New guy with a .45 Colt design question

[C. Latch]

Hi folks,

This is my first post. I've been lurking here every now and then for years, and I started casting about 6 months ago, and have lurked a lot more since then. I've read until my eyes blurred, bought a number of cheap molds, made a few bullets, and shot more than I have shot in years.

I've cast a few bullets for various muzzleloaders so far, but my main focus has been casting for a .45 Colt (Ruger Bisley Blackhawk 5.5"). I bought two molds for it: The first is a Lee 452-255-rf 2-cavity, it casts easily, most of my bullets (COWW scrounged from a local shop) come out fairly consistent, and it has shown great accuracy potential (sized to .452 w/ push-through sizer and lubed with a witch's brew I cobbled together at home) with several powders ranging from mild to wild.

The second bullet I have been using is from a Lee 452-300-rf 6-cavity. I'm using aluminum Gator checks and have shot this bullet very slow and very fast and several points in between; the only constant is that it groups well enough to kill deer at short range (2" to 3" at 25 yards) but tumbles somewhere short of the 100-yard mark, making hits on anything smaller than a car hood somewhat problematic. I *assume* that this is due to the wide meplat (0.36" or so) and relatively low velocity; I've shot it up to a bit over 1200 FPS but honestly do not see the need for such power levels for anything I intend to do with this gun.

That brings me to the crux of my question and the reason for finally joining so I could post here:

I want to have a mold cut (by mountain molds) but despite reading volumes of stuff here and elsewhere about molds, I still have a few misgivings about designing my own mold.

Here's what I know:

-I need something that will fly well at moderate velocity (there are no wooly mammoths where I hunt)
-I'd like something heavy enough to reliably penetrate any deer from any angle (with the remote possibility of being used on elk one day) and it seems as if 300 grains is sufficient for this. If this is true, I don't want to go any higher because I don't feel a need to put up with the extra recoil. I don't mind recoil, but see no need to subject myself to it without cause.
-Based on everything I have read, at moderate velocity, the bigger meplat I can get away with, the happier I will be. The 255-grain bullet that is shooting so well for me has a .32 meplat, the 300 that tumbles has a .36 or so. Somewhere between those two is what I want.
-I know I can get away with a .45 nose length in my cylinder, but am not sure that such a long nose will leave enough bullet in the case to ensure good alignment if it only weighs 300 grains, and I'm not sure I need such a long nose with my desired power level (The Lee 452-300 drops at 309 grains before I add a GC, and I chrono'ed those at ~1165 with N110, the powder I have plenty of on hand, at what should have been a pretty mild pressure and with a lot of bullet stuffed into the case (seated to rear groove) compared to what a .45 nose would be) and I'd like to settle on a load at that level or slightly less). It's not like I'm out of case capacity.
-I do not want a GC bullet. I've had my cylinder throats opened to .4525 and intend to lap my barrel eventually, but leading isn't an issue even now with my choked barrel (.450 or so in the frame opening) and the checks basically double the cost of each bullet and make me add another step to casting. If this was a .454 Casull I might want a GC but I don't see the point at the velocities I want to shoot.

Things I do not know:

-Mountain molds offers the option of a secant ogive instead of tangent. In the world of jacketed rifle bullets that can be a real advantage; here it seems that the only advantage would be in allowing me to leave slightly more weight (and length) in the case for any given bullet weight, versus a tangent ogive). I need some input here.
-I understand what is meant by groove-to-band ratio but have no idea what the advantages or disadvantages are to different ratios.
-How much crimp groove do I need? I don't have the skill or instruments to measure the Lee crimp grooves, but I haven't yet experienced a noticeable amount of crimp jump even with the 300's at over 1200 FPS when crimped with a regular Redding seat/crimp die.

And the biggest question...meplat size. I've read tons of stuff on shooting critters with flat-point bullets, but have never fired one at a deer. I do know that people seem to quite happily and easily kill deer with pretty much anything with a meplat bigger than .30 and a velocity of 900FPS or more; I also know that the .32 meplat bullets I've shot will pretty much crowd into the same hole and the .36s tumble before they reach the range I'm comfortable shooting at critters with a handgun.

What are the odds that I can get away with 76% meplat (0.3435") on a secant-ogive .452-300 bullet with a .45" nose at 1075 to 1175FPS? By 'get away with', I mean I'd like a bullet that would fly well out to at least 125 yards (for hunting) and preferably 200 yards or more (for plinking). Should I go with a shorter nose to put more bullet in the case? Should I make the meplat smaller, or try to bump it up another percent or two to squeeze all the tissue damage out of the bullet that I can get?

I'm sure I am leaving something out - I've been fiddling with this handgun for about 3 months now and have shot a number of loads with a number of powders and have learned a few things and found many new questions along the way; it's hard to boil all of that down into a single concise post, but I've tried. Anyway, thanks in advance for your help.

[RobS]

What you need to do is possibly ask around in the Boolit swappin section for different types of boolit designs and then see what works best so you don't have to lay down the $$$ and not know. I have a 310 that I designed over at Accurate Molds and it is has proven very accurate in my Ruger Bisley 5.5" barreled 45 Colt as well as in my Ruger Super Redhawk 454 Casull. I also have a 260 grain LFN style design that also does quite well too. I'm a LFN style boolit person myself as I've had an easier time finding accuracy with multiple different loads (different powders/charges boolit combos).

As far as secant vs. tangent:
I've designed both and in a revolver I've found that they both shoot well but the tangent profile will give just a bit more bearing surface which I feel helps with accuracy as the nose of the boolit guides better than a secant and the nose makes contact sooner on the forcing cone and lands which keeps the back end nearer to the cylinder throats as the nose hits. I believe this helps keep the boolit straight and if a person has boolit slump even more so. Just my thought as I first started out with secant designs and changed everything over to tangent nose profiles.

This design is about what you are looking at and is one I push out at 1200 fps with Ramshot Enforcer or beyond with H110.
http://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=45-310B-D.png

You could get by with a .400" nose length easily in the Ruger BH cylinder but I keep it at .380" for balance and the fact I use this design in a lever action rifle.

And then this one is a 345 grainer that is also a very accurate design:
http://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=45-345A-D.png

[DougGuy]

You will get quite a few opinions on this one, you've already got arguably the best deer/elk boolit with the Lee 300 RF GC. Straight ACWW or 50/50 WW and pure lead, with your gas check. As far as wide meplat hunting boolits go, for that caliber the Lee is about all most could want.

If you are getting instability out of those, they may need to be pushed a little harder out of the muzzle. I know the LFN boolits have to be pushed as hard as I can push them out of a Vaquero that has been taylor throated in the barrel and reamed to .4525" in the cylinders. I have better accuracy out of the shorter nose dual crimp groove Lee boolits and don't have to drive them as hard but this is my in the woods up close and personal load whose primary job is as a sidearm to accompany a .308 or a shotgun in a tree stand, at less than 25yds.

Those look really good RobS.. Welcome to the forum C. Latch, always interested in another's experiences with WFN boolits.

[454PB]

I think the Lyman 45- 270 SAA would be just the ticket for what you want, but RobS has a good idea there.....do some swapping and decide what you like best.

I use the Lee 310 GC in my .454's and have had no problems with boolit slip from the case. Proper case tension is the key, followed by a healthy crimp.

[Mk42gunner]

Another Lurker hooked, Welcome aboard.

I shoot the Lyman 452424 from my Ruger Vaquero, it does all that I need a handgun boolit to do. In your case, your Lee 452-255RF seems to shoot acceptably, so I think that is what I would use for deer and while gaining experience. It may not penetrate fully if you do a lot of texas heart shots, but I have never shot a deer in the behind in my life.

I would ask for a few examples of your desired heavier boolits, and take your time deciding.

You really don't need a big crimp groove, case neck tension does more to hold a boolit than crimping does.

Robert

[Changeling]

This was an extremely well written post in regard to what you were looking for, I tried asking the same questions also, with about the same results.

RobS does have a very nice bullet design.

Good luck in your quest.

[Changeling]

Hi RobS. Have you ever shot that 45-310B at low velocities like 1000 or so, will it hold accuracy out to 100 + yards?

[RobS]

As I mentioned in my above post I first started out with secant designs and have 4 or 5 secants over on the Accurate Molds catalog but the tangent profiles seem to win out for accuracy (they are very close though) and I run a 75% meplat which is in between the WFN and LFN meplat diameters for the 45 Cal class.

Changeling:

The 310 grainer above does real well at 1000 fps with Herco powder and is a lighter Ruger Only 45 Colt load. The 310 shoots very well with some of the slower powders (H110, Enforcer, 2400) and run anywhere from 1100 fps to over 1300 in the Ruger 45 Colt.

The 345 didn't do too bad either at 950 fps, again with Herco but I tend to see the groups really pull in when I run this one 1100 fps plus with slower powders.

My Ruger 454 Casull SRH shoots both of these designs like freaking lasers in to nice tight groups at 1100 fps +.

At 100 yard distances these designs are good enough to hit orange clay pigeons once I figure out the elevation on my revolvers. In the lever action these two designs are good way past 100 yards and as far as I would want to shoot something with open or buckhorn sights.

[C. Latch]

Thanks for the replies, folks. I actually looked at the 270-SAA mold (and if I didn't like the 452-255 so much I'd want to try the 270-SAA.....I can already tell I'll eventually end up with some sort of Keith-ish SWC mold 'just because') but for the price I'd rather spend a few more bucks and get exactly what I want. That 310-grain mold from accurate molds looks like pretty much exactly what I want; I scrolled through some of their designs and that one's as close as any to what I want (or think I want.....).

If I have MM make a mold, I'll stick with the default crimp setting - I've had no problems getting good crimps with my current setup, and seriously doubt that I shoot many (if any) max loads, so from what I'm reading here, that should be ok.

From what I'm gathering, nobody's making an issue out of any particular groove-band ratio, so I'll just stick with the default there. I'll probably try the 76% meplat - with the understanding that it probably has a velocity floor at which it will tumble, but hopefully that floor is much higher than the big WFN Lee 452-300.

As a side note, when I chrono'ed the 452-300, seated to the rear crimp groove in front of 20.0 of VV N110, with a CCI LPP in Starline brass, they averaged about 1165 (measured at 10' and adjusted to muzzle). A friend ran my load through quickload and told me I probably had a grain of wiggle room with that load, but 20.0 was about the recoil level I wanted. As an interesting (to me) side note, I chrono'ed the same powder with a 300-grain Hornady XTP; it gave almost exactly 100FPS less velocity at equal charge weight. I wish I'd known that two decades ago when my grandpa and I were pushing jacketed bullets as hard as we dared out of his blackhawks.

Oh, and I'd totally jump on trying to swap out some bullets to try a few different designs, but the wife and I are in an apartment now; my closest range is my dad's farm, it's an hour away. The wife and I are hoping to have a house built on some land we own in a few years, but until then, range days are limited (but much more frequent now than they were before I started casting!).

Thanks a lot!

[RobS]

You will be fine with keeping the default settings for the crimp groove and groove/band ratios (equal). I run my LFN style designs with a 75% meplat so another 1% I doubt will make much if any difference here as I usually have a boolit diameter of .455 when my molds are cut so that's .341" meplat vs a .452 diameter's boolit with a 76% meplat = .343" meplat. I've not seen any of my two designs tumbling but then again I've only shot them at 200 yards from a lever action and 100 yards max with a open sited revolver and only do this when I want to play at shooting orange clay pigeons sitting on the birm. I typically shoot revolvers at 30-40 yards maybe 50 yards.

[C. Latch]

RobS,

I noticed on your first linked design from accurate molds that, like most of the other .45 molds there, you're using a nose that's a good bit shorter than you could use in a Blackhawk cylinder. For instance, my Lee 452-300 mold has about a .355 nose when seated to the rear groove, most designs I see on that page have a .35 to .40 nose, then a few redhawk-only designs go beyond .45.

I realize that I don't NEED a longer nose, but other than probably needing another grain of powder to get to a particular velocity, is there any disadvantage to a longer (.43-.45) nose versus a shorter (.35-.40) one? My throats are .4525 and I'll size to .452 (if my lee push-through sizer is to be trusted) and with a .45 nose I still have 0.30" or more in the case and 0.50" of bearing length overall.

[RobS]

I went with a .380 nose to accommodate a lever action however it turned out to be a great balanced boolit design that I wouldn't change for anything. A longer nose may have potential for a bit more velocity but it will only be at the top end. Longer nose lengths also makes it harder to use the slower burners at moderate velocities/pressures especially the slower ball powders as there is more open volume inside the case. It will take more powder to hit the same velocities with a design that has less body in the case and as I sit here texting another forum member who also shoots a 345 grain LFN style design but with a longer nose the same charge of Enforcer/AA4100 does 80 fps slower from an alike Ruger Bisley 45 Colt 5 1/2 barrel with the same cylinder throat diameter has my revolver. I also don't like to have my boolits right at the near end of my cylinders as the flame from the powder can erode the meplat/nose. More boolit inside the case can provide more boolit tension to keep it from jumping crimp.

Here are the two different designs:
Mine again: http://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=45-345A-D.png
My friend's: http://www.accuratemolds.com/bullet_detail.php?bullet=45-340E-D.png

His is also a tangent profile nose which gives him more bearing surface and the design is accurate too.

[C. Latch]

Ok, everything in your last post made perfect sense. I don't foresee using this one in anything but the Blackhawk, but the implication of your last post is that for someone wanting to shoot at moderate speeds, taking full advantage of the entire cylinder length would be counterproductive. I may split the difference and go with .400 or .410. That gives me a bit more powder space; if I have to add a half-grain of powder to get back to my target velocity it isn't a big deal.

[RobS]

You won't see much difference with powders such as Unique or Herco, maybe 800X etc as they are higher energy powders but with the slower burners you'll need more powder to get closer velocities between the different case volumns. 2400 will probably be a good powder for mid to near upper end loads for what you are doing and something in the Unique range will work for those 850 to 950 fps area.

[C. Latch]

With the powder market being what it is right now, I'm pretty much stuck with what I have on hand....I have absolutely no desire to stray from VV N110, though. It really does seem to be a great .45 powder. I actually loaded up a few more of the Lee .452-300s tonight; I have a pile of them cast, sized, lubed and checked; might as well shoot them. I'm going to nudge them a bit faster and see if stability improves.

[RobS]

VV N110 is from what I've heard and seen from others is to be a tremendous powder similar in nature to 2400 in physical characteristics but yields higher velocities and lower pressures while being a very clean powder. I just never liked the price. Should I be in your shoes, knowing you don't mind the price and have N110 already, I probably wouldn't look any further for a slower powder considering what you are comfortable with and wanting to do. I don't now what other powders you have on hand but and don't know if this interests you but a bit quicker powder can push a lead 300 grainer out to 1000 fps without hitting high pressures or spikes in the Ruger 45 Colt large frames.

[Changeling]

There is more information one can really use in this thread (statistic numbers, not letters) than I have ever seen. Rob has displayed an excellent knowledge of bullet design and not balked when asked questions no one else seems to want to answer (like accuracy at distances)!
I have asked about accuracy up to and past 100 yd many times (relative to meplat size) and necessary velocity. However he is the only one that has answered (not perfect), but better than anyone!

If anyone feels this isn't true, just post your findings, I'll be glad to reply.

Thanks Rob.

[C. Latch]

I agree that this thread has been very useful. When I started loading for my .45 I knew that full wadcutters would tumble inside of 100 yards, and knew that the WFN design was somewhere on a sliding scale between wadcutter and spitzer, and on some level I guess I expected them to tumble eventually, but I was expecting it at 150 or 200 yards or more. Instead, I got it at 50 yards or so. I suppose it would be possible, in theory, to figure a formula of bullet diameter, weight, meplat, and barrel twist, and figure a floor velocity below which it would tumbe, then use a ballistics calculator to estimate what velocity you'd have to start it at in order to reach a particular distance before hitting that floor.

I loaded a few more of the 452-300s at what should be ~1200 FPS (0.5 grains more n110 than what averaged 1165) and will shoot them at 100 yards and see if they tumble. If I can get them to 100 yards, that will take care of most of my plinking and all of my hunting needs.

I ordered a mold anyway, though; 300 grains, .453, .400 nose, 76% meplat, tangent. MM's website says 3-7 weeks lead time; if I don't get it for 7 weeks I'll be pushed to work up a load before deer season, so I need to have a plan B. That may end up being my little 452-255-rf, which shoots very well with VV Tin Star. I'll try it with a slower powder and see how it does around ~1300-1400 FPS in the meantime.

Thanks, everyone, for the help.

[C. Latch]

BTW, changeling, I saw your other thread in the wheelgun forum about meplats, etc. When I get to shoot my 452-300s at the latest power level I'll let you know how they do. Likewise when the new mold comes in.

[bigboredad]

That's because Rob has hands on experience and buy into or pass on inter myths. If Rob says something works its because he has done now you and your gun are different but I guarantee what he posts is what is the real deal. He has helped me more with .45 colt than any number of people who will tell you how much they know. Rob is Mr. .45 colt

[RobS]

I agree that this thread has been very useful. When I started loading for my .45 I knew that full wadcutters would tumble inside of 100 yards, and knew that the WFN design was somewhere on a sliding scale between wadcutter and spitzer, and on some level I guess I expected them to tumble eventually, but I was expecting it at 150 or 200 yards or more. Instead, I got it at 50 yards or so. I suppose it would be possible, in theory, to figure a formula of bullet diameter, weight, meplat, and barrel twist, and figure a floor velocity below which it would tumbe, then use a ballistics calculator to estimate what velocity you'd have to start it at in order to reach a particular distance before hitting that floor.

I loaded a few more of the 452-300s at what should be ~1200 FPS (0.5 grains more n110 than what averaged 1165) and will shoot them at 100 yards and see if they tumble. If I can get them to 100 yards, that will take care of most of my plinking and all of my hunting needs.

I ordered a mold anyway, though; 300 grains, .453, .400 nose, 76% meplat, tangent. MM's website says 3-7 weeks lead time; if I don't get it for 7 weeks I'll be pushed to work up a load before deer season, so I need to have a plan B. That may end up being my little 452-255-rf, which shoots very well with VV Tin Star. I'll try it with a slower powder and see how it does around ~1300-1400 FPS in the meantime.

Thanks, everyone, for the help.

It will likely be 4 weeks for Dan over there at Mountain Molds he does excellent work. I have had him cut quite a few molds for me and each was well finished. I think you'll have a pretty good shooter with such design just size the boolit to fit your revolver.

[Pooch]

Question. What are your cylinder throat diameters? If your groove diameter is smaller than your cylinder throat you're in good shape and you must size to the cylinder throat diameter. If your throat diameters are smaller than your groove diameter then you are looking at getting the cylinder throats reamed. Take some really accurate measurements.
I shoot a Ruger Blackhawk in .45 Colt. My groove diameter is .451 but my throat diameter is .454. Only when I sized to the throat diameter did I start having really good results. The difference was like night & day. I've been shooting the LEE 452-255-RF with 8.0 grains of Unique behind it.

[C. Latch]

Question. What are your cylinder throat diameters? .

I had them reamed to .4525 before I ever fired the gun. Barrel is choked to .449ish at the frame, then .452ish afterwards. I hate the choke, but haven't had time to firelap it yet. I have a few bullets gritted up and ready to load for lapping, but I'm going to do that carefully and slowly.....my lapping bullets, with compound embedded in them, are larger than my cylinder throats and I do NOT want to lap my cylinder throats.

[Char-Gar]

Long ago Elmer Keith designed a bullet to just what you want. It is called 454424. A few years ago David Scovill did a little improvement to add a smidge more length and weight. It is called RCBS 45 270 SA.

No need to reinvent the wheel. Nothing you come up with will be any better. If you want to do it just for fun that is OK with me, but don't think you will improve anything.

[bigboredad]

That's kind of narrow mindef

[RobS]

Long ago Elmer Keith designed a bullet to just what you want. It is called 454424. A few years ago David Scovill did a little improvement to add a smidge more length and weight. It is called RCBS 45 270 SA.

No need to reinvent the wheel. Nothing you come up with will be any better. If you want to do it just for fun that is OK with me, but don't think you will improve anything.

Yep.........been there done that:
45 Cal. Boolits
http://i612.photobucket.com/albums/tt206/RobS01/45calbulletsSM.jpg

This photo doesn't even have 4 or 5 other boolit designs I've shot, two of which are those up top in this thread my current LFN style 310 and 345 grainers. I can think of the Lee 45-255-RF that isn't up there either but then again it's not a Keith so it wouldn't be "better" I suppose. If you look up there the 454424 and the RCBS 45-270-SAA are there too along with the RCBS Keith style 255 and then the two 280 grain Keiths that 45 2.1 designed for BRP and Mihec. Well I suppose I'm fooling myself and my targets are a figure of my imagination.

[C. Latch]

LOL.....I have no doubt that the Keith bullet is a good one.

[DougGuy]

C. Latch.. I applaud your quest for the reinvented/perfected .45 Colt boolit, but have you contacted Ruger about the choke? It would be worth giving them a call and describing the threaded part of the barrel and see if they will issue an RMA and a prepaid shipping label for it.

[Char-Gar]

I like guns. I like to shoot guns. I like to handload for the guns I shoot. I like to shoot cast bullets in my guns. I like to cast bullet for the guns I shoot. I like to try different cast bullet designs and I have been doing all of the foregoing for over 50 years.

I have no issues with the guy who like to collect bullets molds and play with them looking for something magic. But, I don't believe in magic. Is that narrow minded? I don't think so, it is just a statement of fact based on my experience. The two bullets will do the job as well or better than all of the other designs out there. They are not magic, just meet the needs of the OP as set out in the original post.

I do sometimes wonder how firm a grasp on reality, some of the denizens of these gun boards have. It is OK to have fun casting and loading and shooting, but there is no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. The government found it and taxed it out of existance many years ago.

For those of you who fret about constrictions, hunt up the post of Outpost75 a day or so ago in the subject. Ruger stopped using crush fit threads well over 20 years ago. Ruger now uses a locking compound to keep the barrel from turning and any sixgun whose breech end of the barrel is .0005 under will be fixed by Ruger. That means they will install a new barrel.

[C. Latch]

Doug,

It hasn't made it to the top of my worry list yet. I'd rather have the gun with the choke in the barrel and be able to shoot it on the rare and unpredictable days that I get to shoot than send it off for a week or three, miss a couple of range days with it, then not get another range day until deer season was already open.

Char-gar,
I don't think you're narrow minded; just maybe a little dense. Nobody here has mentioned looking for (or believing in) any sort of magic; I asked a technical question, I got an answer; if that disturbs you log off of the internet and go shoot something.

[RobS]

I like guns. I like to shoot guns. I like to handload for the guns I shoot. I like to shoot cast bullets in my guns. I like to cast bullet for the guns I shoot. I like to try different cast bullet designs and I have been doing all of the foregoing for over 50 years.

I have no issues with the guy who like to collect bullets molds and play with them looking for something magic. But, I don't believe in magic. Is that narrow minded? I don't think so, it is just a statement of fact based on my experience. The two bullets will do the job as well or better than all of the other designs out there. They are not magic, just meet the needs of the OP as set out in the original post.

I do sometimes wonder how firm a grasp on reality, some of the denizens of these gun boards have. It is OK to have fun casting and loading and shooting, but there is no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. The government found it and taxed it out of existance many years ago.

For those of you who fret about constrictions, hunt up the post of Outpost75 a day or so ago in the subject. Ruger stopped using crush fit threads well over 20 years ago. Ruger now uses a locking compound to keep the barrel from turning and any sixgun whose breech end of the barrel is .0005 under will be fixed by Ruger. That means they will install a new barrel.

Nope, not what the original poster wanted in his original post in reference to your suggested 454424 or the RCBS 45-270-SAA. He even said no politely earlier in the thread because he had so much success with the Lee 255 grain RF.


What are the odds that I can get away with 76% meplat (0.3435") on a secant-ogive .452-300 bullet with a .45" nose at 1075 to 1175FPS? By 'get away with', I mean I'd like a bullet that would fly well out to at least 125 yards (for hunting) and preferably 200 yards or more (for plinking). Should I go with a shorter nose to put more bullet in the case? Should I make the meplat smaller, or try to bump it up another percent or two to squeeze all the tissue damage out of the bullet that I can get?



Thanks for the replies, folks. I actually looked at the 270-SAA mold (and if I didn't like the 452-255 so much I'd want to try the 270-SAA.....I can already tell I'll eventually end up with some sort of Keith-ish SWC mold 'just because') but for the price I'd rather spend a few more bucks and get exactly what I want. That 310-grain mold from accurate molds looks like pretty much exactly what I want; I scrolled through some of their designs and that one's as close as any to what I want (or think I want.....).

[bigboredad]

I like casting reloading shooting and hitting what I shoot at. I've tried the magical Keith bullets both the 255 and 270 and while they are OK I have found bullets better than OK. I've shot 2 or 3 of Rob's and they did better than OK and I've shot bullets that subsonic designed and it did better than OK and even the bullet I like and shoot most of that does better than OK is my own design. But that's after spending over 2 years trying to make the rcbs 270saa shoot better than OK. So I guess I'm narrow minded for thinking the .45 colt can shoot better than OK. You can't honestly believe that if Mr. Keith were alive today and had all the modern technology that we have today that he would still be happy with what he made so many years past. I don't believe for a second he would have stopped looking for and finding a better bullet. So if a guy s happy with OK than don't tell everyone else to be happy with just ok

[Char-Gar]

OK guys...I may be dense, but I can take a hint. Have fun in your quest.

[Changeling]

This has been a very clean thread with some awesome information. I and a lot of guys would like to see it continue (myself included). There is no reason to become beligerant by anyone.

Add what you have to say and bow out, if you have said something that others think is factual/interesting they will respond, but if most think there is something wrong with your thinking, add a conclusion and quit!

Continuing to argue just RUINS it for everyone!!

[white eagle]

I am going down this 45 colt road again for the second time with a revo and three times total if you include my wifes 45 colt rifle
have bought and sold so many 45 c molds would make your head spin
like some have said alot of time is spent on boolit shape
I won't say one design is better than the other however o/a shape plays a role in accuracy
everyone has their own style of shooting and even gripping a handgun if you find a design that works use it if it don't leave it and move on who know you may want to revisit it at a later point
its all fun your journey down this road of casting as a newbie is just starting

[Changeling]

BTW, changeling, I saw your other thread in the wheelgun forum about meplats, etc. When I get to shoot my 452-300s at the latest power level I'll let you know how they do. Likewise when the new mold comes in.

Thanks, I would really appreciate that. Your post and answers from Rob kept me from making a costly mistake!

[C. Latch]

Well, I haven't shot the .45 any more since I started this thread, but hopefully I'll get to shoot some this weekend.

Also, when I came home today a nice little cardboard box from Idaho was in the mail. Looks like I'll get to cast some bullets with the new mold......maybe tonight.

[geargnasher]

C. Latch, I've enjoyed reading your posts, you seem to be someone truly interested in learning the "ins and outs" of your undertaking and have obviously done quite a bit of homework. Only two things I can add to what has been mentioned already: Alloy characteristics and trajectory. Softer, malleable alloys kill thin-skinned game better at lower velocities in my experience, and I think many will concur. I'm talking heart/liver/lung shots under 1500 fps with handguns, most shots being under 80 yards. Trajectory is, of course, a factor of ballistic coefficient, velocity, boolit weight, and distance.

While several approaches can be made to .45-caliber handgun hunting of deer-type animals, I tend to prefer lighter boolits with 40-65% meplats, heat-treated low-antimony alloy in the 10-12 bhn range, muzzle velocity in the 900-1200 fps arena, and 255-grains seems "magic" to me. I can build loads that shoot very accurately at these speeds, have excellent trajectory due to light weight, and are simply devastating to pigs and whitetail deer without destroying too much of what I want to eat. For longer ranges, I defer to another techique: Rock-hard, tough, tangential-ogive boolits with large meplats pushed as hard as practical. Think LBT-style WFN boolits cast of heat-treated or water-quenched clip-on wheel weight alloy plus about 1% tin added. I learned that from 44Man here on castboolits. The meplat does the killing, the hardness and nose base shape/angle takes the rifling and guides the boolit from cylinder to barrel with minimal skidding or bending damage, and large doses of slow-burning powder gets the velocity and gentle launch that helps achieve excellent accuracy past 100 yards. There are plenty of ways to get a .45 boolit to go from revolver cylinder to the "boiler room" of a deer, and most of them work pretty well if YOU do your part as a hunter and shooter, but what you do as a boolit crafter and handloader can improve or detract from the effect.

"Keith" boolits work fine, I personally prefer my revolver boolits to have no step from ogive to full diameter because my guns tell me so through targets. Opinions vary, that is mine based only on my experience. I think RFN boolits tend to shoot better in my guns because of better self-alignment qualities across the board regardless of alloy type or launch condition. 44Man will tell you that a hard boolit with an ogive curving up to full diameter will bump the cylinder into perfect alignment during the throat-cone transition, and I think he's right based on recovered boolit samples I have from tight guns, loose guns, soft alloy, and hard alloy. Harder alloys with a little cylinder wiggle launched with slow powders, standard primers, and a LOT of case tension (and UNIFORM case tension) outshoot them all, but don't expand much on game. Hence the WFN and a lot of velocity to make them kill better.

The last deer I killed was an exotic, load was 7.8 grains of Unique and a Lee 255-RFN crimped in the lube groove. Alloy was soft enough to scratch with a fingernail and could be hammered into a 2" coin without splitting the edges. At 45 yards it jumped straight up, and ran about ten yards and expired.

My new favorite that I've put over 300 downrange in six .45 Colt revolvers and various rifles in the past two weekends is the Accurate 45-255C. It is the first boolit out of now 14 moulds that shoots very well to very best in ALL of my .45 Colts, and has every single quality I look for in a boolit. If it kills as well as the Lee, Lyman, and RCBS RFN equivalents I'll sell all the other moulds I have for that cartridge.

If you can post pictures, I think I can speak for most of us here that we'd love to see the fruits of your first casting session with your new mould. Do keep us posted!

Gear

[C. Latch]

geargnasher, that's a really interesting post. I have considered trying to soften up the WW alloy I'm using, but I don't want to go *too* soft. I've killed a truckload of deer with jacketed bullets and agree that the more expansion one can get (with sufficient penetration) the faster critters die, and see no reason why the same wouldn't hold true here. It's all about tissue damage, and without a doubt the bullets I'm dealing with have penetration ability to spare, so I'd be happy to trade off some penetration for expansion....problem is, that means using pure lead, of which I have relatively little, or tin.

I'd love to add a couple percent tin to all of my bullets, but I'm cheap, and the thrift stores around here have almost no cheap pewter. I found one real pewter candlestick, but it was $7 for less than a half-pound. I do have 5-6 pounds of WW with 1% tin and another pound of SOWW with about 3% tin in it. I could probably mix those together and end up with something softer than WW that would cast very well. I also have a half-pound or so of 95/5 solder laying around.


FWIW I cast some bullets last night and the mold dropped bullets effortlessly. I just didn't get it hot enough to make pretty bullets, and it was way after dark when I started casting, and I had turned the pot off before I figured out that only the last few bullets were properly filled out. Gonna try to cast more tonight then post a picture.

[Piedmont]

You can't honestly believe that if Mr. Keith were alive today and had all the modern technology that we have today that he would still be happy with what he made so many years past. I don't believe for a second he would have stopped looking for and finding a better bullet. So if a guy s happy with OK than don't tell everyone else to be happy with just ok

Well let's look at the record. He designed the Keith .44 bullet around 1927 which he followed within the next decade with versions of the same thing in .45 AR, .45 Colt, and .38 Special. He had had custom designs made in the mid 1920s that he didn't like as well because they didn't shoot well at long range. The last bullet I can remember him 'designing' was a .41 Keith by Hensley & Gibbs because Lyman had made a .41 Keith with no input from him and he didn't like how they designed it. That would have been somewhere around 1965 and it was basically the same thing he had been using for the last more than 35 years, just in a new diameter.

So Keith had and carried the .44 Keith by 1928 and carried it in his .44 Specials until the magnum came out about 1955, then he carried it in that until his stroke put him in a nursing home in the early 1980s. So he had over 50 years to keep improving his design and did not do it. What kind of "modern technology" do you think he would have needed to improve his design? What makes you think after 50 years of sticking to something WITH HIS NAME ON IT that if he were alive now he would suddenly resume the quest for the perfect bullet? He thought he HAD the perfect bullet and the perfect cartridge (.44 Mag, of which he kept reminding everyone he was its daddy, whether he was or not).

You are doing the same thing guys on the internet do when they say if he had had the .454, or .475 Linebaugh or .480 Ruger he would have switched. No he wouldn't. And he actually tested the early .454 Casull and did not like it--thought it operated at too high pressure.

[bigboredad]

OK thank you for sharing your opinion

[C. Latch]

Well, I've figured out that casting at night is no fun - the lights on the porch are poor, and I can't tell if any given bullet is 'right' until I finish up and haul them all inside. I'll have to try again sometime during the day when I can tinker with mold/pot temperatures. As it is my reject rate was.....well, really high. :oops:

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j85/clatch/Mobile%20Uploads/71BDC5AB-A942-4C50-9077-6952059620B9-24012-00002FD0C112962A_zps4501f50f.jpg

Anyway, they drop at 305.5 grains, which is fine, and in the picture you can tell that the meplat is a tiny bit smaller than the big Lee 452-310-rf. When I get a chance to make some more I'll load some up and see how they do with a medium-hot dose of VV N110. *Hopefully* I get to do some shooting this weekend.

[geargnasher]

That's ok, you get to have fun making more if you aren't happy with the way the last batch turned out. Moulds always seem to cast better for me after three or four long sessions, even after heat-cycling them a few times before the first go. Boolit casting and romancing are two things I've found that don't require expertise for enjoyment.

Getting the mould to the right temperature is most of the trick with regard to good fillout and nice, sharp bases. Pouring technique and venting have a little to do with it, and alloy that has been properly fluxed free of junk metals like aluminum, calcium, iron, and zinc will flow and fill much better than a sluggish, clumpy trash mix. 1/2 to one percent tin with 1-5% antimony is plenty to keep the surface tension of the molten alloy low enough for good fillout at reasonable alloy temperatures (around 100F above the mush point) if all else is ok. You can add more tin than that if you wish, but adding more tin by weight than antimony can have its own problems such as tin nodule formation that can leave gummy tin streaks in your bores, so no need to overdo it. Tin adds a slight bit of malleability and toughness to lead/antimony mixes, but again, the point of diminishing returns is reached after 1-2% unless you're striving to make and exact Lyman #2, eutectic alloy. Spend your tin money on primers and powder, or range scrap and wheel weights, it will do you more good.

There is a lot you can do between pure lead and COWW, including mixing the two in various proportions and water-quenching the boolits from the mould. What I was talking about in the previous post with lighter, slower boolits involves an alloy that's about 3/4 pure lead, 1/4 COWW, about 1% total added tin, and a rapid water quench. That gets me a boolit that handles, loads, and makes it through the gun like ACWW, yet expands upon impact like a much softer alloy, which gives reliable expansion without under-penetrating or shattering when it hits bone. It's tough enough to handle reasonable pressure and be accurate at low to mid handgun velocities but not too "hard". It also makes great hollow points. I like a smaller meplat when using this type of alloy to ensure good initial penetration through hide, and it helps the ballistic coefficient and low-speed stability at longer ranges, too. You can tune the alloy composition, temper/hardness, boolit shape, and load to do just about whatever you want, and there are a number of very good approaches for a hunting handgun load, it's up to you to decide what your needs are and we can offer suggestions to help you get the most effective hunting performance out of whatever you choose. Lots of critters, both two and four legged, have been dispatched with .45-caliber handguns. Don't argue with the fellow that may tell you that a cap-and-ball .45 revolver is one of the most effective meatgetters ever devised for shots inside 50 yards!

Gear

[geargnasher]

I took too long making that last post (supper and a show!), so I missed the pics. Thanks for posting! That's a great looking boolit, I think you'll be very happy with it and it strikes a good balance of all the factors we've discussed. I'll bet it will work fine if cast harder and shot fast, or cast softer and shot more conservatively. Get some downrange and let us know how it does on paper.

Gear

[DougGuy]

Those look really good! Expansion in those is more an afterthought than anything else, even in real soft lead I would have to 2-hole at least two of our deer here with one shot to provide enough resistance that expansion would occur. Have fun with them!

[Changeling]

Thank you very much for the post on the mold, as always it's a pleasure to see your prgress with your bullet design.
Nothing like a picture to make an absolute statement, thanks.

[C. Latch]

I haven't had time to load up any of the new bullets, but I did go to the range today, and I had a couple of loads to try today. First up was the big Lee 452-300-rf over 20.5 grains of N110. Five shots went into 2" at 25 yards, which isn't great but is better than any other load with this bullet thus far (yes, I realize that one 5-shot group is statistically meaningless....I don't have the time to test the way I'd like to right now).

I only had 10 rounds of that load. The other 5 I shot at ~125 yards and while I had no actual target at that range (time was an issue here) I did put 4 of the 5 within a few inches of my aiming point. I'm *guessing* that at 50-100 yards the load would have been pretty stable and grouped decently, but it was falling apart at 125 yards. In other words, it would do fine for hunting.......except that I don't want to hunt with it. Call me a wimp, but that load was the upper end of what I enjoy shooting. It averaged 1170 for 5 shots......virtually the same as the 20.0 grain load. These had been loaded a month or so and with my sloppy lubing technique it's at least possible to have a little powder contamination - or maybe the weather was just different today. I don't know. Anyway, I'll probably try to load up some of the new bullet with 20.0 grains of N110 and see how they do.

[Slow Elk 45/70]

Great discussion

[C. Latch]

Ok, I've been sort of quiet because the new mold hadn't impressed me yet. It drops bullets easily, but I had a lot of wrinkles and rounded bases, no matter what I tried, so today I did the sure-fire thing and cast rapidly, dropping improperly filled bullets back into the pot, until the mold was really really hot and the alloy was also. Then I commenced to dropping the most even bullets I've ever cast.....both cavities, every bullet dropped 301.4 grains, with almost perfect consistency, using WW with 2% tin added. The tin probably wouldn't have been necessary if I'd tried casting really hot at first instead of messing with a cooler mold. Bases are filled out perfectly.

I have a batch of bullets (maybe 50?) in the oven now, heat-soaking for the next little while until they are ~425 degrees, then I'll cut the oven off and go eat. After the kids are asleep I'll try and size these, lube them, and be ready to load them up.

Knowing that 20.0 - N110 gave me a tad bit more velocity than I wanted with the Lee 452-300-rf, I think I'll start these at 19.5 grains, then 20.0, then 20.5. With lighter weight and slightly less length seated in the case, these should show a tad less pressure than the 452-300-rf and all three loads should be between 1100 and 1200 FPS. I'll load them in new Starline cases, to the crimp groove, with CCI LPP.


Oh, and as a side note, I shot some of the little Lee 452-255-rfs the other day at 25 yards, over 22 grains of N110. I expected more velocity - the average was 1298 at 10'; correct that back to the muzzle and it's exactly 1300. This is the bullet that groups almost one hole at 1000 FPS over VV Tin Star; at 1300 FPS 5 of them only went into 2.75" or so. After shooting about 25 full-power loads and 15 more of the light loads with Tin Star, I have some noticeable leading; I'll clean that up before shooting again.

[C. Latch]

Well, I shot the new bullet today.

20.0 grains of N110 gave me an average of 1044 FPS. That's considerably slower than the same charge behind the Lee 452-300-rf. I'm chalking that up to differences in weight and seating depth. This new bullet is seated .040 further out than the Lee, not counting the fact that there's less material in the case anyway due to the slightly lighter weight. In other words, less pressure, ergo less velocity.

The first 6 shots at 25 yards went into 2". Actually, I had one non-called flyer that went wide. This has happened before several times.......one shot high and left; I think it may be an out-of-line cylinder hole. I marked it for further testing. Been meaning to do that; no reflection on the bullet.

Anyway, not the best group I've ever shot with a pistol, but better than the Lee bullet. I then shot 5 shots (through the other 5 holes in the cylinder) at 50 yards. They went into about 2.75" or so. I'll measure it tomorrow; I was in a rush this afternoon and eyeballed the group next to my little swiss army knife and guessed at 2.75".

I went to shoot another 5 at 50 yards, taking my time a bit better this time, and the first three went into 1.5" or less. I then proceeded to get excited because I had a decent group forming, and I jerked the next two. Called both of them as flyers to the left, and sure enough, I ended up with a 3" group.

If that seems bad, well, I had also loaded up 6 rounds of 20.0 VV N110 and the Lee 452-300-rf. Might as well shoot them since they're cast, sized, lubed, and checked.

Six at 50 yards went into 5" or more. The one from the cylinder hole that I suspect of being out-of-round was a bit high and left; throw it out and the group was still about 5 inches.

Obviously, this is by no means a statistically valid test. But I see good signs that the new 300-grain mold with its .34xx nose is going to outshoot the Lee 452-300.

I had loaded 22 rounds. I shot 16 today, so I have 6 left. I'll try to shoot them out around 100 yards in the morning.

FWIW after 16 rounds there was no trace of leading in the bore. It looked downright clean, except for a few very tiny little bits of powder fouling.

[C. Latch]

Correction: My OCD kicked in and I went and pulled that target. The first 5 of 6 (I honestly think I have an out-of-line charge hole) were 1.7" at 25 yards. Then 5 into 2.4" at 50 yards. Then 3 were in 1.6" at 50 yards before I pulled a flyer and blew the group. Wasted ammo. :-(

Six shots from the Lee bullet at 50 yards were 4.9" regardless of whether I count the high-left shot or not.

I'll try to shoot around 100 yards tomorrow and see what happens.

[geargnasher]

Glad to know I'm not the only one who measures groups with the scale on my SAK!

Looking forward to the 100-yard groups.

Gear

[C. Latch]

Well, this is weird.

I finally got around to shooting this afternoon - the range faces the Northeast, so evening is better for shooting with open sights - and, anyway, I very slowly and deliberately shot five shots at 100 yards.


They scattered all over 12" or more.

I guess this bullet needs more velocity.

[C. Latch]

I hate that I've been so slow to update this thread, but work has been busy, and with vacation, planting food plots for deer season, etc, etc, I haven't had time to shoot until yesterday.

I went on up to 22 grains of N110. This should be very close to 1200' fps; I didn't have time to set up the chrono yesterday. Either way, at 25 yards 5 went into 1.75" and at 100 yards 5 shots went into 6". Not great - there was a bit of vertical stringing going on with both groups and part of that was my fault; I had two orange target stickers sitting vertically in line and it didn't occur to me until I moved the target to 100 yards that they would sort of blur into one blob with my (weak) eyes at that range.

Anyway, after that, I moved in to 75 yards and got a worse group, then 50 yards and it got still worse (in terms of MOA). I had changed to a thicker lube (I still lube by hand, and was looking for something less messy) and I fear that my barrel was starting to lead up.

After I clean the gun I will shoot this load again at 50 yards, then limit myself to 50 yards during deer season. I'm out of time for load development for this year. Looks like this bullet is going to do OK at the 1200' velocity level, but I need to come up with a better way to lube bullets before I try to push further.

As a side note, my load with VV Tin Star pushing the 260-grain Lee bullet at 1000' FPS is still a tack-driver. I might just hunt with that load, too.

[Gus McCrae]

Very informative thread. I just got a .45 Colt Bisley and will be reading more. Thanks y'all.

[waco]

RCBS 270-SAA
Mine weigh right at 27586148

[C. Latch]

As a side note, the new mold, after casting with it a few times now, makes excellent bullets.

I dropped 66 bullets yesterday and after a very picky inspection, I kept 58 of them. If you knew me you'd know that's a really high percentage. I figured out that I needed to run it fairly hot, and needed to alternate with another mold (358-158-TL Lee SWC) in order to let my sprues cool enough to cut cleanly.

[C. Latch]

I got to do some more shooting the other day. I shot 22.0 and 21.5 grains of N110 behind this bullet, at 50 yards, and both gave ~3" groups.

It's muzzleloader season in Tennessee. I sat yesterday afternoon and watched a doe for a long time, wishing it was legal to have my pistol with me - she would have been an EASY shot; she stayed within 60 yards for the better part of an hour before ambling off. While watching her, it occurred to me that even if I was comfortable shooting a deer with an open-sighted handgun at 100 yards, she looked awfully small at 50-60 yards and I'm probably going to limit my shots to that range this season anyway.

If I'd had time, I would have shot some of these bullets in my muzzleloader (which I use with .452 sabots) but I never had the time. That's on the agenda for this winter, anyway.

[C. Latch]

A small update:

Earlier in this thread I mentioned some erratic groups at 50 and 75 yards......it *seems* that those may have been due to some quirks with the ruger rear sight. I can't swear to it, but my sights moved on me sometime after my last post in this thread, and when I started tinkering with the rear sight (I didn't want to but I can't really afford a Bowen rear right now) I figured out that the ruger rear sight is....well, sloppy. I disassembled it, did a little shimming, and it seems to be OK for the time being. So maybe those groups were the sight's fault.

I did kill a deer with this load a couple of weeks ago, but again, my sights were off (see thread in hunting forum) and I basically missed her - I hit her in the neck, she dropped.

Also, the reason I'm updating this thread was mainly because I got a chance to run a few rounds over the chronograph today; my load of 22.0 grains of N110 (temp in the 40's, 10' from muzzle) averaged just over 1250 FPS. Faster than I expected. I shouldn't have skipped the chronograph when I went from 20.0 to 22.0 earlier; I could well have got by with 21.0 and less recoil, which is what I'll aim for next time I have a chance to tinker some more with this load.

Next on the agenda: load up more with 21.5 grains and see how stable they are at longer ranges.