Catshooter 45-283 testing

[freedom475]

Gun= FA97 with 4 1/4" barrel Iron sights. Boolit just barely fits.........Just right!
Load= 22.5gr. W296
Boolit=weight 282gr. WDWW sized.452 lube="Soft Blue"
All shots were fired over the hood with forearms resting on old pants. (real technical)
Target= printer paper box

Got a chance to shoot today and had good results. the load is a little dirty with some unburnt residue. Needs to be a little hotter but it is petty stout out of the little FA. Fireball from the 4.25 is very impressive! Didn't chrono any yet.

First group at 50yrds was looking real good with the first 3 going into a straight horizontal line with each hole touching the last, got excited and sent the last 2, which pushed the group out to 5 inches, My fault I'm sure. Fired several more groups with almost the same results with 3 real close at 1 1/2" and 2 shots outside.

Moved to 100yrds and fired 2 ,10 shot groups. The first group was a nice (for me) 6inch. Second 10 was still in the cluster with a few going outside of the general grouping.

Moved to 200yrds and only hit the box once out of 5 with the rest going low. I was very happy with the results considering the barrel length and fading light.

Moved up to 10yrd and fired 25 shots off hand. Wore out the 3in "shoot-N-see" stick on target.(had to redeem myself after the 200yrd joke)

Any one else had a chance to try this boolit yet.

[dubber123]

If it's anything like the 310 Keith group buy, the faster you shoot it, the better it does. I got mine to around 2" at 50 yards, but it took a stouter load than I was hoping for, (Smith 625).

[pipehand]

dubber-
what was that load? I'm using that boolit in a 625 Mountain Gun, or,I should say, I will be using that in a MG 45 Colt. I got the 462420 and the 45-283 at about the same time. While the 45-70 dropped boolits beautifully, the 45 colt mould took some work. I finally got the 45-270rcbs clone right and casted a bunch this evening, enough to use up a pound of Unique after I get them sized. Previous best performance with the original RCBS mould was 20 grains of H-4227. I'm going to use the Unique to halve the powder cost.

[dubber123]

I'll have to check tomorrow, as I'm not home right now. I will let you know.

[Possum]

Any more reports on this bullet before I load em up?

[dubber123]

dubber-
what was that load? I'm using that boolit in a 625 Mountain Gun, or,I should say, I will be using that in a MG 45 Colt. I got the 462420 and the 45-283 at about the same time. While the 45-70 dropped boolits beautifully, the 45 colt mould took some work. I finally got the 45-270rcbs clone right and casted a bunch this evening, enough to use up a pound of Unique after I get them sized. Previous best performance with the original RCBS mould was 20 grains of H-4227. I'm going to use the Unique to halve the powder cost.

With the 310 Keith, I had my best accuracy with 18 grains of 2400 and a standard LP primer. This is getting pretty stout for a Smith, so I would proceed with caution.

[PatMarlin]

What crimp are you guys using to crimp in the groove?

[pipehand]

I'm using the standard roll crimp on the RCBS dies. Earlier today, I shot some loaded with 9 grains of Unique, and they shot well, but not as well as the 20 grains of 4227. The 4227 does leave some unburned powder, and I think I'l have to give the 2400 a try as it is a bit faster burning. I got a pound of WSF shotgun powder as part of a trade, but the only pistol data I can find is for 38 Super, 40S&W, and 10mm Auto. Is there an analogous powder-like 231 and HP-38 were always the same powder? HS-7 and Win 571? Looking throught the data, it appears to be a little slower burning than Unique, but I'm not real confident in my extrapolation. Any ideas?

[Possum]

Not to change the focus of the post, but Pipehand, where are you located at? I am right outside of Columbia on the Lexington side.

Plan on shooting some 283's today at the range. I am going to use #5 and see what happens.

[pipehand]

My home is in Chesterfield, but I only get to live here on weekends. I'm currently working on a power plant upgrade down toward Charleston, and have my camper set up within commuting distance of the job.

[45Spades]

Anyone else have any results to share? I haven't cast any yet but plan on soon as the weather continues to cool off.

[Lloyd Smale]

I havent done a ton of testing of that bullet yet but my results mirror what dubber said about the 310. It hasnt been a great performer at speeds under 1100 fps.

[Ed K]

That's interesting as it was billed as an improved RCBS 45-270 SAA. The RCBS is good for Colt SAA velocities...

[45 2.1]

That's interesting as it was billed as an improved RCBS 45-270 SAA. The RCBS is good for Colt SAA velocities...

If you will note the alloy and hardness each person is using, you will see that they are hard boolits. Cast them suitable for the pressure used and they shoot equally well.

[Lloyd Smale]

actually the rcbs bullet in the testing weve done (extensive testing) suffers from the same flaw. It too isnt that good at slower velocitys. Now before you jump on me and say it works in your gun. Any bullet can find a good home in a certain gun. Just about every mold i bought that was a dud has at least one gun it shoots in. But for the most part the 270 saa isnt the great bullet everyone puts it up to be. Ive payed attention to this and most everyone that brags it up kind of gives me that dumb stare when i ask how they actually came to that conclusion. Most have never really properly bench tested the bullet. Boys im here to tell you that i shoot a ton of 45 colts and after all these years still havent found that majic 45 bullet thats under 280 grain. Its even tough to find one that shoots well at 25 yards. I thought i had the majic bullet once. Its the 255 rcbs in the version we are waiting for right now as a group buy. that bullet shoots well in most guns out to normal hunting ranges but falls flat on its face at long range. A good friend of mine Jeff Oakland who is about the most knowlegable person in the country on kieths and how they fly and is a guy who does more long range testing then about anyone thinks he may have found the bullet ive been searching for. He is in the process of trying to get it cut and I will get my hands on one of the molds and report back. Personaly im done buying crap 45 molds until he gets this worked out. What really boggles my mind is that 44 molds that cast bullets that do well at both short and long range are a dime a dozen but the same in 45 is about impossible to find. Bump up the weight to 300 grain and the 45s come into there own.
That's interesting as it was billed as an improved RCBS 45-270 SAA. The RCBS is good for Colt SAA velocities...

[Cayoot]

aBump up the weight to 300 grain and the 45s come into there own.

Interesting statement Lloyd...I would have thought that such a heavy weight would be difficult to stabilize at the (slower) .45 Colt velocities.

[PatMarlin]

Hmmm...

I've been wondering what would happen if we put a gascheck on the base and pushed it harder?

This will be one of the next ideas we will pursue for the 44. and .45 plain base just as soon as the 30 cal is finished.

I've got the cat-283 mold and it will be a top priority to study.

[ktw]

actually the rcbs bullet in the testing weve done (extensive testing) suffers from the same flaw.

We've swapped some bullets Lloyd. Yours run a lot harder than mine (8 bhn range scrap or 12 bhn WW). Bullets I've received from you tend to go 18bhn+


Boys im here to tell you that i shoot a ton of 45 colts and after all these years still havent found that majic 45 bullet thats under 280 grain.

Have you ever tried the Lyman 454190? I get great results with that one. Much better than any "keith" I've ever tried.

-ktw

[Lloyd Smale]

I can about bet you a dime to a dollar that if you cast them softer the problems will be worse especially at long range. A bullet that deforms and bumps up will never do it exactly the same two times and you cant expect a bullet that is differnt every time it leaves the barrel to shoot consistant at long range. . Ive never tried that bullet and i know youve told me about it before. I guess i look more at a bullet as to how it will do in the hunting field then i do for plinking. Have you killed anything with that bullet? Now patmarlin is on to something id like to try. A good 280 class swc with a gas check would probably be the ideal hunting bullet in a ruger. Problem is theres still no gurantee that because you slapped a gas check on it that it will fly well. Theres alot of gremlins that make there living jinxing bullets when it comes to long range flight and for the most part its a crap shoot. Id sure give it a try if someone honchoed it though. Id probably pick up the first 3 of them. As to the 300 shooting well at low velocitys. You will usually find that most heavys shoot well at low velocitys. Its the short stubby nosed bullets you will have the most problems with in 45s.
We've swapped some bullets Lloyd. Yours run a lot harder than mine (8 bhn range scrap or 12 bhn WW). Bullets I've received from you tend to go 18bhn+



Have you ever tried the Lyman 454190? I get great results with that one. Much better than any "keith" I've ever tried.

-ktw

[Lloyd Smale]

ps next time your in town drop me off a handfull of them and ill do some testing on them.
We've swapped some bullets Lloyd. Yours run a lot harder than mine (8 bhn range scrap or 12 bhn WW). Bullets I've received from you tend to go 18bhn+



Have you ever tried the Lyman 454190? I get great results with that one. Much better than any "keith" I've ever tried.

-ktw

[ktw]

I guess i look more at a bullet as to how it will do in the hunting field then i do for plinking. Have you killed anything with that bullet [454190]?

No. I am not a handgun hunter. It does not have much of a meplat. I would drill-hollowpoint a few if I wanted to use it for that.

I use it as a bulk practice bullet cast in 8-9 bhn range scrap over 9.3 Unique for roughly 1000fps. This has shot remarkably better for me than any Keith design. I have not tried it at ranges beyond 200 yards.

I would be happy to drop some off on my next trip through.

-ktw

[Lloyd Smale]

thanks pal

[GLL]

Lloyd:

I also like the 454190 in both standard and HP form. I can send you a bunch in WW or linotype to try if you are interested.

Jerry

http://www.fototime.com/16A56089703E78F/standard.jpg

http://www.fototime.com/870C513516F7E65/standard.jpg

[Bass Ackward]

GLL,

You always take such good pictures. Looks like you used paste wax on those for an hour before you took the shot. :grin:

Just look at the picture and see where the center of balance of that bullet is in relation to bullet length. The hollow point that throws even more weight back. Bet it stabilizes sooner at slower velocity.

If you want to find out if your problem is the design or your method of launching it, hollow point a few. If accuracy improves, your not stabilizing it and need to rethink strategy. Nothing is going to fly well if you launch it like crap.


Lloyd,

A gas check helps you get the launch so that you can achieve initial stabilization. That's all it does. A GC will do nothing to help how the bullet flies as it weights less than lead. So once launched, the risk with a GC design is more that it catches wind or comes off ruining balance even farther.

So it's a compromise. If you need more velocity out of it or to be able to use more powders with it to get a good launch, then you will benefit from the check.

[Lloyd Smale]

Ill argue that :) a gas check doesnt weight more then lead but it definately adds enough weight to the base of a bullet to effect the stability of a bullet design. Ive seen large caliber bullets weight 3 grains more with just a check. Ive also took molds that didnt shoot for me and mill very small ammounts off the top of the blocks and test them as i went and it was amazing how just a couple thousands of an inch off the blocks changed the loads i was shooting so much. A properly crimp check will stay on a bullet in flight and even pentrating heavy bone. I believe too that it does help a bullet grab the rifling and this prevents bullets form stripping through the rifling. I think that is one of the biggest reason a soft bullet benifits so much from a check when it comes to leading and why you see the biggest benefit with them at high velocity. I am a firm believer in gas checked bullets. Ive loaded 100s of thouands rounds of ammo in to many handguns to count and know one thing for sure. Gas checked bullets are hands down easier to get to shoot then plain based bullets. There alot less tempermental about velocitys they are shot at. They also just about eliminate any leading problems. They are alot less tempemental when it comes to alloys used ot. I can cast a plain based bullet out of soft and hard lead and they will usually shoot totaly differnt when it comes to benching groups and a gas checked bullet that shoots well out of ww will usually still shoot well out of lynotype or even soft lead. Alot of guys balk at buying gas checks. But im not one of them. I think there well worth the added expense and im one of those cheapsakes that buys once fired brass and suplus powder. Bass you know very well that i respect your technical knowlege and appreciate you sharing it. But the statements i posted above are learned from 1000s of hours of sitting on a bench with a sixgun. Now where did my wife hide my pain pills!!!!!

[Bass Ackward]

Lloyd,

I think you miss the point. I am not saying anything negative toward GCs. In fact, I believe in them for just about everything because of the flexibility that they provide. But I am just using common sense.

What is the purpose of a check? I have heard gas seal, lead removal, use of softer lead, and grip the rifling which is sort of the same as softer lead. All of these things pertain to launch factors so that you can start the bullet off properly.

Once launched, a check provides no positive to flight and can best hope for a neutral effect. Only negative things can occur from that point. If a check could magically turn to lead, then the center of balance would shift back and the design would remain stable to lower velocities.

I will say again, .... a bullet that flies perfectly at long range is useless if you can't launch it "properly" from your gun. Properly, defined as stable, without yaw. If you can do that, you can achieve stability or stable flight with even a poor ballistic coefficient designs as 44man likes to point out with his WFNs.

Each design made, good, bad, whatever requires a certain velocity and a certain RPM rate to stabilize. These are in direct opposition. The faster you spin something, the slower you can to run it. The slower you spin something, the faster you will have to drive it.

You like to make note of not liking long barrels. Assuming the same twist rate, the shorter a barrel is made, the more difficult it will be to get good or stable launches. Flexibility (options) will be lost to attain the correct velocity/ RPM combination to launch a bullet properly. Pressure will need to be increased to attain velocity and the gas check will become more and more important as barrel length is lost. And as you increase pressure to accelerate, you increase muzzle pressure to have negative effects on what you launched. Notice I did not say that longer barrels were more accurate. But they will have more acceptable loads from which to choose to select the best one.

Take 44 Mag as an example. With a 16" or longer barrel you only need 38 twist for the velocity to be able to stabilize most common weight slugs. When you drop that to a 10" handgun, you need a faster twist. Same as you shorten farther, you need a faster twist which the manufacturers don't do or eventually, you need to learn to love a gas check. Plus you develop more "bad" bullet designs cause you can't launch them well enough. Same with requiring harder bullets. You have to keep it all in context which can be difficult. If I wanted a nice 4" in 44 Mag, I would want a 16 twist so I didn't have to over push it. Even my 7 1/2 Bisley is 16 twist.

Make sense?