Serious question - have patience with me...

[7kings]

Okay, so I loaded up my first batch of 200gr SWC and took it to the range with me yesterday (some of you may have seen my other post on the results), and I have a total neophyte question.

I have been shooting for 25 years, all makes and models from .22 up to and including .500 S&W. In that time, my .45 shooting has been generally limited to either 185gr SD loads or 230gr FMJ loads, both factory. When I began reloading .45 recently, I took the advice of all of you more experienced folks and selected a 200gr SWC as a target bullet with these specs:

200gr LSWC (Precision Bullets coated)

5.2gr HP-38

1.250"

WLPP

I've read a TON of posts on several different forums where folks indicate that this should be a pretty tried-and-true plinking load, and many folks actually prefer more in the 5.0gr range with this powder.

Now for the question. When I fired these rounds at the range yesterday, I found them to have an extremely light recoil. It was light enough that the brass didn't throw very far and I felt that the slide may not even be reaching full actuation, since I had a few FTF that were corrected simply by pushing the slide forward into battery.

Now, I had been firing 150 rounds of 230gr WWB FMJ just before that, so I'm sure that part of it was that I had grown accustomed to the heavier slug during my session, but I'm wondering if that's all there is to it. Is it normal that a 200gr SWC on top of 5.2gr of HP-38 should feel so light in the recoil department?

Although I wasn't using it yesterday (I was running these test rounds through an RIA 2011 Tac), my Colt GCT came with a lighter recoil spring to accommodate lighter loads, but I thought that was primarily for 185gr cowboy loads. Am I way off base here? Is my recipe somehow completely wrong?

Edited August 10, 2015 by 7kings

[Fredlegentil]

It's the beauty of hand-loading your own ammo. I can't tell you about the recipe because I only shoot 9 and 40 but once you have a load that achieve good accuracy and consistent results, you should stick with it and get an assortment of recoil springs to tune your gun to the loads.

That way you will see an improvement in felt recoil as well as sight recovery.

Below is a link to a video that explains it pretty well

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3UVLm2GajI

Enjoy!

[TDA]

I prefer powders such as N310, Clays, N320, or Red Dot.

5.0-5.2 of Red Dot spits a 200gr LSWC out of my 1911 at just over 1000fps, cuts a nice clean hole in paper, feels like a .45 load, ejects the case like it should, and I find it to be very accurate.

[zzt]

Your load is going about 860fps, or 172PF. That is a major PF load, but not close to a standard 230 FMJ load @ 195PF or a defensive load ! 230PF. So you would expect it to feel light. Many load lighter than that. Bullseye shooters load the 200LSWC to between 775 and 820fps.

Your FTF can be attributed to a couple of things. First, your feed ramp may not have been designed for SWC profiles. Second, your OAL is probably a tad too long. There is only one brand of 200 LSWC that I can load to that length and have it feed. Others have to be at 1.240" to work. With the Dardas bullets I'm currently using, 1.245" works perfectly. You also have to be careful with the excess lube that is applied to many brands of bullets. That can ooze out the top when seated and cause some drag. If I'm going to use LSWC for a competition, I wife all the lube off each round before I box them up.

Another thing to look out for is a "burr" or ridge around part of the shoulder of the wad cutter section. That can cause some feed problems.

If you are not shooting a competition where you really want those perfect round holes the SWCs give you, consider changing to lead truncated cone bullets (LTC). Load then to about 1.200" and they will feed in anything.

Edited August 10, 2015 by zzt

[superdude]

7kings, that sounds about right for that load, based on the Hornady Manual. It is a light load at about 800 fps and won't produce much of a recoil impulse.

[7kings]

Thanks guys - great input. When I get the Blue Bullets in (already ordered a sample pack of 200gr coated SWC), I'm going to load them at 5.2 again and see how it works. I'm not shooting for competition, so if I experience FTF issues, I'll try another bullet profile, as suggested by zzt.

[rev1911]

If the only issue you had was the gun failing to go into battery by a small amount, and you were able to just give it a little push home, then I would double check your OAL. 1.250 might be hitting rifling.

Did you pull the barrel out of the gun, and plunk/spin test the rounds?

[Hi-Power Jack]

One word - chronograph !!

Only costs $70 - $100.

You shouldn't be reloading without one.

[Steve RA]

Chronographs are great but I'd suggest trying the "Plunk" test first to see if the OAL length you are loading is correct for your chamber. Also I'd try a 12 or 14 pound recoil spring if this is the type load you plan on continuing with.

[7kings]

One word - chronograph !!

Only costs $70 - $100.

You shouldn't be reloading without one.

I usually shoot at an indoor range with fluorescent lighting, which I understood doesn't mix well with chronographs. If you know otherwise, please let me know. The other thing to keep in mind is that I'm not looking to load match-grade ammunition. I typically find a load that works well for me and stick with it. I'm not nearly as sophisticated in my needs as many folks around here.

Chronographs are great but I'd suggest trying the "Plunk" test first to see if the OAL length you are loading is correct for your chamber. Also I'd try a 12 or 14 pound recoil spring if this is the type load you plan on continuing with.

I did try the plunk and twist test and have no issues with the OAL that I can tell. The round drops in easily and twists without any resistance. I didn't want to lead-up my Colt GCT while testing these bullets, but if the Blue Bullets fire without fouling, I'll probably swap in the lighter recoil spring for the Colt and see how they perform with that setup.

[RiggerJJ]

Doesn't matter where you shoot or how you shoot. Load developing without a Crono is dangerous, akin to driving without a speedometer.

your load is probably light, but there is no way to tell without a Crono...don't add powder without checking.

"But officer I wasn't speeding, I was driving with the traffic...

Here's 2 tickets Mr Smith, one for speeding, and one for improper equipment"

Get a Crono.

jj

Edited August 11, 2015 by RiggerJJ

[TDA]

your load is probably light, but there is no way to tell without a Crono.

Look at the primer.

[Hi-Power Jack]

your load is probably light, but there is no way to tell without a Crono.

Look at the primer.

The primer is not an absolute indicator of velocity - MUCH better to have a chrono,

or borrow one for a day.

[Steve RA]

Ok, Ok go get a Pro Chrono from Amazon, should be right around $100.00 !!!

[7kings]

Doesn't matter where you shoot or how you shoot. Load developing without a Crono is dangerous, akin to driving without a speedometer.

your load is probably light, but there is no way to tell without a Crono...don't add powder without checking.

"But officer I wasn't speeding, I was driving with the traffic...

Here's 2 tickets Mr Smith, one for speeding, and one for improper equipment"

Get a Crono.

jj

Just to clarify - I'm not looking to develop loads. I'm looking to use a load that has already been tested and is within published parameters. How is that dangerous? I'm well below Hodgdon's maximum load weights for this bullet.

I'm not saying that a chronograph isn't valuable, but I don't believe that it's impossible to reload safely without one, especially using load data that has been tested and proven over many years and countless shooters. Are my 5" 1911s so much different from everyone else's that a proven mid-range load on yours will be dangerous when used in mine?

[TDA]

your load is probably light, but there is no way to tell without a Crono.

Look at the primer.

The primer is not an absolute indicator of velocity - MUCH better to have a chrono,

or borrow one for a day.

With all due respect:

The chrono is not an indicator of pressure!

Most here are looking for a specific power factor, so a chrono is a necessity. I would rely more on the primer as an indicator of nearing a pressure problem if I had a choice.

I would suspect that powder manufacturers rely on pressure readings rather that velocity when developing load data. (Not to say that they rely specifically on reading the primer)

I've got Clays that I am trying to use and I have read lots of threads on loads for it in various calibers. On some I've stopped short of what others have claimed to be using due to primers I didn't like the look of, before reaching the power factor/velocity that they claim to be getting. When the primer flattens back out to where the firing pin dimple nearly gets pushed back out, I don't really care what the chrono shows!

When I try a new load, whether "published" of from someone on here, the first thing I do is start below low and fire a round into the dirt and look at the primer. Then work up watching the primer and the chrono.

My method may be way off base, and I'm not claiming that it is the "correct" way to go, but it's working well for me so far!

[RiggerJJ]

Doesn't matter where you shoot or how you shoot. Load developing without a Crono is dangerous, akin to driving without a speedometer.

your load is probably light, but there is no way to tell without a Crono...don't add powder without checking.

"But officer I wasn't speeding, I was driving with the traffic...

Here's 2 tickets Mr Smith, one for speeding, and one for improper equipment"

Get a Crono.

jj

Just to clarify - I'm not looking to develop loads. I'm looking to use a load that has already been tested and is within published parameters. How is that dangerous? I'm well below Hodgdon's maximum load weights for this bullet.

I'm not saying that a chronograph isn't valuable, but I don't believe that it's impossible to reload safely without one, especially using load data that has been tested and proven over many years and countless shooters. Are my 5" 1911s so much different from everyone else's that a proven mid-range load on yours will be dangerous when used in mine?

Yes, you are developing loads. You are trying to find a load suited to your purpose, using another's set of data. Using someone else's data IS dangerous, because you cannot be 100% certain you are DUPLICATING the other load.

I fail to understand the reasoning for avoiding the borrow or purchase of a Crono. It is a great tool, not the end all answer, but a great tool that will help. Visual inspection of fired brass and primers are more tools.

Like I have said before, if you can buy guns, powder, brass, bullets, primers, and reloading equipment, you can afford to buy a $100 Crono...it's just as important to have as a press is.

I am done here...

jj

Edited August 11, 2015 by RiggerJJ

[Postal Bob]

The oal on those rounds, are the same I use without problems. You may be over crimping, and creating a slight bulge in the brass, which is why it won't fully go into battery.

And you mention the empties are not going very far, and feel like the slide may not be coming fully back. This indicates you need a lighter recoil spring than what may be in the gun. Normal spring is 16lbs, but maybe your gun came with 18lbs. When shooting light loads I used a 14 lb. The recoil spring may also be contributing to the ftf issue, as it may be short stroking.

[7kings]

Doesn't matter where you shoot or how you shoot. Load developing without a Crono is dangerous, akin to driving without a speedometer.

your load is probably light, but there is no way to tell without a Crono...don't add powder without checking.

"But officer I wasn't speeding, I was driving with the traffic...

Here's 2 tickets Mr Smith, one for speeding, and one for improper equipment"

Get a Crono.

jj

Just to clarify - I'm not looking to develop loads. I'm looking to use a load that has already been tested and is within published parameters. How is that dangerous? I'm well below Hodgdon's maximum load weights for this bullet.

I'm not saying that a chronograph isn't valuable, but I don't believe that it's impossible to reload safely without one, especially using load data that has been tested and proven over many years and countless shooters. Are my 5" 1911s so much different from everyone else's that a proven mid-range load on yours will be dangerous when used in mine?

Yes, you are developing loads. You are trying to find a load suited to your purpose, using another's set of data. Using someone else's data IS dangerous, because you cannot be 100% certain you are DUPLICATING the other load.

I fail to understand the reasoning for avoiding the borrow or purchase of a Crono. It is a great tool, not the end all answer, but a great tool that will help. Visual inspection of fired brass and primers are more tools.

Like I have said before, if you can buy guns, powder, brass, bullets, primers, and reloading equipment, you can afford to buy a $100 Crono...it's just as important to have as a press is.

I am done here...

jj

I won't pretend to know as much about reloading as you clearly do, and I absolutely appreciate your input, but I just don't understand how following published data load parameters from a manufacturer is the same as developing my own load.

I'm sorry if you feel that I've offended you somehow.

[Steve RA]

It isn't, many of us lived for years without a chronograph, first one I ever had was the Oehler with the little wire screens and back then they were all very expensive, it's only been in the last 20 years or so that the really affordable - that worked - chronos came along.

I've got a Pro Chrono and an Oehler 35P that I've had since they first came out.

As long as you stick to popular loading manuals you would probably never have any problems.

All that said, it certainly would not be a bad idea to get one, especially if you ever want to compete in anything that has Power Factor limits.

[Steve RA]

A modern chronograph is inexpensive and very accurate!

History
While ballistic chronographs have existed for more than a century, most of that time they were large, cumbersome, very expensive and difficult to use. It wasn’t until the 1960s that the first portable electronic chronographs became available to the common shooter — and even then they were still very costly and hard to use. You had to shoot through paper screens that had tiny wires running though them, and a sensor would detect when the resistance of the screen changed as some of the wires were broken by the bullet. These screens didn’t last very long in a shooting situation and had to be replaced when they could no longer detect the passage of the bullet. Time was wasted when things didn’t go as planned, and buying chronograph screens was an ongoing expense.

The early electronics were also quite troublesome from today’s perspective. They didn’t directly read out the velocity of the bullet. Instead, they registered the time that elapsed between screen one and screen two, detecting the passage of the bullet. And even that wasn’t direct! They did it by illuminating lights in various columns on a panel that the user had to interpret. The user took that number to a table and looked up the velocity. It wasn’t always given as one absolute speed, either. It was often given as a small range of velocities within which the bullet was traveling — like 2,140 to 2,148 feet per second. It was slow, crude and primitive, but it was the best we had at the time. This was also the time when we were using slide rules to solve complex math problems, and we accepted small margins of error when taking a reading.

These early electronic chronographs were also very imprecise by today’s standards. The precision of their internal “clock” was only about 1/10 to 1/40 that of today’s chronographs, so the number they gave…which was a best guess to begin with…was nowhere near as close as what we get from a modern instrument. Still, they gave us numbers, and we were fascinated by them.

When the first direct-reading chronograph (one that displayed the actual velocity of the projectile) came out, it boosted sales worldwide. Then, chronographs were easy enough for the average user. And when the first photo-sensitive sensors (skyscreens) came out, they did away with the expense and frustration of the old paper-and-wire screens. Both these things happened some time in the 1970s, if I remember correctly. That was when the private use of chronographs really took off.

[7kings]

Thanks! I probably will end up putting one on my list (I wasn't arguing against one - just trying to learn what I could about the reasoning and criticality of having one).

[wgj3]

I've been debating on chiming in on this...

I don't believe that you have to have a chrono to load using data from the powder manufacturer. You do have to make certain that you are truly following the data in regards to powder charge weight, projectile weight/construction, COAL, etc.

When deviating from published data, I do believe that a chrono is invaluable but even then it's certainly not a real safety mechanism if you think about it. You have to pull the trigger on the over-charged round to send the bullet across the chrono...

[Hi-Power Jack]

1. You have to make certain you are following the data (powder charge & COAL )

2. You have to pull the trigger on the over-charged round over the chrono...

Good points, but:

1. how many of us make mistakes and don't follow the data, and how many times are OAL incorrect for

The Bullet we happen to be using? If the scale is off, we may not always be aware of it - and OAL also.

And, don't forget my favorite - bullet setback.

2. Yeah, true, but only once - not a 1,000 times. Most modern guns will take a +P+ load a few times, but

you don't want to keep it up for a year or two.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Hi-Power Jack

[noylj]

A light target load of .45 Auto will not have the recoil of a full-house factory load.

A light target load in a new .45 Auto may not fully cycle since the gun is NOT broken-in and is still stiff and tight (hopefully).

You may need a lighter recoil spring, but vary the load up and down working on accuracy (if that is your goal) and don't worry about function until you find the load you like.

My best load with the Precision Bullet 200gn L-SWC is right at 4.8-5.2gn 231/HP38 at a COL of 1.270" (I load the SWC so the shoulder just barely touches the lede/rifling and the case head is flush or very slightly under flush with the barrel hood). That is the single BEST load for that bullet in my guns that I have found--and I have used almost all other suitable powders from N310 to Unique.

The right COL is not found in a manual very often. It is found by loading a given bullet long in at least two inert dummy rounds and working COL down to find the range where the rounds will feed and chamber without problems. If the COL range includes what is in the manual for that specific bullet (and that is fairly common), you can use the manual's COL as the minimum COL for that data. Otherwise, the COL within the working range is up to the reloader (maybe you want to load at the mid COL?) and you start at the start load (or, the lowest start load you can find after checking several manuals) and work up; however, I will reduce the start load by 2% or so if my working COL is shorter than the manual's.

Never ever needed a chronograph (chrony). A chrony is absolutely required for power factor, but not for reloading. I have never read a manual yet that said I needed a chrony for reloading

No danger loading without a chrony. There is very little that velocity tells you about pressure, unless you have a pressure-tested round of known velocity tested in YOUR gun and charge weight of the same lot of powder and you are testing using the same lot of bullets.

If you want some way to actually track pressure without having to go over pressure, you must do the following (I have done this several times over the last 30 years and it has seemingly worked well):

From Rocky Raab (on another forum several years ago):

Many times I’ve been asked how I determine how much pressure a given load develops. The answer is that I don’t. That is, I don’t determine the actual pressure in pounds per square inch. What I can observe, however, is relative pressure, and that is enough.

Let me explain: The actual pressure that a given rifle or pistol load develops when it is fired is important, both for performance reasons and for safety. As reloaders, we are vitally concerned with both; but we lack the means to measure pressure. The big ammunition companies have laboratory equipment that costs well into the millions of dollars, and even it only gives a rough approximation of what happens inside a cartridge case when the powder burns. That equipment can, however, determine peak or maximum pressures of ammunition. We amateurs have no such systems available to us. (Yes, I know all about Dr. Ken Oehler’s Model 43 Personal Ballistics Laboratory. It is truly a magnificent system for the very advanced amateur, but even he doesn’t claim that it measures actual pressures.)

The good news is that we don’t need million dollar laboratory systems that tell us actual pressures. Once peak pressures have been determined by a laboratory, all we have to determine is if our loads develop less or more pressure than factory ammunition. That’s what I mean by relative pressure.

Before I delve into this any more, allow me to give credit to a real expert. Ken Waters, a true reloader’s reloader, revealed all that I’m about to explain to me. It is explained in much more detail in the first chapter of Ken’s classic “Pet Loads Volume I.” I urge you to study Ken’s words in great detail, as he is a masterful wordsmith in addition to his skills at the reloading bench. And now, back to my effort.

The pressure generated by burning gunpowder exerts force in all directions equally. Part of that force is used to accelerate the bullet down the barrel, and the rest causes the brass case to expand in the gun’s chamber until it is stopped by the chamber walls. That is a good thing, because the expanded brass acts as a gasket or seal. Thus, the 50,000 pounds per square inch or so of incredibly hot gas and incandescent particles are kept within the gun and not blown at hypersonic speeds into our tender anatomy. (Keep the image that has just formed in your mind very fresh, and recall it when you are tempted to add just one more grain of powder.)

The brass case, having now expanded as far as it ever will, holds its new size and shape – except for a small amount of “springback” – after the bullet exits the muzzle and internal pressure drops once again to ambient, or zero. Thinner parts of the case expand more, but also spring back more, than thicker parts.

Where the case walls are almost their thickest, just ahead of the internal part of the case called the web, at its rear, the case expands to its largest diameter, and springs back least. The higher the pressure, the farther the case expands. And that, readers, is the secret of the method.

Let us take the venerable .30-06 case as an example. Using a precision micrometer that reads to four decimal places (.0000”), and measuring an unfired factory round, we find that the case measures .4700” in diameter at a point just ahead of the internal web (or about 3/8” ahead of the rim). After that round is fired, we measure again at the same point and find that it has expanded to .4720”. In THAT GUN, therefore, factory ammo expands .002” at what we must presume is normal working pressure for that caliber.

Now we prepare a reload using the same bullet weight and a powder charge at the start level from a current reloading manual. (We measure to be sure that our sizing die reduces the case to near-original size, as well.) After firing that round, we find that the case has now expanded to .4715”. We obviously have a safe load that develops less than factory pressures. A chronograph

would reveal that velocity is below that of the factory load, as well.

If we elect to increase the powder charge in small increments, we might notice a progression of expansion measurements. Succeeding loads might result in diameters of .4717, .4718 and .4719”. The next identical increase in powder charge might produce a diameter of .4721”. The chronograph, if used, would reveal steadily increasing velocities until that of the factory load were equaled or slightly bettered. At this point, we can assume that the pressure being developed is roughly equal to that of the factory ammunition, and we have reached a maximum load for that rifle. That is where we stop, even if the loading manual shows higher loads.

If we were to proceed with even higher charge levels, we would note several things: cases would expand to beyond that of factory ammunition, velocities would show ever-smaller increases per charge increase, and we would begin to see other signs of excess pressure. Namely, we might now observe sticky extraction, cratered or flattened primers, bright spots on the head of the case, or other classic signs. But all of those classic signs only begin to appear AFTER we have already gone beyond factory maximum pressures!

Notice that we do not now, nor ever did, know the actual pressure of any load fired. The precise numbers are immaterial. If we can assume that the factory ammunition produces pressures that are no higher than established maximums for that caliber – and we may safely make that assumption – then we can also conclude that our own reloads do not exceed that same level of pressure.

Better yet, we can observe a working maximum charge BEFORE any other signs of over-pressure even begin to appear. It is this ability to observe the APPROACH to maximum pressure that is so valuable. All other methods of judging pressure reveal only that a safe maximum has been PASSED. Determining relative pressure by the case measurement method allows us to observe when we are below, roughly equal to, or in excess of the pressure of factory-loaded ammunition.

When using this method, there are several things that must be remembered:

1. You must begin with fresh factory ammunition using the same bullet weight as you intend to reload.

2. The results are only valid in one particular gun. If you reload for more than one gun in a given caliber, the entire procedure must be repeated for each separate gun.

3. You should use a single lot of brass cases, or the factory cases themselves, for the tests. Cases of different composition, hardness, or dimensions will invalidate the results.

4. You must use a precision micrometer capable of measuring to at least four decimal places, and also develop a consistent measuring technique.

5. You must measure only at the “expansion ring,” a slightly bright ring that appears on the case wall ahead of the internal web, roughly 3/8” from the rim or ¼” ahead of the extractor groove or belt. This ring is easily seen on any fired case, and is not to be confused with an even brighter ring that presages a case separation.

6. All other safety practices normal to reloading must be scrupulously followed.

For a much more detailed explanation of this method, I once again encourage you to refer to Ken Water’s original work in his Pet Loads Volume I.

Rocky Raab

The only two caveats I have is that I always use virgin cases from the same manufacturer, and not work-hardened, many-times fired cases, and as soon as I reach the same expansion (measured with several cases and measuring at least four places on a case) as the factory round, I stop. Generally, before I ever get to that "max" expansion, I have passed the most accurate load any way.

For the guns I have used in tests, the expansion has been almost frighteningly repeatable around a case and from case-to-case, but I still want data points.

Edited August 31, 2015 by noylj