45ACP paper bunching boolits

[Evil Dog]

Just wondering what your preference is in 45ACP boolits for serious paper punching. I've been using cast 200gr SWC's (Lyman 452630 and 452460). Just got in some cast 185gr similar to the Lyman 452630 design. Tried them with +/- 3.8gr Bullseye but wasn't all that thrilled. Will try them maybe tomorrow with W-231 and Clays. What cast boolit do you prefer?

[MtGun44]

452460 used to be my most accurate boolit. In my Kimber the new MP 452 200 HP is the
new 'most accurate' at 50 yds. Have not yet tried it in my most accurate 1911, my
DW Pointman 7.

Bill

[Mk42gunner]

I like the Lyman 452460, although I hear lots of good things about the H&G #68.

I shot a lot of commercial hardcast prior to getting serious about casting, and it always seemed to me that the 200 gr SWC shot closer to the fixed sights on various .45's than any other weight.

No more than I shoot a .45 anymore, my two cavity works well.

Robert

[fredj338]

I like the Lyman 452460, although I hear lots of good things about the H&G #68.
I shot a lot of commercial hardcast prior to getting serious about casting, and it always seemed to me that the 200 gr SWC shot closer to the fixed sights on various .45's than any other weight.

No more than I shoot a .45 anymore, my two cavity works well.

Robert

I think that style 200grLSWC has been the benchmark for 1911s & target work for decades. Even the Magma mold w/ bb shoots pretty damn good.

[casterofboolits]

The H&G #68 is the boolit everyone seems to copy and offer a varient of, altho each of the imitators do not make an exact version of the H&G #68. I prefer the H&G #68 from H&G moulds.

IMHO, H&G moulds are the best moulds ever produced, and I am lucky enough to have several. Even a few two cavity made for the Magma Master caster.

[Moonie]

+1 for Mihec's 200gr HP

[Char-Gar]

I am with most of the others. Lyman 452460 and H & G 68 are the two standard paper punching bullets and both have proved their merit in millions and millions of rounds fired in Bullseye competition.

The H & G #68 was designed in 1939 by G.A. Hensley. It will weigh about 200 grains.

Ed Rowland designed the other bullet 1940. Rowland arriving at his design by modifying an older 280 grain 45 revolver bullet to maintain the bearing length, but loosing most of the weight of the nose. Several maker began to make molds for it as it was wildly popular with the paper punching crowd. Lyman brought our their version (452460) in 1949. It will weight about 215 grains.

Both the above designs are good ones. I have a preferance for the Lyman bullet. It will feed in any pistol and when pushed to the 850 -857 fps level, it is a good field load. I have a pair of Lyman 4 hole molds I use. It is just a good all around bullet for the 1911 auto-pistol.

I have a pair of Lyman four cavity 452460 molds I use and am well pleased with the bullets.

Although the 185 grains bullet do well, I am still a fan of the heavier bullets as they are more versatile.

[gray wolf]

What were you not thrilled about ?
How did you test them ?
Did you vary some powder charges ?
Did they work in your gun ?
Please get a little more involved with the why.

Sam

[R.M.]

I'd try 3.6 of bullseye if your spring is light enough. Works great in mine.

[243winxb]

Lyman 452630 http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct...tNumber=161788 best i have tried with 3.8 bullseye. Starline brass, not +P. If using range brass (pick ups) accuracy will be bad.

[243winxb]

Bullet alloy must be correct so that the Flat Base bullets base is not deformed by the sizing of the barrel. A bevel base bullet is more forgiving in this area. Eliminate end play Seat a lead bullet so it just touches the Leade/rifling for slow fire rounds. Measure the loaded rounds from the head to the shoulder of the bullet. There is a fine line between go and no go. This is the measurement i use, may not work in all, some chambers have long throats.

[Dave C.]

The H&G #68 over 4.2 Bullseye is one of the best feeding and very acurate at 50YDS.
It will even run most Hardball guns without a spring change. And yet it does not recoil bad.

Dave C.

[Dale53]

I have used both the H&G #130 and H&G #68 with excellent results. Over a period of five years, I shot 75,000 rounds of .45 ACP with these bullets during my IPSC years. I know that IPSC doesn't require great accuracy, but it absolutely DOES require flawless functioning. My 1911's will feed empty cases (no lie) so I never had functioning problems.

However, shooting a dozen or so major matches a year around the country, I was brought into close proximity to a LOT of VERY good shooters (and some newbie's just starting out). It soon became obvious to me that the H&G #68 with a flat base (really, a H&G #69) was the bullet of choice. It was designed to have the same "strike point" on the feeding ramp as .45 Hardball.

I have access to a Ransom Rest and had an opportunity to run a number of different 1911's and different loads over the RR. I didn't find any particular accuracy difference between the various popular bullet design SWC's. However, there IS a difference in functioning and some cut clean holes and some did not.

My preference gravitated to the H&G#68 with flat base. MiHec's rendition of the bullet has become my bullet of choice for the above reasons. I keep several thousand of these cast and lubed, ready to go. I cast mine of WW's + 2% tin and size to .452". I shoot more of these than any other bullet. I have slowed a bit and only run about 5000 rounds per year through my 625's and 1911's (mostly 625's, these days).

On the other hand, if your bullet pleases you, there is little reason to change. If you are buying a bullet mould, I would choose the original design (MiHec does a nice job, here) and get a multicavity mould.

One further note, use the barrel from YOUR 1911 to use as a seating depth gauge. When the loaded round is dropped into the chamber the base of the cartridge should be flush with the barrel hood. If not, adjust the seating depth until it is. This will give you the BEST overall length for YOUR chamber. In addition to trouble free feeding, you will be headspacing with the bullet for consistent ignition.

YMMV
Dale53

[runfiverun]

i replaced my h&g 68 2 cav with a lyman 452460 4 cavity and haven't looked back.
the pic above is the normal ,what everybody says to seat to.
both of my stock type 1911's like the shoulders seated flush to the case mouth, and one likes a slight roll crimp on the shoulder,no matter if its the lyman, h&g, 230 rn or 225 fp or 160 rnfp.
titegroup and unique are the powders of choice.

[mpmarty]

The Lyman 452xxx and H&G 68 boolits will not work in Springfield XD45s worth a darn. Truncated Cone shapes will work in the XD however.

[fredj338]

The Lyman 452xxx and H&G 68 boolits will not work in Springfield XD45s worth a darn. Truncated Cone shapes will work in the XD however.

True, can't get them to run better than about 80%. A LTC or LRN is the ticket for the XD & the G36 as well.

[That'll Do]

I use Mihec's version of the H&G 68 (flat base version) or Saeco's #069, which is also a close copy of the H&G 68.

For paper punching I stick to using Bullseye at 4.0gr or W-231 at 4.5gr. I've also used Clays at 4.0grs; very clean and accurate to boot. I've briefly experimented with other powders, such as Red Dot, but I haven't had to time to accurately compare them (was in a motorcycle accident...)

The loads I listed are much more accurate than I am, but at 15 yds freehand, the only time the boolits hit outside of the 8-ring is when I goof up.

[Artful]

Another vote for 452460 lyman - when I shot bullseye it was the ticket.

[220swiftfn]

Or for those that like older molds, Lyman 452488, similar to the Saeco 130 195 grains.

Dan

[skeet1]

The 452460 with Bullseye or Unique, the perfect combination.

Skeet1