7kings Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Hey all - I've been reloading 9mm for a while now and just decided to add .45ACP to my bench to feed my 1911s. I was just going through the die setup today (I have a 550b and the deluxe quick change kit) and all the minute adjustments that entails. I noticed something that I thought looked weird with the bullet seating and I figured I'd ask you guys if this looks okay to you. They seem like they're seated too deep to me, but they measure out at 1.210" COL, which is what the Hornady manual recommends. I'm used to loading FMJ RN in 9mm, but I picked up some Hornady HAP FMJ FP 230gr to use for my .45 endeavors. I'm using the following specs (and pulled the recipe from the Hornady reference book): Powder: Unique Pwdr Wt: 5.9gr Bullet: Hornady HAP (FMJ FP) Bul Wt: 230gr COL: 1.210" Also, would you guys use the round nose seating die or the flat nose for these bullets? I don't seem to be getting consistent COLs with these. The COL seems like it varies by as much as .004" between rounds, which is troubling to me. In my experience reloading FMJ RN 9mm, I typically only see variances of .001"-.002". Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Youngeyes Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Those seem short. I load to 1.25 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve RA Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Load to 1.25" as above and do a Plunk and Turn test in your barrel to be sure they clear ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7kings Posted July 2, 2015 Author Share Posted July 2, 2015 Load to 1.25" as above and do a Plunk and Turn test in your barrel to be sure they clear ok. What's a Turn test? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tires2burn Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Your right on the OAL that Hornady lists. If they cycle ok run them. My 45"s run at 1.250 with a 230 RN and anything shorter causes cycling problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve RA Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 After it plunks, try to rotate it, sometimes the overall length will check out but due to the shape of the bullet nose it is engaging the rifling. In that case you just have to shorten it a little and try the test again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7kings Posted July 2, 2015 Author Share Posted July 2, 2015 After it plunks, try to rotate it, sometimes the overall length will check out but due to the shape of the bullet nose it is engaging the rifling. In that case you just have to shorten it a little and try the test again. I'm assuming you mean to do the plunk in the barrel, not a case gauge (I have no idea how I'd grab hold of the cartridge to turn it in the case gauge - lol). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve RA Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 Yes, in barrel, as mentioned in post #3. "Load to 1.25" as above and do a Plunk and Turn test in your barrel to be sure they clear ok." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7kings Posted July 2, 2015 Author Share Posted July 2, 2015 Yes, in barrel, as mentioned in post #3. "Load to 1.25" as above and do a Plunk and Turn test in your barrel to be sure they clear ok." Ah - missed it the first time. Thanks for the suggestion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDA Posted July 2, 2015 Share Posted July 2, 2015 My Hornady 8th Edition manual shows 1.230" for 230g HAP. 5.2-6.6 Unique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7kings Posted July 2, 2015 Author Share Posted July 2, 2015 My Hornady 8th Edition manual shows 1.230" for 230g HAP. 5.2-6.6 Unique. Hmm... I pulled mine from the 9th edition. I wonder if it's a misprint in the 9th edition. 1.210" just seems too short to me (and everyone seems to agree). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDA Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Unfortunately, I just got home and my manuals are at work. I also have the 7th edition I could look at. That may be the tie breaker! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7kings Posted July 3, 2015 Author Share Posted July 3, 2015 Unfortunately, I just got home and my manuals are at work. I also have the 7th edition I could look at. That may be the tie breaker! LOL - I'm really curious now what the 7th edition says! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve RA Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 Do the suggested tests and do what your barrel tells you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDA Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 7th Edition shows 1.230" as well. I always start by determining the max COAL for a particular bullet in my barrel, then see if the magazine will accept it, and then work from there. If published data states 1.200" and my barrel will accept 1.250" I know I can load a bit heavier to start. If the opposite, I lighten up the starting load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7kings Posted July 3, 2015 Author Share Posted July 3, 2015 Thanks for the information, everyone. It helps! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7kings Posted July 3, 2015 Author Share Posted July 3, 2015 Do the suggested tests and do what your barrel tells you. I already do the plunk test, although I use a chamber gauge. I'll try the turn test as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDA Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 (edited) I already do the plunk test, although I use a chamber gauge. I'll try the turn test as well. Use your barrel. My 1911 and my Sig P220 use two different COAL's A chamber gauge would not show that. Edited July 3, 2015 by TDA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7kings Posted July 3, 2015 Author Share Posted July 3, 2015 I already do the plunk test, although I use a chamber gauge. I'll try the turn test as well. Use your barrel. My 1911 and my Sig P220 use two different COAL's A chamber gauge would not show that. Yeah, that's what I meant (can't do the turn test in the chamber gauge anyway). I was just saying that I currently do the plunk test, but using the gauge. Thanks again, guys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njl Posted July 3, 2015 Share Posted July 3, 2015 OAL in published data can generally be considered the minimum for that data. Going longer is ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noylj Posted July 4, 2015 Share Posted July 4, 2015 Note: the COL in a manual is NOT really a recommendation. It is no more than what they used for testing and, being a "safe" test lab, would want to use a short COL--shorter than they would expect reloaders to use. Note2: COL is dependent on the bullet and its ogive and the gun (magazine, feed ramp, and chamber. You need to find what works best for you. The test lab doesn't have your gun and very likely didn't use the exact same bullet you are using. Your loads a shorter than they need to be. You could even have some failure to feed due to the rounds leaving the magazine early and jamming the bullet into the top to the barrel. If they do feed and they function and are accurate enough, then you are fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7kings Posted July 4, 2015 Author Share Posted July 4, 2015 Thanks - actually in this case, the COL listed in the Hornady manual was specifically for the 230gr HAP bullet that I'm using (other COL values are listed for other types of bullets), which is why it was confusing to me that it seated so deeply. I'm always cautious about the COAL, as I don't want to over-pressure the round (especially when I'm loading 9mm, which is already a high-pressure round). I know that .45ACP isn't a high-pressure round, but I try to be very diligent in my reloading practices, so when it seemed wrong to me I figured I'd ask the opinion of more experienced reloaders. I'm a programmer by trade, so my personality already lends itself to a certain amount of obsession when it comes to being anal about precision. You should see me doing an initial setup of dies in the tool head - it infuriates me to get a perfect measurement on a station, only to find that it changes by .001"-.002" when the shell plate is full of cases. (It's also a character trait that my wife finds absolutely hilarious...) I've pulled those rounds apart and reloaded them to 1.250" (as Youngeyes and Steve RA suggested initially) and tested them in my barrel for plunk and turn. I'll be taking them to the range today today to make sure I like the load. You guys rock - thanks for the help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve RA Posted July 4, 2015 Share Posted July 4, 2015 Always adjust dies with a full load on the shell plate. Equalizes force around the shell plate. some, such as the sizing die , won't adjust that way but you can tighten up all the nuts so the dies are lined up at each station. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7kings Posted July 4, 2015 Author Share Posted July 4, 2015 Always adjust dies with a full load on the shell plate. Equalizes force around the shell plate. some, such as the sizing die , won't adjust that way but you can tighten up all the nuts so the dies are lined up at each station. I've also found that I can't really set up the dies without the locking nuts being mostly tight. When they're loose, there is a very small amount of play in the threads of the die that will also throw off the final measurements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now