same velocity

Winchester LP (Fed primers gave 35 fps less velocity)

[Guest KCSTEVE]

Target purpose is fine but I'm also thinking of more defensive purposes as well. I'm more of a fan of factory made PD ammo but wouldn't mind having a stock pile of reloaded as well.

t

I once heard Massad Ayoob say "never use reloads for defensive purposes."

That their lawyers will accuse you of making and using ultra destructive killing ammo to mutilate their client".

Hell Yeah! But a jury might see you as a cruel monster.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

There's only so much that you could get out of a pistol load, so I don't and never have understood

that argument about using a load of my own in my pistol for defensive purpose. My loads do as well

as anything Federal or Winchester makes, and they are a lot less costly. The argument a lawyer or

jury might use seems graspy to me.

There are literally millions of reloaders in this country and an argument could be made that they make

as reliable ammunition and more accurate ammunition. They don't do it too kill someone more. How

do you kill someone more, anyway? Those arguments of using hot powder and dangerous projectiles

also don't fly. They would leave evidence for the CSI groupies to use against you. I doubt any of that

has been used in self defense handloads by any law abiding citizens, also.

Edited March 16, 2011 by 6.8 AR