Kosh75287

If you try the bullets I mentioned would you please keep in touch about how they work out for you? BTW, Missouri Bullets also makes a wide-meplat 215 gr. .452" SWC that works WONDERFULLY in .45 ACP! Let me also suggest that you get in touch with Brad Alpert at MB, and ask him what he recommends.

I'm kinda late to the party on this question, but I'd like to suggest a 158gr. LRN Flat Point for general purposes. It has a wide meplat that seems to work well on whatever gets shot with it, and is bereft of the sharp shoulder of the SWC, which always seems to hang ME up, when loading from a speed loader. The design is safe for use in tubular magazines, and lends itself to feed through a lever-action carbine far better than the LSWC. I haven't exhaustively tested these projectiles on bowling pins, but the limited experimentation I did suggests that they'll work well in that application. I get MY cast projectiles from Missouri Bullets (whom I recommend unreservedly), but I'm pretty sure that there are other sources for them. When I try other sources, I usually find that Missouri Bullets" product is a shade more accurate, so I use them for matches, and the locally sourced ones for practice.

Unless there's something pretty unusual about your pistol, you should be able to make 170+ PF with any of those powders. Bullseye or WST will be more economical, WST tends to be cleaner than the other two, and Unique will do anything the other two will at lower pressure, with less economy, slightly more dirt and flash, and a wider margin for titration of charge weight vs. velocity. I'M a huge fan of Unique, so if I had access to more of it (and didn't have 6 pounds of Alliant Promo I'm trying to use up), I believe I'd use it. I'm not convinced that I can feel the difference in recoil between loads making 170 PF using Bullseye/WST vs. Loads making 170 PF with Unique, but many shooters are certain they can. For the versatility offered, I'd probably still stick with Unique. By the way, if you find Alliant RedDot or IMR-700X on the shelves, these powders are remarkably similar to W231 in burning rate. DO NOT use W231 loading data with them, use data intended for that particular powder. But don't be surprised if your results are similar for similar charge weights.

I think the school of thought is that repeatedly letting the slide go into battery full force on an empty chamber can result in "peening" the bolt face, and doing unsalubrious things to firing pins and their springs. I try to keep it to a minimum because I was trained to, not because I've seen any weapons ruined from it. That said, any firearm should be handled in a manner that does not ire its owner, or not at all.

STEVE RA, what charges and bullet weights are you using and what velocities are you getting? I tried Clays with 200 gr., 225 gr., and 230 gr. cast bullets, and got nice clean target loads, but lost accuracy as velocities moved toward "major" velocities. Also got what I think were pressure signs. Coulda just been my pistol, I guess.

WHY would you EAT them in the FIRST place? MY inclination would be to try to find the most accurate load using the components and rifle you specify. If the round's power equates to 55 gr. at 2750 f/s or above, it'll have the desired effect on-target (animate or otherwise). If you attempt to load hotter than where your "accuracy sweet-spot" is, groups can get big in a hurry. At double-digit yardages, this isn't a huge matter, but it can be disastrous at extended ranges. I have a Mini-14 that shoots 2.0 MOA , when I do MY part and I use a particular load, with 55 gr. Hornady FMJBTs. I'd LIKE to find a comparably priced 60 - 65 gr. BT projectile that isn't as hard on the steel targets as the M855 ball. I get the impression that the heavier projectile's momentum will send the steel down a bit more surely, and I suspect I'd get better groups beyond 300 yards (which is somewhat problematic, already). Until I find a BETTER projectile, though, I'll stick with the Hornadys.

They should go to a gun range where they can rent different revolvers. Whatever they shoot best is what they should end up with. Failing that, they should find a used Taurus M65 or something similar in .357. Get it checked by a gunsmith, to make sure the trigger hasn't been lightened to the point of unreliability. Shoot 100 rounds (each of them) through it, half .38 Spl. +P and half .357 Mag. Whatever load they hit best with is what it should have in it if it must be used.

I've been wanting to try it for quite a while, now, but cannot find any locally. I keep hearing good things about the powder, but it's scarcer than free love, in my parts. Loading data depends on the configuration of the 180 gr. projectile you want to use. Alliant lists a max load of 6.3 gr. for a JHP (not a Speer GDHP, tho) to 7.0 gr. for a 180 gr. Speer "CPFN". All cartridge overall lengths were 1.12", and velocities range from just over 1000 f/s (JHP) to approaching 1100 f/s (CPFN).

I think CFE-Pistol is the one that Hodgdon lists as propelling a 200 gr. LSWC at 1142 f/s. That's 10mm Auto territory. I feel like Mulder and Scully... I WANT to believe...

I've been researching brands and models for the same reason. I can't remember what brand the reviewer had, but he solved the light problem by putting battery-powered lights under the sky-screens and anchoring them there from the other side with a handful of those niobium "supermagnets". He reported that it worked well from there.

I compared rounds with Promo (I, too, am whittling down an 8# jug!) that I made with hand-trickled & weighed charges, powder-scooped charges, and charges thrown by a powder measure. The load was 4.0/Promo/230 LRN. I couldn't tell any difference between them, and neither could two other shooters. You can check your actual charge weight from a powder measure by throwing ten charges, weighing them and divide by ten. I'D wager that if the weight of 10 charges is 31.7 gr. - 32.3 gr., your ammo won't be the weak link in the accuracy chain.

ZZT, I concur with your calculations. I entered the wrong weight for the firearm, when I did the calculation. It sounds like I need to build some loads using different powders and run them past a chrono. Step one, buy a chrono....

Sounds like I need to do some actual testing. Oh well, that's half the fun.

A friend owned a 10" T/C Contender in .45 Colt, and we'd try to hit clay birds with it at short distances. It was more fun and edifying than practical, but it left some lasting lessons. The pistol came with a detachable "shredder tube", designed to slice up the shot cup on the CCI-SPEER .45 Colt "rat shot" loads. It worked okay with .410 shot shells, too, but DO NOT leave the thing attached when shooting a single-projectile .45 Colt round through it. You'll end up with what resembles a single-shot, 10" barreled, .45 Colt caliber "trombone".

Yah, that or know someone who owns land and is sympathetic to the cause. Thanks for your reply. It gives me a direction.

I'm not interested in starting a "contest of urination" on the subject, so please take my inquiry as a request for data, not an argument. How do you define "large differences in recoil"? I calculated recoil for 8.2/HS-6/230 gr. LRN (825 f/s) vs. 5.3/WW231/230 gr. LRN (832 f/s). The first load gave calculated recoil velocity, energy, and impulse values (respectively) of 9.3 f/s, 4.7 ft.*lbs., and 1.0 lb*sec. The second load gave 8.8 ft./sec., 4.2 ft.*lbs., and 1.0 lb.*sec. The differences between values are 5.6% for velocity, 12% for energy, and 0% for impulse. I'm not sure if 5.6% is larger than the tolerances involved in recoil measuring devices robust enough to repeatedly withstand the force of such tests. The 12% differential for recoil energy sounds impressive, until we remember that we're talking about one-half of a foot-pound. That's roughly the force associated with dropping a 500 mL water bottle onto the ground (or one's foot) from 5 1/2" above it. DISCERNIBLE force, perhaps, but hardly a threat to the ground or my instep. I question if most shooters could differentiate between the loads I mention, if they shot them blindfolded. Perhaps the effect is psychological. If the shooter thinks it helps, then it just may be so, but at that point, we're delving much more into the physiology of tactile expectation than into physics.

It's "steel", not "steal".

I've never used either one, but it looks like CFE Pistol is at its best when it is pushed very hard ( > 20,000 psi). Since the general consensus seems to be that less recoil is generated by small charges of fast-burning powder propelling heavier projectiles,TiteGroup would seem the optimal choice. I'm STILL trying to wrap my brain around the notion that the recoil from a 230 gr. projectile propelled at 765 f/s will be different if propelled by 3.0/Norma R-1 than if propelled by 6.0/Herco. I mean, on paper, the physics equations tell us it MUST be so. But how so small a difference translates into better recoil control and match-winning scores still plumb evades me. On the other hand, I'm not shooting a $4000 + "open" class pistol, and I'll be the first to admit that there are whole libraries filled with all that I DO NOT know about this sport.

Thanks for all the input, fellas! I knew I could count on you all for help! I probably won't SUSPEND the reloading activities until the chronograph arrives, but I'll be more watchful about approaching upper-level loads. I don't see any reason for "channeling" Elmer Keith, for action-pistol competition, though if the spirit of Skeeter Skelton wanders by, he'll be warmly welcomed. I think the idea about the Charter Arms Bulldog loads from Taffin is a good one. I'll do some poking around. Thanks again, Gents.

I regard the passing of Justice Scalia as a tragedy for ALL, not just one political viewpoint or the other. I am loathe to politicize the loss of a legal giant such as he. God rest him. But we also need to be realistic. The libs went into action the moment they got the word about Justice Scalia. We're fooling ourselves to think that they wouldn't cheerfully steal the march on us, if this event afforded them even the smallest opportunity. Something about the price of liberty and eternal vigilance comes to mind, and we dare not let sentimentalism stand in the way of preparation and response.

This probably a lot too late, but increasing the crimp on your 3.8/HP-38/158 load might be enough to bump velocity from 687 f/s to over 700 f/s. I'd expect this to be very pleasant to shoot, and reliably exceed minimum PF for most contests, except maybe Bianchi Cup.

Thanks noylj. I was having trouble de-crypting the acronym. I thought about asking, but was afraid that too many forum members might be tempted to help me by giving me their own special version of Special High Intensity Training.

This question is directed to all those shooters using .44 Special in USPSA/IDPA competition (BOTH of you). An associate uses a 4" S&W M29 for both, and we're setting about the task of optimizing a load for both contests (ideally, ONE load, both contests). I told him that I didn't know enough about how to advise him concerning what loads he used, until I became more familiar with the round and the revolver and suggested he show up with whatever ammo he had (no Elmer Keith or Corbon/Underwood/Buffalo Bore stuff), and just shoot a match and we could go from there. Well, the first contest was shot with 7.2/Unique/240 LSWC, and the results were....emphatic. It's the first time I've ever heard a steel target make an "OOOF!" sound in addition to a VERY audible "clang". I reduced the powder charge to 6.5/Unique/240LSWC, which took greater pity on the poor steel, but was still well in excess of what was needed for "Major". Tried 6.0/Unique/240 LSWC, which was where we wanted to be power-wise, but smokey, sooty, grunjy, bad ejection, etc. Heavier crimp & slightly deeper bullet seating helped, but not enough. I went from there to 5.0/Red Dot (Promo)/240 LRNFP (we ran out of LSWCs). which burns VERY cleanly, but may be borderline in terms of PF (I know...get a flershwuggener chronograph...It's in the works). Thought I'd try 5.2/Red Dot (Promo)/240 LRNFP next, to see where we are. Is anyone else shooting .44 Spl for either contest, and if yes, would you mind sharing what you're loading? Thanks in advance.

+1, BIGTIME. I can use and tolerate Lee LCDs MOST of the time, though they're never NOT more trouble for me to set up correctly. I'm also not naive enough to believe that taper-crimping in a separate operation is some panacea, but it HAS solved a great many accuracy and function problems for ME, on occasion, when nothing else would.

5.5 - 5.9/Unique/158 LSWC or LRNFP (sized. 356"). Higher load should give you @ 172 PF. I'D start at 5.3/Unique & let a chronograph and pressure signs guide you. I PREFER Alliant Herco or Blue Dot for .38 Super, but until you get some, this load should work.