Extreme bullet help

[Fuzz]

I have just tried for the first time Extreme Bullets and my load is all over the place and I am looking for advice.

I am loading 45 acp 230gr copper plated RN. I am using Winchester WST which is m first experience with this powder. I have been playing with the load trying to find some accuracy and do not seem to be finding it.

My COL is at 1.23

My crimp is set at .47 with variances running from .4695 to .47

Extremes website says that I should run a light crimp which this is the same crimp I used with polycoated lead cast.

My question is what crimp is anyone that is experienced with this bullet using? What is a light crimp?

Crimp is the only thing left that I can think of that would be scattering my groups.

Thanks for any assist.

[Slotbike]

I use the exact bullet but load it over Win 231. I use a very light crimp just to take the flare out and not deform the bullet. I think your OAL is too short. I load around 1.255.

Glenn

[njl]

How much WST are you using, and is this SP or LP brass?

Disassemble one or two rounds and see how much of an indentation your crimp is leaving on the bullets. If it's more than just barely visible, back off to .471-.472".

[Fuzz]

All Large primer brass. From testing I am using 4.3 gr of WST. From my testing this was the best grouping I could get on bullseye. 4.3 to 4.6 were all about the same. Less or more went grossly awry

I would love to be able to load some Win231 or VV or Clays for that matter bu I cannot find any so I am trying to make due with what I can find.

[Fuzz]

I use the exact bullet but load it over Win 231. I use a very light crimp just to take the flare out and not deform the bullet. I think your OAL is too short. I load around 1.255.

Glenn

I have always ran this gun at 1.26 but Hodgdons website says 1.20 so I shortened a bit.

[Fuzz]

I use the exact bullet but load it over Win 231. I use a very light crimp just to take the flare out and not deform the bullet. I think your OAL is too short. I load around 1.255.

Glenn

What is your crimp measurement? Please

[Slotbike]

I use the exact bullet but load it over Win 231. I use a very light crimp just to take the flare out and not deform the bullet. I think your OAL is too short. I load around 1.255.

Glenn

I have always ran this gun at 1.26 but Hodgdons website says 1.20 so I shortened a bit.

I know......I have spoken to Hodgdon a few times about the OAL they list for .45 ACP. In my opinion and experience, it is wrong. At there listed OAL, some projectiles would have to be crimped on the nose portion of the projectile. I have some high end finicky 1911's. Ed Brown recommended that my .45 ACP loads should be around 1.250 to 1.255. (Before that, I loaded at 1.265). At 1.250 to 1.255, my loads run perfect in any and every .45 I have.

G

[Slotbike]

I use the exact bullet but load it over Win 231. I use a very light crimp just to take the flare out and not deform the bullet. I think your OAL is too short. I load around 1.255.

Glenn

What is your crimp measurement? Please

I believe it is .471 BUT, using mixed brass, as I (and most of us) do, this can vary slightly. I suggest using the method suggested above and crimp a round (no powder/primer), pull it and if you have anything more than the faintest of lines, you are too tight.

G

[njl]

I use the exact bullet but load it over Win 231. I use a very light crimp just to take the flare out and not deform the bullet. I think your OAL is too short. I load around 1.255.

Glenn

I have always ran this gun at 1.26 but Hodgdons website says 1.20 so I shortened a bit.

AFAIK, that's minimum OAL. i.e. they're saying not to go shorter than that length with their published max load or pressure will be higher than they publish.

[Slotbike]

I use the exact bullet but load it over Win 231. I use a very light crimp just to take the flare out and not deform the bullet. I think your OAL is too short. I load around 1.255.

Glenn

I have always ran this gun at 1.26 but Hodgdons website says 1.20 so I shortened a bit.

AFAIK, that's minimum OAL. i.e. they're saying not to go shorter than that length with their published max load or pressure will be higher than they publish.

Their published load data is supposed to state the OAL that they used to develop that load. I just can't see seating a bullet that deep. It just doesn't work.

G

[Slotbike]

You should actually load as long as you can to get reliable feeding/extraction etc. I was having problems with a few very tight chambered guns in .45 ACP, so I went down to 1.250 to 1.255 and they all just run so well!

G

[Slotbike]

You should actually load as long as you can to get reliable feeding/extraction etc. I was having problems with a few very tight chambered guns in .45 ACP, so I went down to 1.250 to 1.255 and they all just run so well!

G

I left out: and to fit in your magazine.

[Mbauer67]

If you are having accuracy with plated bullets, it is most likey your crimp. Back it off till there is actually a little flat left on the case.

[Fuzz]

Ok I am going back up on my length and I will look at a bullet and very likely adjust my crimp. Thanks for the help guy's

I always thought when they give you a COL in you load data it was for the load they used. Why would they show the min and not the max if they were going to do that. And if they are they should state it. In my opinion of course and not theirs I suppose.

[njl]

The min OAL sets a minimum volume which maximizes pressure. If you used published data, but used a much shorter OAL than that data, your pressure would be higher and could turn a max load into a KB load. I suspect data is often/usually published with what seems like ridiculously short OALs because they figure it's an OAL nobody will want to go lower than, so the data should be safe for all.

This is complicated by the fact that you're probably not using the same bullets used to make the published load data, and as bullet lengths vary, so does the case volume presented by same OALs with different bullets. Short OALs in published data may also be to compensate for this issue.

[Fuzz]

The min OAL sets a minimum volume which maximizes pressure. If you used published data, but used a much shorter OAL than that data, your pressure would be higher and could turn a max load into a KB load. I suspect data is often/usually published with what seems like ridiculously short OALs because they figure it's an OAL nobody will want to go lower than, so the data should be safe for all.

This is complicated by the fact that you're probably not using the same bullets used to make the published load data, and as bullet lengths vary, so does the case volume presented by same OALs with different bullets. Short OALs in published data may also be to compensate for this issue.

I understand this. I guess my point is then why do they not print that this is the min, They say the COL used is that amount. Not that this is the min. And then why would not publish the max. Guess that would make sense.

[Slotbike]

The min OAL sets a minimum volume which maximizes pressure. If you used published data, but used a much shorter OAL than that data, your pressure would be higher and could turn a max load into a KB load. I suspect data is often/usually published with what seems like ridiculously short OALs because they figure it's an OAL nobody will want to go lower than, so the data should be safe for all.

This is complicated by the fact that you're probably not using the same bullets used to make the published load data, and as bullet lengths vary, so does the case volume presented by same OALs with different bullets. Short OALs in published data may also be to compensate for this issue.

Very well said!

[drewbeck]

Just asking the obvious but has the gun proven more accurate with a different load before the WST? Have you changed anything, since you last shot an accurate group with the gun? A lot of different things can affect consistent lockup and it may not be the load causing the brain damage. I would make sure a different load or factory load shoots accurately as a double check before you pull you hair out trying to change crimp and figure out a load with WST. If other loads are accurate RIGHT NOW in the gun, see what the longest load is that will pass the plunk test and fit in the mag and run a ladder test with different charges of WST and you should find a winner.

Not trying to be insulting but sometimes its the stupid stuff we forget about that causes the most aggravation (like me going crazy with a rifle load later to find a loose scope ring!)

[njl]

The min OAL sets a minimum volume which maximizes pressure. If you used published data, but used a much shorter OAL than that data, your pressure would be higher and could turn a max load into a KB load. I suspect data is often/usually published with what seems like ridiculously short OALs because they figure it's an OAL nobody will want to go lower than, so the data should be safe for all.

This is complicated by the fact that you're probably not using the same bullets used to make the published load data, and as bullet lengths vary, so does the case volume presented by same OALs with different bullets. Short OALs in published data may also be to compensate for this issue.

I understand this. I guess my point is then why do they not print that this is the min, They say the COL used is that amount. Not that this is the min. And then why would not publish the max. Guess that would make sense.

What they print is the min. The max OAL is defined by SAAMI specs, your magazines, and your chamber.

[Fuzz]

Just asking the obvious but has the gun proven more accurate with a different load before the WST? Have you changed anything, since you last shot an accurate group with the gun? A lot of different things can affect consistent lockup and it may not be the load causing the brain damage. I would make sure a different load or factory load shoots accurately as a double check before you pull you hair out trying to change crimp and figure out a load with WST. If other loads are accurate RIGHT NOW in the gun, see what the longest load is that will pass the plunk test and fit in the mag and run a ladder test with different charges of WST and you should find a winner.

Not trying to be insulting but sometimes its the stupid stuff we forget about that causes the most aggravation (like me going crazy with a rifle load later to find a loose scope ring!)

Not insulted at all, The gun fires a group less than half of what I am doing with the WST load. The only variables are the new bullet, new powder (WST) and the shorter COL.

I went shorter because I had the occasional FTF. Not very often mind you but it happened. Plus using the data from Hodgdon made me push it shorter.

I did ladder check the powder charges and 4.0 gr was a terrible group and low / left. 4.3 gr pulled back on bullseye but the group was double what I have done with several of my other loads for this gun. It stayed consistent until 4.9 and then the group got bigger and low again.

I shot a match with these loads Sunday and well that didn't go great as expected but I also was surprised as to how dirty WST was in the gun when I finished. I was always told that WST was clean burning.

I am going to keep working this load till I get something worked out I will let you guy's know what I figure out. Thanks for the assist.

[drewbeck]

If you can also get some chrono data while you're working it may be very beneficial in determining what is going on. Hodgon shows starting load of 4.0 and max of 4.3 with 230gr RN at 1.20" when you were at 4.9gr did you notice pressure signs? You could have been at the upper threshold which is why is open back up again.

I would work around the 4.3-4.6 grain with the chrono to get the power factor where I wanted it and once you have the velocity close start messing with the crimp. Try to eliminate one variable at a time otherwise you won't know which one had the impact or the two changes could fight each other and you'll be chasing your tail. Once you're settle on a velocity the crimp will change it to some degree but its easier to go back and change the charge a little to get you back on track.

How does the recoil impulse feel to YOU? If it feels totally different than what you are used to you could have a timing issue with the trigger pull/jerk/mash, etc. It may be worth while to have someone else shoot is as a double check or shoot from a rest as another test.

Good luck

[ZombieHunter]

Deleted

Edited July 22, 2014 by ZombieHunter

[Fuzz]

If you can also get some chrono data while you're working it may be very beneficial in determining what is going on. Hodgon shows starting load of 4.0 and max of 4.3 with 230gr RN at 1.20" when you were at 4.9gr did you notice pressure signs? You could have been at the upper threshold which is why is open back up again.

I would work around the 4.3-4.6 grain with the chrono to get the power factor where I wanted it and once you have the velocity close start messing with the crimp. Try to eliminate one variable at a time otherwise you won't know which one had the impact or the two changes could fight each other and you'll be chasing your tail. Once you're settle on a velocity the crimp will change it to some degree but its easier to go back and change the charge a little to get you back on track.

How does the recoil impulse feel to YOU? If it feels totally different than what you are used to you could have a timing issue with the trigger pull/jerk/mash, etc. It may be worth while to have someone else shoot is as a double check or shoot from a rest as another test.

Good luck

The extreme website suggest that for there bullets you use the upper half of a lead cast bullets data and the lower half of a FMJ 's data that is why I started where I did. Thanks for the advice it will be heeded.

[Slotbike]

I load my plated bullets in the mid- range of Jacketed data for the same weight/profile of the bullet. My loads are very accurate and shoot great. I used to load only lead and now load only plated.....except for the .357 magnum loads I shoot out of my Coonan's. Those run only near Max loads so those loads get Jacketed projectiles.

G