Para 1911

[newton]

Ok guys, seeing how you all are my favorite people in the world on this site, you have got to help me out. Tanners Sport Center(out of Pensilvania, but sell online) is selling their Para Expert for some seriously low dollars. $425 for a nitride finish, and $449 for stainless. This is before the $100 rebate that Para is giving out till the end of the year. That means an American made 1911 for $325. Hello???? I know they have had a bad past with some of their guns, but you don't find that with this new model Expert(not the old GI model), or at least I have not found the negative aspects. If some have had some, please let me know what I should be looking out for on my gun.

So, I have already bought one in nitride from another online dealer, firearmsforsale.com (this was before I saw the deal Tanners had) or else I would be jumping all over this deal. The help I need now is for you all to buy the remaining ones Tanners has so I do not feel tempted to buy another! Hey, who would not look cool with a 1911 strapped to either side of him/her self? lol You guys helped me once with the H&R single shot 30-30 that Buds was selling, had it in my cart and was about to buy but waited around long enough that they sold out. That was a close one. lol

All playing aside, this sounds like a good deal so I thought I would share. Of course, reports of the product will be posted when I finally get it in my hands. I sure wish that FFS company would hurry up and send me a shipping confirmation email. I've been cleaning brass and coating boolits all weekend in prep for shooting when this thing comes in.

[pretzelxx]

Im ordering one from gallery of guns. Slightly more, but there's a lot less "leg" work on that order. Local store will give me some rewards points or something. If the wife would let me, I would buy two!

[Love Life]

Dang, that is good price. It would be worth buying just to learn on and customize and experiment with.

[newton]

Im ordering one from gallery of guns. Slightly more, but there's a lot less "leg" work on that order. Local store will give me some rewards points or something. If the wife would let me, I would buy two!

Yea, mine was slightly more also. I have heard Tanners is a solid place to buy from though. I hope the place I bought it from pans out well. They were just under $600 at one of the local gun shops. I had already paid for mine or else I would have seen if they would have come down.

I sure hope it shoots the cast boolits good. Its supposed to come with a match barrel, and from what I have read everything is supposed to be polished for good feeding. We shall see. It will get a lot of fire time seeing how it will be very inexpensive and easy to load for.

[newton]

Dang, that is good price. It would be worth buying just to learn on and customize and experiment with.

Lol. Yea, I am halfway tempted to buy another for a gift. But I cannot, because I know I'll just keep it. lol

That's why you guys need to hurry up and buy them!

[Poygan]

This may be different than the G I Expert I bought several years ago. I put about 500 rounds of cast through it and it functioned OK but I was underwhelmed by it and sent it down the road at a loss. I did pay a lot more than the above cited prices so it could be a good deal now.

[Boolit_Head]

I picked on up a few months ago. Is it a high end gun... No but it's a very nice shooter that you can do what ever you want to with. I just got back from the range a day ago and mine punched the center out of the target at 15 yards, a few fliers when I did not do my part. Not bad considering the price of the high end guns.

[Nise]

Oh sure rub it in, :) , I'm still debating if my passing it up was the right thing to do? Our local store had the Para Expert on sale for 379, then the 100 dollar rebate, I happened to ask them about it and was holding the last one they had in stock for the sale in my hand, asked for the paperwork, then thought hard and handed it to the guy next to me that was staring at me and almost drooling on the counter. I decided I didn't need it. The one they had was the display model, the last one, and it just had more slop then I cared for, not excessive but 300 bucks is 300 bucks. I'll probably never forget it though, though I don't have 'non-buyers remorse'. It's a great price for building it up into something better. Or you could save the cash and go buy a few molds/powder/primers, etc.

[newton]

This may be different than the G I Expert I bought several years ago. I put about 500 rounds of cast through it and it functioned OK but I was underwhelmed by it and sent it down the road at a loss. I did pay a lot more than the above cited prices so it could be a good deal now.

It is a different model. They put a match grade barrel on, they changed the surface finish, and they put a match grade trigger on. I guess being my first 1911 I wont be comparing it to the high end models, so it wont make me feel like I got a bad deal. lol. For me, if it goes bang when I pull the trigger, and again when I pull the trigger again, then I will be happy. Well, that and if its at least as accurate as I am. On that part, I have heard VERY good things about the barrels for them being very accurate when rested.

As you can tell, I am excited to be getting it. Just wish I could have found it for the same amount in the LGS. I went by Cabelas at lunch today, they have one sitting in their case, same model, for $600+. I just shook my head and walked away. I really wanted to ask to hold it, but I knew all that would do is make me wait at my FFL dealer night and day till mine came in.

Now I need extra mags, holster, ammo boxes,.......this is going to get expensive.

[newton]

Oh sure rub it in, :) , I'm still debating if my passing it up was the right thing to do? Our local store had the Para Expert on sale for 379, then the 100 dollar rebate, I happened to ask them about it and was holding the last one they had in stock for the sale in my hand, asked for the paperwork, then thought hard and handed it to the guy next to me that was staring at me and almost drooling on the counter. I decided I didn't need it. The one they had was the display model, the last one, and it just had more slop then I cared for, not excessive but 300 bucks is 300 bucks. I'll probably never forget it though, though I don't have 'non-buyers remorse'. It's a great price for building it up into something better. Or you could save the cash and go buy a few molds/powder/primers, etc.

I couldn't pass it up if I had been there. But I have been wanting one for quite a few years now. Hey, now is your chance! There are some still left.....

[newton]

I picked on up a few months ago. Is it a high end gun... No but it's a very nice shooter that you can do what ever you want to with. I just got back from the range a day ago and mine punched the center out of the target at 15 yards, a few fliers when I did not do my part. Not bad considering the price of the high end guns.

Whats the main things that stand out to you about the differences in the high end guns besides just the look of them? I did some rich man window shopping looking at the Wilson Combat guns(which are made just a few miles from me) and I can see the difference is night and day in the looks compared to the Para.

I just wonder what the other things would be. You shooting cast out of yours? Load?

[Boolit_Head]

It is a different model. They put a match grade barrel on, they changed the surface finish, and they put a match grade trigger on..

Only difference I saw was the addition of a beaver tail grip safety versus the spur. Last Para GI I looked at was identical other than that. I believe the GI's were replaced by the Experts but I have seen the GI's referred to as "GI Expert". Barrels and finish seemed the same from the ones I had my hands on over the last year I was drooling on them.



You shooting cast out of yours? Load?

I shot some out of a new NOE 452-230HP mold I just received over about 5gr Red Dot. That's about all I plan to shoot and they shoot real good. Might change out the pins for the flat pins and get some close to 250 for bowling pins if the HP's don't work respectably on them. A range across town has a pin shoot once a month. Only change I've made so far has been a oversize firing pin stop to get a more squared off bottom to decrease the muzzle flip. Once I get dialed in I may be trying it out over there.

[Nise]

Really for the cost you'd be hard pressed to find a better deal, even if you were to tear it down and swap everything out. I think for the price of a bare frame, slide, bbl, trigger, etc you'd far exceed the investment you have in the para. You could invest the difference in what you would have paid for it normally and end up with a better handgun.

[Boolit_Head]

I looked at a STI prefit frame and slide and it was about double the cost of the para.

[Jupiter7]

I looked at a STI prefit frame and slide and it was about double the cost of the para.

And for good reason, STI makes great stuff. Para is owned by freedom/Remington/cereus and as with many other brands, it isn't getting any better.

[newton]

And for good reason, STI makes great stuff. Para is owned by freedom/Remington/cereus and as with many other brands, it isn't getting any better.
Yea, I didn't research enough before I bought the gun. I found out after its gone to the Remington world now. But, as of right now the guns still are what they are and untouched by Remington. Once they set up shop and start making new ones, then they will be pararemies, but for now all things point to a sweet deal for an above baseline gun. But, that's just according to the guys who shoot these things a lot. I don't, so I cannot give a good honest cross review.

[Love Life]

You should see how much I pay for a wobbly 1911 with free machining marks and sharp edges. Makes me want to cry some times.

[Babbott213]

Hey Newton, I tried replying to your PM man but your inbox is full and it will not let me send it to you. Clear out your messages and I'll send it over to you man.

[robertbank]

Para had a hit and miss reputation when they were out of Toronto and didn't get any better when they moved South. They have had problems with their cast slides from day one. My son had my Para SS double stack bought 15 years ago and it has been steller. I sold an single stack Para I had. The slide peened at the slide stop notch. Sent it back for service and got it back three months later. 50 rounds through it and the slide looked like it did before I sent it in for repairs. I have a couple of $350Cdn Norincos I wouldn't trade you for the best Para makes.

Take Care

Bob

[newton]

Inbox cleared.

[newton]

Any pictures of this peening? I've never seen it before. Like to know what to look out for.

[keyhole]

I bought a Para 14 .45 ACP about 8-9 years ago. After 500 rds of 230 cast RN, 6.0 grains Unique, the frame cracked at the slide stop hole. Para replaced the frame and returned the gun. After further issues getting the trigger pull reasonable, it is fine now.
About 5 years ago took a chance on another Para, the GI Expert. Fired about 1,000 rounds of same load through it with no serious issues. It is a good accurate shooter. Finish is not very durable. Never carried in a holster but finish is wearing more than other .45's I have. Trigger pull is OK but has extra movement typical of firing pin safety-type guns. Nevertheless, I am very pleased with it for what I paid, $470.

[robertbank]

Any pictures of this peening? I've never seen it before. Like to know what to look out for.
No gun is long gone. Just take a look at the notch. If you see peening you will know it. There is no missing it.

Take Care

Bob

[newton]

I have just been reading up in general on the 1911, not any specific maker. Came across an article that talks about magazines. I read it and low and behold, the writer attributed the magazine Para used in their guns to causing significant peening of which you were talking about. He talked about their magazines sticking significantly higher in the well than most other makers.

Anyways, interesting article. The more I read, the more I am hit with how magazines are almost the heart and soul of a 1911 as far as functioning and reliability, and now longevity. Very interesting. That will be one of the things I look over real good when I get my gun.

[Love Life]

Magazines are quite important. There are many good threads on this forum covering the 1911 pistol written by people in the know. When they talk, I shut up and listen.

[robertbank]

I have just been reading up in general on the 1911, not any specific maker. Came across an article that talks about magazines. I read it and low and behold, the writer attributed the magazine Para used in their guns to causing significant peening of which you were talking about. He talked about their magazines sticking significantly higher in the well than most other makers.

Anyways, interesting article. The more I read, the more I am hit with how magazines are almost the heart and soul of a 1911 as far as functioning and reliability, and now longevity. Very interesting. That will be one of the things I look over real good when I get my gun.

Well all that is good to hear except I wasn't using Para mags I was using Wilson Combat mags, probably as good a mag as you can buy for the 1911 in 45acp. Too, the mags were not causing any peening on any of the three other 1911's I owned. The best information I could find is the peening was being caused from timing issues as the gun cycled. Mattered not to me I got rid of the gun and it was not Para's entry level model. If you bought the Para I hope it works out for you.

Take Care

Bob

[jonp]

Oh sure rub it in, :) , I'm still debating if my passing it up was the right thing to do? Our local store had the Para Expert on sale for 379, then the 100 dollar rebate, I happened to ask them about it and was holding the last one they had in stock for the sale in my hand, asked for the paperwork, then thought hard and handed it to the guy next to me that was staring at me and almost drooling on the counter. I decided I didn't need it. The one they had was the display model, the last one, and it just had more slop then I cared for, not excessive but 300 bucks is 300 bucks. I'll probably never forget it though, though I don't have 'non-buyers remorse'. It's a great price for building it up into something better. Or you could save the cash and go buy a few molds/powder/primers, etc.

You, sir are an Oak.

[newton]

Well I understand the bad taste in the mouth hat happens. I have one right now with the company I bought my gun from. I would rather someone be 100% honest than to beat around a bush and make me feel like I'm pulling teeth to get information.

Hopefully the gun will be here end of the week, but the way they are talking I might be waiting till first of next to get it. Whenever it is, I'll do a good review for you guys and have lots of pictures. Should be enough time after that to get one on order before the end of the year rebate ends.

[Boolit_Head]

Para has a lifetime warrantee. I figure they have a long time to maintain it.

[newton]

Para has a lifetime warrantee. I figure they have a long time to maintain it.

lol. Well, we shall see how that works out. I don't know the legalities, but since Remington bought them out I'm curious if they still have to honor it. I would think so, but who knows how that stuff works these days.

It is nice to have a product that gives that kind of warranty. How they live up to it is a whole world unto itself. I just hope I don't have to test it.

Reminds me of the Blackhawk I bought from ruger. Shot maybe 50 rounds through it and the darn thing would not let me lower the hammer manually. It would fire, just not lower. Upon inspection I found there is a pin with a spring behind it on the hammer. It was locked up. Had to send it back to ruger for repairs. Been fine ever since then though.

[Shooter973]

My youngest son (32) and I each bought one of these nice handguns from Sportsman's ware house a couple of weeks back. The price was $379 - minus the $100 rebate. We also had a coupon for $10 off a $100 or more purchase. Bottom price was an astounding $269 for a nice tight good looking 1911 style handgun. I've never seen such a low price for any 1911 , even the ones made in the Phillipinrs or China are more than that. Seems to be a great gun[smilie=s:

[newton]

Yea, I live way far away from a sportsmans warehouse or else I would have jumped all over that deal. Funny thing is there used to be one just a few miles away but they closed up shop some years back.

Any hiccups with your gun? Show us some pictures? Load your using?

[bangerjim]

I bought the Para 1911 SST match grade unit very early this year and really like it. Paid in the low $400's after all was said and done. Not a bad gun. This is a pre-Rem version. Cycles well. Good accuracy. I cannot complain!

banger

[robertbank]

I bought the Para 1911 SST match grade unit very early this year and really like it. Paid in the low $400's after all was said and done. Not a bad gun. This is a pre-Rem version. Cycles well. Good accuracy. I cannot complain!

banger

That is the gun I had that peened on the slide stop. Keep an eye on it. Not sure if it effects much. It just looked like heck. For $400 you got a good deal. When they first cam out they were selling up here for +$900Cdn.

Take Care

Bob

[newton]

I bought the Para 1911 SST match grade unit very early this year and really like it. Paid in the low $400's after all was said and done. Not a bad gun. This is a pre-Rem version. Cycles well. Good accuracy. I cannot complain!

banger

Yea, those are the ones for $449. I really, really thought about getting it even though I had already paid for the other. But, in all honesty, when I really sat back and thought about it, I don't like the stainless finish. Weird, I know. The popular thing is stainless in a gun, so naturally most people view it on a higher scale, and when I saw the price I thought this would be a great way to get a stainless 1911. But then after thinking, I realized it was all just because the majority likes it and I really don't.

Don't get me wrong, stainless has its place and done right can be very pretty to look at.

Good to hear about the gun being good to go. I am crossing my fingers that I receive the email today that the gun has shipped and on its way. If it happens, then I should have it Friday/Saturday. If it does not, then it looks like Monday. So irritating, but its my luck.

[newton]

That is the gun I had that peened on the slide stop. Keep an eye on it. Not sure if it effects much. It just looked like heck. For $400 you got a good deal. When they first cam out they were selling up here for +$900Cdn.

Take Care

Bob

Was the stop itself peened, or the slide where the stop hits it? Either way, I think it would effect it in the long run. Maybe not at first, but eventually I think it could cause problems. Peening really only happens when something is not working correctly, so that in itself would say something was amiss.

I'm a tinkerer by nature, so I think I would have dug deeper finding the problem. I did with my Ruger, then sent it back. lol. But I wanted to know what the issue was. I can see not caring though if its just another gun in a collection of many. I hope to have that problem one day. lol

[robertbank]

If you think of the slide stop cut out as a n shape the peening was on the lower leading edge of the stop ie the muzzle side of the notch. Para didn't fix it so I assume they didn't know anymore as to what caused it as I did. In any event it is gone and I have others to play with.

Take Care

Bob

[newton]

If you think of the slide stop cut out as a n shape the peening was on the lower leading edge of the stop ie the muzzle side of the notch. Para didn't fix it so I assume they didn't know anymore as to what caused it as I did. In any event it is gone and I have others to play with.

Take Care

Bob

Now I see. I know you don't care, this is obvious, but it intrigues me. If you think about it, it could be only caused by one thing. The slide stop itself. And it could only be caused by it in one way, the slide stop being just slightly raised up further than it should. This correlates directly with that article I read where the mags were riding high in the mag well, which would in turn lift up the slide stop. But, seeing how you were using after market mags, then the very next thing I could see is that the magazine catch was too high causing all magazines to ride high.

It is either that, or the slide stop itself was out of speck. If it had been my gun, I would have filed down the lower end of the stop so that when I put a mag in loaded it did not raise the stop at all.

But that's me. lol. I'm a tinkerer. The only reason I would not have sent it in would be to save on shipping and the fact that it would be gone from me for a while. Of course, that would be negated if I had more than one 1911.

[Boolit_Head]

There is another cause. Riding the bottom of the slide stop could cause it to raise enough to contact the slide.

[newton]

Well, like I said, I am new to 1911. Just reading up now on the timing thing. Very interesting. So I guess there could be multiple reasons why the slide was peening. I see why you would not want to spend time on it for sure. I guess I just view things differently. lol

[newton]

There is another cause. Riding the bottom of the slide stop could cause it to raise enough to contact the slide.

yea, just seeing this. I love mechanical things, and this is very intriguing to me. I am now curious why the slide stop would be in contact with anything other than the magazine. It seems to me that the only reason to lock it open is for an empty mag. Other than that, it should stay out of the way. Guess I am going to have to dig into why it is in connection with the barrel some more.

[jonp]

My youngest son (32) and I each bought one of these nice handguns from Sportsman's ware house a couple of weeks back. The price was $379 - minus the $100 rebate. We also had a coupon for $10 off a $100 or more purchase. Bottom price was an astounding $269 for a nice tight good looking 1911 style handgun. I've never seen such a low price for any 1911 , even the ones made in the Phillipinrs or China are more than that. Seems to be a great gun[smilie=s:

Thats not how I read the ad. I thought it said the price and that was including the $100 off.

[newton]

So, you guys who have bought guns online before, what's the typical time from purchase to your FFL? They did not have my FFL on file, so that took a day, but tomorrow at noon will mark 7 days since I bought my gun. I'm irritated, but understand that delays can happen. I just have this sinking feeling that when I do get my gun it's going to be jacked up somehow. Usually when it rains it pours on me. i hate to keep emailing and asking about it. I'm not sure what proper etiquette is in this type of situation.

[jonp]

All depends on the dealer. It took Buds right at the end of their estimated shipping time to send the gun. Sportsmans Outdoor Superstore: I ordered a 1911 on Saturday, they shipped on Monday and my dealer had it Wednesday.

[newton]

I just saw a thread where it took someone well over a week from Buds. So, knowing that Buds is legit(way to many reviews not to be) seems things happen and it's just my bad luck messing things up.

[robertbank]

There is another cause. Riding the bottom of the slide stop could cause it to raise enough to contact the slide.

The correct answer is the gun a problem within the timing cycle. It sounds like it likely might have been to high a mag release cut causing issues with the slide lock lever. The mags never had a problem seating so I remain skeptical. I never had a problem with my double stack Para or any other 1911 I owned then or now.

The single stack guns, by the sounds of it, are going for blow out prices to get rid of built up inventory. We can buy Norinco produced 1911's out of China for the same or lower prices. They have had issues reported but none of mine have had any and they make great build guns with excellent frames and slides. I wish I could say that about the Paras. They look nice and at the prices quoted are certainly worth a look.

I wasn't aware Remington bought Para.

Take Care

Bob

[newton]

Could you give a link to look at some Norinco's at those prices. I have looked, but cant find any that hit under the $400 mark.

[Love Life]

I'd love to have 5 or so norinco's for under $300 apiece. I missed my chance years back and have regretted it ever since.

[alamogunr]

A question for those familiar with Para's: How do the early Para's stack up? I have 2 that I bought over 15 years ago. I don't have a lot of rounds thru either, probably not over 500.

I also have a Tac Four that I bought about 10 years ago. Haven't shot it much at all. Can't get used to the DAO action.

[ole 5 hole group]

A question for those familiar with Para's: How do the early Para's stack up? I have 2 that I bought over 15 years ago. I don't have a lot of rounds thru either, probably not over 500.

I also have a Tac Four that I bought about 10 years ago. Haven't shot it much at all. Can't get used to the DAO action.

I had an early model made in Canada and it was every bit as good as advertised. Had a mag spring weaken and I replaced it, other then that it never had a FTF, FTF and kept everything within 6 inches at 50 yards rested. I traded it even up for a Winchester 97 in good shape - wish I would have just kept it and tried to talk the guy down some on his 97 price.

[newton]

I'd love to have 5 or so norinco's for under $300 apiece. I missed my chance years back and have regretted it ever since.


Just 5? lol

[robertbank]

Could you give a link to look at some Norinco's at those prices. I have looked, but cant find any that hit under the $400 mark.
If you are in the US you can't import them into the US. We can't bring them in even for competitions. As for a link here is one.

https://www.canadaammo.com/

The Dominion Arms is also made by Norinco out of China.

Take Care

Bob

[alamogunr]

I had an early model made in Canada and it was every bit as good as advertised. Had a mag spring weaken and I replaced it, other then that it never had a FTF, FTF and kept everything within 6 inches at 50 yards rested. I traded it even up for a Winchester 97 in good shape - wish I would have just kept it and tried to talk the guy down some on his 97 price.

Come to think of it, I had weak magazine springs on the Tac Four. Para sent me several replacements, really more than I needed for the Tac Four. I used them on the P13-45 since they used the same magazine and I didn't want to chance the weak magazine syndrome on that gun.

[Love Life]

Just 5? lol

1 for each vehicle, 1 for upstairs, one for down stairs, and one to tinker with.

[newton]

If you are in the US you can't import them into the US. We can't bring them in even for competitions. As for a link here is one.

https://www.canadaammo.com/

The Dominion Arms is also made by Norinco out of China.

Take Care

Bob

Interesting. Thanks. I wonder why they cannot come here? Is it a China-USA thing?

[robertbank]

Interesting. Thanks. I wonder why they cannot come here? Is it a China-USA thing?

From what I understand either Norinco directly or the Chinese Gov't shipped product into L.A. or San Francisco to local gangs. I believe it was Clinton, no doubt egged on by gun manufactures in the US to issue an Executive Order banning their further importation when it all came to light. There is probably more to the story but that is how I understand it. The Norinco 1911's are excellent pistols for the money. The Chinese copy darn near any retail product you can imagine and guns are no exception. Their Sig 226 copy is excellent if work is done on the trigger. They also make copies of CZ, Colt, S&W, Springfield and Browning guns. I have three of their 1911's (One stock, 2 customized) . They run like clock work and the newer ones seem to be better finished now than they once were. You can buy the copy of the M 14 for around $600 Cdn still and you pay about $750 for the AR copy.

Take Care

Bob

[newton]

Very interesting

[jonp]

I'd love to have 5 or so norinco's for under $300 apiece. I missed my chance years back and have regretted it ever since.

When I was in college I traded a roomate $300 and a fish tank for a Gold Cup. I sold the Gold Cup for something I had to have. Yes, been kicking myself ever since.

[NavyVet1959]

I have a P14.45 LDA that was made in Canada and a WartHog made in Pineville, NC. Haven't had any problems with either. The WartHog is my daily carry lately. Both are stainless.

[Jal5]

So far my Expert SS has been flawless both with WWB 230 RN and my hand loads Extreme bullets 230 RN over a min dose of Bullseye. One ragged hole.

[newton]

How are the throats in you guys new Para Experts? I was getting some cases ready for loading last night, and got to wondering if I will have to burry the Lee 230 TC past its shoulder in order for the case to headspace on its rim. I have heard different guns like different things, but figure most of the Para's probably are pretty close to each other. I loaded a dummy round that has just a tad bit of the shoulder showing. Its sitting right at 1.190"-1.195". I have heard this is about the best place people have luck with, but also know that some have to go below 1.180" to get it to feed right. I'll be testing soon as the gun gets here.

I sure wish I was picking it up today. It shipped, and I followed it all weekend online. It now sits at my local FedEx place, just waiting for delivery to my FFL, but it still says that it will be Tuesday as deliver date. Hard to know its "in town" but cannot see it yet. lol

[Boolit_Head]

You ought to be ok. I had that mold for a week till I sent it back for not being aligned properly. Because of that accuracy suffered but they fed fine in my expert.

[newton]

You ought to be ok. I had that mold for a week till I sent it back for not being aligned properly. Because of that accuracy suffered but they fed fine in my expert.

Great. So you loaded them with the shoulder showing a little?

My mold is a dandy, but know what you speak of. I have a Lee mold that does that. This one shoots good though. I use it for my 45colt loads and it shoots straight out of my 4 5/8" BH. I think its going to be sweet out of the 1911.

FedEx says its on the truck for delivery. Fingers are crossed. Hopefully I'll have pics to show tomorrow. lol Sure would be nice to find a few extra mags in the box for having to wait on the shipping. But, I get it also that sometimes things happen and are unavoidable. Its the little things that hook people for loyal customers though. I told them I am going to buy another one from them outside of the holiday season though. I will too. There are a few more guns on my list, and now they have my FFL paperwork so it will be a buy and ship thing.

[Love Life]

Taurus PT 1911's are on clearout for $375 on Gunbroker. Not a bad price for a forged frame gun to build on.

[Boolit_Head]

Great. So you loaded them with the shoulder showing a little?

My mold is a dandy, but know what you speak of. I have a Lee mold that does that. This one shoots good though. I use it for my 45colt loads and it shoots straight out of my 4 5/8" BH. I think its going to be sweet out of the 1911.

FedEx says its on the truck for delivery. Fingers are crossed. Hopefully I'll have pics to show tomorrow. lol Sure would be nice to find a few extra mags in the box for having to wait on the shipping. But, I get it also that sometimes things happen and are unavoidable. Its the little things that hook people for loyal customers though. I told them I am going to buy another one from them outside of the holiday season though. I will too. There are a few more guns on my list, and now they have my FFL paperwork so it will be a buy and ship thing.

Just a bit.

[newton]

Just a bit.

Good deal. I wondered also the difference between the ramp on the barrel vs one on the frame. I take it the Expert has it on the frame. I guess either way they feed boolits fine.

[Boolit_Head]

So far mine has not been picky at all, it's fed everything I threw at it.

[newton]

Well I am a bit perturbed. Just checked the tracking and it says "Adult recipient not available". I am not sure if I buy it or not. Only thing I can figure is out of all the hours in the day, the owner decided to take lunch, and the FedEx driver decided to come during that break. Go figure on my luck.

I called FedEx, and the lady said that I could go to the local station and meet the truck guy there, that he would be back at 6 and they don't close till 7. That seems interesting to me. I would have thought that it could only be picked up by them. But I guess because it has my name on it.... So, there is no way for the store owner to go and pick it up, because they don't have my ID.

I am not sure what to do now. It says it try to be delivered tomorrow, but my luck is it will all happen again. What a stinking mess. I just wonder if I can pick it up and take it to the store tomorrow for all the paper work.

[Boolit_Head]

Legally I would not pick it up yourself. I had the same thing happen on one I shipped out of state. They redelivered the next day fine.

[newton]

Yea, I figured. I went back and looked at the ticket and I guess maybe it was not in my name afterall. Oh well.

[newton]

Went by the store. Sure enough, she was at lunch. She did leave a sign saying she would be back, which I guess usually the drivers come back, but with holiday season and all... She called and the driver now has her number so it won't happen again hopefully. I'm gonna go sit nearby tomorrow and block the driver in if he comes while she is at lunch and tries to leave.... Lol

hey, it's my present after all. Most other kids have to wait till Christmas morning. I'll get to play with mine Christmas Eve most likely. I can't really complain too much. Probably the most anticipated one since I was a younger boy.

[newton]

Here it is.....

125336

125331

125333






I'm happy, very happy. Got it on Wednesday. Have just under 100 rounds in it, but it took a while to find exactly what it liked. I had to keep adjusting my dies to get reliable loading. I think most of it is attributed to it having a very tight chamber. There were many rounds that would not drop into the barrel, much less able to be pushed into it, that would just plunk right into my 45acp cylinder on my Blackhawk. I think the main thing that was happening was getting the boolit to start into the case straight. If it went in at very much of an angle one way or the other it left a significant bulge. Even though it would be sitting straight after fully seating.

I think that I could get away with .451" boolits. I have not slugged the barrel though. I am very, very tempted to get the FCD for it from Lee though. I know a lot of guys talk about it sizing their boolits down and causing leading, but in my case, with the very tight chamber(and most likely bore), I think that the FCD would be the ticket. Anyone have one they don't need and would let go at a decent price?

The gun shoots great though. I have a little more experience under my belt now shooting a pistol than I did before when I first got my Blackhawk, but this thing groups very well. The trigger needs some breaking in, or fine tuning, because its the main thing keeping me from having extremely good groups. It seems to be a little ruff, and I am not sure what to think. Its either just that it needs to wear in, or the series/model 80 safety thing is causing it to be hard. I do not think its the sear surfaces. I am not going to be too concerned for now with it. If after 500 rounds its not smoother, then I will look into doing something else with it. Once I know its not going to have issues, I might take out that extra safety thing and work on the trigger. I have looked into getting a whole new trigger group for it, and it looks like you can get a good quality set for around $100. That would put the gun at the $500 mark which is still great for a good 1911 I think.

Everything else is just fine. Yes, you can tell the frame is cast, and its not as "pretty" as a well forged one. But the fit and function is very, very nice minus the trigger.

All in all, great buy. I am happy with it, even if the experience of buying it was pretty ruff. I'll buy from the people again for sure. I think the holiday rush had it all jacked up. Have to say they kept in constant communication and never let one of my emails go more than a day without responding to. I never had to make a phone call to them.

I hope to post some more good results as well as targets in the coming weeks. I think that I'll be set if I get a FCD though, although from the last few rounds I ran yesterday I might not need it. I just think it will help with those one rounds where the bulge is a bit much because of different case thickness and all. I did figure out that seating, and then crimping, is best done in separate steps. I know a lot of guys will argue that you can set up your dies right and do it in the same step, and I think that's true if your using boolits/bullets that are exactly the same, and are using brass that is exactly the same. My boolits are not the same, they are DT powder coated(which is VERY nice), and I am using a widely mixed variety of brass.

It took me about 50 rounds to realize that because of those two aspects, I will not be able to size and crimp in one step. Most of my rounds were fine, but the odd ball would be thrown in and ruin the mag run. It was not much though like I said, because ALL the rounds could be shot in my Ruger BH. The last batch I did I made in the separate steps and it was fine. Except, for the ones that would slightly bulge on one side of the case, which was extremely hard to keep from happening. The FCD will solve that issue though. I am almost positive of it.

************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ****************************************

WORD OF WARNING

In the following pages you will witness a train wreck. lol. Actually, I am going back to edit my comments and clean things up. If you want, skip to the end and see the outcome(almost complete at the time of this edit). I have no doubt that the guys on here like to share the knowledge they have, and I trully absorb it like a sponge. But sometimes its more respectful to let someone do something the way they want if it effects no one else but themselves. In the following pages you will see that I am trying to acomplish getting my gun running good without the need of reaming the barrel. Others have genuinely chastised(reamed me....) me for not reaming it. In the end, its all up to you if you decide you want to cut your barrrel. I chose not to, and am happy with my descision. The only descision I am not happy with is the fact that I got suckered, hook line and sinker, into a full fledge arguement. So thats why I am going back, maybe it will cut some pages off the thread and make it easier to find out what I did with my gun.

[Love Life]

Good read and glad the pistol is meeting your expectations. It very well may have a tight chamber and not accept .451 boolits loaded in brass.

Also, ensure your flare is fully ironed out. You should be crimping at .468-.470, and seating and crimping in separate steps is a good idea.

As for the bulged brass with loaded bullets, can you post a picture? My loads have a bulge, but have fed and fired in every 45 acp pistol I have ever stuffed them in. You can see the bulge in the picture:

[Jal5]

Sounds like you're on the right track with seat&crimp separately. I wouldn't go to the FCD yet it may introduce other things like reducing the boolit dia. Too much causing it to lead up the barrel. Did you slug the barrel? I worked around the dia. Of the case mouth and got it exactly where the gun likes and not one problem with lead. Was a different Lee mold TL 452230-2r. Still working on the best load but it shows real potential. No leading and no FTF or misfeeds.

[newton]

Good read and glad the pistol is meeting your expectations. It very well may have a tight chamber and not accept .451 boolits loaded in brass.

Also, ensure your flare is fully ironed out. You should be crimping at .468-.470, and seating and crimping in separate steps is a good idea.

As for the bulged brass with loaded bullets, can you post a picture? My loads have a bulge, but have fed and fired in every 45 acp pistol I have ever stuffed them in. You can see the bulge in the picture:

I will get some pictures tonight. I am next to positive that its the bulge and not the crimp. I tried crimping some of them harder after I found they would not chamber(barrel plunk test), but it did not matter. Also, the proof of it in the end is when I somewhat forced the round(not hammer) into the chamber. When I took it back out you could see shinny rubbed area's on the brass midway down, right where the bulge was. I'll do a before and after photo of one to show what I am seeing.

Its that right there that leads me to being next to positive that the chamber is very tight. Which is not a horrible thing really, but it does mean an extra precaution needs to be taken to ensure reliable feeding. I think the Lee FCD, from what I have read, will be the ticket there. It should post size all of the rounds to fit. So any with just a tad bit of a bulge will be smoothed out some, or(in my head) rounded out even by pushing the bulge inward and - more or less - centering the boolit in the case. I am not sure if that makes any sense, it does in my head though. lol

[Love Life]

You may be better of sizing your boolits to .451 or having the chamber opened up a tad. Personally, I'd look to having the chamber opened so that all my rds fit all my guns, but if this is your one and only then no big deal.

You can seat and crimp in the same step...successfully, but I highly recommend that you trim all your brass to a uniform length for same step seating/crimping. What happens is when you set the crimp die, it is set for that brass length so when a longer piece of brass enters it begins to crimp before the boolit is fully seated. You end up with shaved boolits and shenanigans.

I might have a spare crimp die floating around and I'll check when I get home. If I do, then it is yours.

Enjoy that new pistol as the 1911 is a ton of fun. Just classic looking and feels good in the hand and on the waist.

[newton]

Sounds like you're on the right track with seat&crimp separately. I wouldn't go to the FCD yet it may introduce other things like reducing the boolit dia. Too much causing it to lead up the barrel. Did you slug the barrel? I worked around the dia. Of the case mouth and got it exactly where the gun likes and not one problem with lead. Was a different Lee mold TL 452230-2r. Still working on the best load but it shows real potential. No leading and no FTF or misfeeds.

I think I remember reading some of your old posts on the FCD and other issues. I read a lot about it, and understand what it does and can do. But if you take into account all the signs and testing I have done, then you can see where it might not be a bad thing for it to reduce the boolit dia in my gun. I honestly think its worth a try to keep from having to go at a snails pace through the reloading process, having to test each round. Because it seems that the slightest bit of bulge is causing the hangup. I ruled out OAL (which I settled on 1.170") and I have ruled out crimp (which I have tried everything from .473" to .470").

The rounds, now that I figured out what OAL and crimp it likes, do not hang up on headspacing on the rim. They hang up by rubbing against the chamber wall, which is seen in the bright areas it causes on the brass. So, with a FCD, it would take that slight bulge out. I did not slug it yet, but am next to positive that it has a tight groove dia (.451" or smaller). Since I am shooting soft boolits, and they are powder coated, they could be shot at groove diameter and be able to be bumped up I would think. No need to go a whole .001" over the groove diameter. I would think that the FCD might only squeeze it down a little anyways.

In my reading I found both those who hated the die and those who loved it. I think it amounts to the different barrel and chamber dimensions people had in their guns. Older guns with loose chambers and bores, that needed a full .452" boolit suffered from the die, and those with tight chambers and bores found the die to help reliability without hurting accuracy or leading. That's just my take away from the research I did.

[35remington]

If you're absolutely positive the chamber is rather too small, smartest thing to do is to open it up. Nothing more aggravating than a range queen 1911, and guns with separate arrangements for sights and barrel that lock up variably from shot to shot really don't and can't take advantage of a tight chamber.

Ream that critter. No practical or significant loss of accuracy will result.

I am presuming your loaded rounds do not exceed the SAAMI spec for diameter over the body of the bullet.

[robertbank]

Love Life has you on the right track. Paras were never known to have to tight a chamber or to loose for that matter either. From my experience cartridge OAL, and the absence of correct amount of crimp was the major problem with feeding issues particularly when the 1911 had the ramped barrel. The guns normally feed very well. You really should not have any problem with bullets sized to .452 and crimped properly. If you do then check the OAL and see if you have to adjust there. The FCD will only set up other problems for you.
If, on the off chance your barrel miked out with to large a barrel diameter then going to even smaller diameter bullets is going to make the matter worse not better. I doubt your problem lies with barrel diameter.

All the Best

Bob

[newton]

You may be better of sizing your boolits to .451 or having the chamber opened up a tad. Personally, I'd look to having the chamber opened so that all my rds fit all my guns, but if this is your one and only then no big deal.

You can seat and crimp in the same step...successfully, but I highly recommend that you trim all your brass to a uniform length for same step seating/crimping. What happens is when you set the crimp die, it is set for that brass length so when a longer piece of brass enters it begins to crimp before the boolit is fully seated. You end up with shaved boolits and shenanigans.

I might have a spare crimp die floating around and I'll check when I get home. If I do, then it is yours.

Enjoy that new pistol as the 1911 is a ton of fun. Just classic looking and feels good in the hand and on the waist.


I thought about trying a .451" sizer, but then figured if the Lee FCD would somewhat size the boolit down why not go that route. And it makes sense since I seat and crimp in two separate steps now anyways.

I hear you on the seating/crimping same thing. But, like you mentioned, all your brass needs to be the same length. I would also say that the same thickness(same headstamp) is also needed. Both of which take time to sort, and to make sure they are the same. To me, seating, then crimping would take the same amount of time. So its having 1/2 dozen in one and 6 in the other. lol

That would be great if you find a crimp die, but I am really just looking for the Lee FCD.

Oh yea, this pistol is going to be what I shoot the most I can see it now. It does fit the hand a lot better than my Blackhawk. One major thing that I will have to fix first is the fact that I am not used to chasing down my brass. I don't shoot on a concrete pad or anything, so the brass seems to blend in with the ground where I shoot. I am going to put up a sheet/curtain to catch the brass and have it all fall in a single line of sorts I think. Then, I can blast away without thinking about where the brass is flying too.

[Love Life]

Put a cheap tarp down on the ground.

[newton]

If you're absolutely positive the chamber is rather too small, smartest thing to do is to open it up. Nothing more aggravating than a range queen 1911, and guns with separate arrangements for sights and barrel that lock up variably from shot to shot really don't and can't take advantage of a tight chamber.

Ream that critter. No practical or significant loss of accuracy will result.

I am presuming your loaded rounds do not exceed the SAAMI spec for diameter over the body of the bullet.

I don't think its too small, just might have been one of the first chambers cut with a new tool is all. I believe it is 100% within SAAMI spec . Once I started seating and sizing in the separate steps then my plunk test fail rate dropped dramatically. In fact, very few failed ( I have done less than 30 rounds since then though). However, the ones that did fail the test failed because of the bulge. Not the OAL or crimp. Those two factors stayed the same. The failed ones came out with a shiny spot on the case where the base of the boolit sat.

[Love Life]

In a 30 rd lot, any failure of the plunk test is unacceptable.

[newton]

Love Life has you on the right track. Paras were never known to have to tight a chamber or to loose for that matter either. From my experience cartridge OAL, and the absence of correct amount of crimp was the major problem with feeding issues particularly when the 1911 had the ramped barrel. The guns normally feed very well. You really should not have any problem with bullets sized to .452 and crimped properly. If you do then check the OAL and see if you have to adjust there. The FCD will only set up other problems for you.
If, on the off chance your barrel miked out with to large a barrel diameter then going to even smaller diameter bullets is going to make the matter worse not better. I doubt your problem lies with barrel diameter.

All the Best

Bob

I am imagining that since these are "newer" models then things might have been changed up. This particular gun has a "match grade barrel". Now, from my reading, all the aftermarket "match grade" 1911 barrels have tight chambers and bore/groove diameters. I think this is the case with my gun. It also has a very low serial #, if I am reading it correctly.

I can assure you, 100%, that OAL and crimp is not the case here. They were playing some part of the issue for the first 50 rounds, but I fixed them after that. The barrel on mine does not have the ramped barrel, its just standard. I think I can polish it up a bit more though, but really I did not have a single failure to feed. They fed into the barrel....they would just get stuck like a black snake trying to get out of chicken wire after eating half dozen eggs.

My barrel and chamber are quite fine.

Just to sum up. My OAL and crimp is not playing the issue here. It is the bulge that happens on some of the boolits I load. I am not sure why it happens, but my best guess is that they get started ever so slightly off centered sometimes. But, in all honesty, they don't look too abnormal from most others rounds that show a slight bulge. It just seems that with my particular chamber it happens to be a bit much. Truth be told, I have taken some of them and went ahead and forced them into the chamber. Of course, it took a pair of pliers to get them back out. So its not much that they are hanging up on, but enough to cause them to not go into battery when fed from the magazine.

I know, believe me I know, that the popular consensus is that the Lee FCD causes issues. But, that cannot be said of all guns I don't think. I could be wrong on this part, but usually that little voice inside my head is right and this time its telling me that the FCD will actually help, not just try to 'fix' other things that are wrong. If after I get one, and try it, and get horrible results from it - I will be 100% honest with you guys about it.

[newton]

In a 30 rd lot, any failure of the plunk test is unacceptable.

That's my thought also. Main reason to use the FCD honestly. Since my issue is not OAL or crimp, but rather the size of the round itself in the middle.

[35remington]

If your loaded round is within SAAMI spec and it's tight the chamber diameter is too small. What did the measurement I asked for reveal?

There is a curious tendency for people to want to "preserve" their overly tight chambers (if that is the case here) for reasons that are elusive. Given the problematic areas of barrel to bushing fit, barrel to slide fit, slide to frame fit, and other areas, having a "match grade" chamber when all other areas are less than perfect is not helpful to accuracy. In fact, a standard chambered arm well fitted in all these areas will easily outshoot a match chamber in an unfitted gun or modestly tricked out gun.

Next time, measure the cartridge over the bulge and see if it is within SAAMI spec. If it is not, then the bullet was likely oversized before it went in the case. No need to "believe" it (chamber and loaded round) is within SAAMI spec if you can measure and change the belief to fact. Knowledge is better than faith. That way you know for sure it is a reaming remedy or a loading remedy that will cure your troubles.

If it is a bulged case from an oversized bullet, is easily solved by sizing bullets before loading them, and this is a better solution than ironing out a case that has a bullet already seated.

I will state that "tight" chambers on production guns are one of the dumbest things ever to put in pedestrian 1911's, and they make no sense whatsoever on the vast majority of 1911's. A tight chamber is not something to take pride in. Rather, view it as an albatross that will cost you, possibly dearly, in anything contemplated for serious use.

[Jal5]

All of these BOOLITS were sized to .452 is that right? If loaded as dropped the sizes could vary quite a bit and cause the bulge you had problems with in only some of the finished rounds.

[NavyVet1959]

I prefer to seat and crimp in separate stages also. If I try to do it in one stage, I often get a bit of lead shaved from the bullet, especially when I'm using unsized bullets.

[Love Life]

SAAMI: http://www.saami.org/PubResources/CC_Drawings/Pistol/45%20Automatic.pdf

[newton]

SAAMI: http://www.saami.org/PubResources/CC_Drawings/Pistol/45%20Automatic.pdf

Thanks! I was just going to go look for that. lol

[Love Life]

Guys, guys, guys......you all are not listening to me or my situation. Its the automatic jump on the "bad" Lee FCD for handgun use. Seriously, I spent a lot of time reading threads that had this in it yesterday. But, amongst those threads I found the few that actually benefited from the FCD. They had good OAL, and good crimp, just a tight chamber. And they did not send out the barrel to be reamed, or buy the expensive tools to do it themselves, they simply tried the FCD. It worked. Seems pretty straight forward to me, no?

I'm a big proponent of if it works then it works. Please let us know if the FCD fixes the feeding issues.

[35remington]

If a .452" bullet won't work, but a .451" will after going through the LFCD and it's reduced another thou to .451".....you STILL don't have enough clearance, as that's something less than a half thou per side. The operative word being "less." That is the definition of a "too tight" chamber.

I am advocating opening a too tight chamber to reasonable size, not advocating enlarging a proper one. By all indications, if a sized .452" bullet is not clearing, and if the loaded round is within SAAMI spec, the chamber is too small. That is a problem if it is fact.

That amount of feeding clearance is just flat ridiculous. Match benchrest shooters in tight neck chambered rifles are flirting with that amount of clearance for rifles loaded one at a time...that is, a half thou or less clearance in the chamber neck. You don't have a reasonable excuse for that little clearance in a gun with inherently loose barrel/slide/frame fit that cannot take advantage of a tight chamber. Even well fitted guns can't really take advantage of a tight chamber.

Why, then, have one?

You're shooting an autoloader that gets dirty and feeds, well, hopefully automatically. Vastly different animal.

I am listening to your issue. Measure your clearances. If it is down to a .451" working, and a .452" not working, clearances are so minimal that you're still flirting with way too little.

A cartridge loaded with .452" bullets will be below SAAMI spec in diameter over the bullet. I've measured many with many different brands of brass.

Reaming is cheap for someone who already has a reamer. Get it done and you won't have a gun that needs "special" treatment and gives room for crud, fouling, and other issues. I'll repeat my comment that tight match chambers on pedestrian guns need remedying.

A LFCD treatment to give less than a half thou clearance per side is a poor substitute for a proper chamber.

[newton]

Will do. Seeing how so many people don't like it, I figured I might be able to buy from a member here. lol But if not, I'll get one from my usual store.

[newton]

If a .452" bullet won't work, but a .451" will after going through the LFCD and it's reduced another thou to .451".....you STILL don't have enough clearance, as that's something less than a half thou per side. The operative word being "less." That is the definition of a "too tight" chamber.

I am advocating opening a too tight chamber to reasonable size, not advocating enlarging a proper one. By all indications, if a sized .452" bullet is not clearing, and if the loaded round is within SAAMI spec, the chamber is too small. That is a problem if it is fact.

That amount of feeding clearance is just flat ridiculous. Match benchrest shooters in tight neck chambered rifles are flirting with that amount of clearance for rifles loaded one at a time...that is, a half thou or less clearance in the chamber neck. You don't have a reasonable excuse for that little clearance in a gun with inherently loose barrel/slide/frame fit that cannot take advantage of a tight chamber. Even well fitted guns can't really take advantage of a tight chamber.

Why, then, have one?

You're shooting an autoloader that gets dirty and feeds, well, hopefully automatically. Vastly different animal.

I am listening to your issue. Measure your clearances. If it is down to a .451" working, and a .452" not working, clearances are so minimal that you're still flirting with way too little.

A cartridge loaded with .452" bullets will be below SAAMI spec in diameter over the bullet. I've measured many with many different brands of brass.

Reaming is cheap for someone who already has a reamer. Get it done and you won't have a gun that needs "special" treatment and gives room for crud, fouling, and other issues. I'll repeat my comment that tight match chambers on pedestrian guns need remedying.

A LFCD treatment to give less than a half thou clearance per side is a poor substitute for a proper chamber.

The .452" boolit works great over 90% of the time. Its that one time, when for what ever reason(me thinks the boolit is slightly cocked or the brass is weak?) the case bulges at the bottom of the boolit. That is the ONLY spot on the brass case that hangs up in the chamber, its also only on one side of the brass. I'll have pictures tomorrow.

I really do hear, and agree 100% that a tight chamber is not needed in a gun like mine. But I am not going to send it out, or buy the tools, if a $15 die will fix my problem. I am just hoping that someone will come along with one they do not need that will sell for a tad less.

[NavyVet1959]

I found it a lot easier to adjust the seating depth with one die and the crimp / taper with another die. When I tried to do it all with the same die, I would adjust the die to give the correct seating depth and then screw down the body of the die to give the right crimp. The thread pitches on these two parts are different, so you can't just get by with holding the seating stem steady and screwing down the body of the die since that ends up changing the seating depth. For me at least, it was easier to separate the seating and crimping. I use the Lee dies -- including the FCD.

[35remington]

Minimum chamber clearance is a really bad choice to make for reliable function. There is nothing more undesirable than a problematic autoloader than could have been fixed properly IMO.

Measure the .452" bullet loaded cases as well. If it is within SAAMI spec and doesn't fit on occasion, then the chamber was a mistake as produced for that pistol. That should isolate causes and proper cures.

Reaming is cheaper than you're fearing. You do it once and the gun belongs with all the others in terms of ammo functionality after loading. If you have any other 45 ACP arms, then its a matter of worrying more about your ammo if it is not done, or taking an extra step to put otherwise unneeded extra "squash" on your finished rounds. Peace of mind and interchangeability has value.

It's up to you as to what to do, obviously, but any functionality issues that occur after the "squeeze 'em even more to fit" choice was made will serve notice what the right choice should have been. You'll find out soon enough, as it's your time and your dime.

I would not trust the gun for any serious pupose unless 100 percent functionality was present even after it gets quite dirty in the chamber. Good, properly fit and clearanced 1911's should and will shoot even when crudded up. Yours should too.

[newton]

Did more research, and it may be very well what I had originally thought. Seating my boolits sideways. I did notice that when I took extra time to carefully place the boolit into the case and have it showing the same amount all the way around then 9 times out of 10 I got a good case. I am not completely positive how I will remedy it with the equipment I have though. I flare the case as much as the powder through expanding die will flare it. Maybe I can improvise something. The boolit is the Lee 230 TC, standard lube groove with a very large heel/bevel.

One suggestion I read was to get as much as a flare as you can, and only lightly place the boolit on top. I have not tried this yet. I always push the boolit down into the mouth.

[Love Life]

I think DougGuy reams chambers. I'd PM just to get an estimate.

As for the one bulged rd...I just flop my boolits on top of the case (some of them are visibly tilted to one side running up into the die) and just run the ram up on the press. The seating die straightens and seats the bullet. I've never had any issues with my ammo in a properly spec'd and functioning 1911 or 45 acp auto.

I would pay heed to what 35 Remington is telling you. Your gun should feed all the time, even when funky from lube and debris and slightly caddy wompus ammo. I am also interested I what the loaded rd measures at the bulge.

[robertbank]

To the OP forget the "Match Grade" barrel nonsense. What would that be, if it existed? Such a term is nothing more than advertising. Did you ever here of a non match grade barrel? If the gun has to tight of barrel would that be a "Match Grade" barrel even though it was to tight or a non match grade barrel because it was to tight? The Para has a well made barrel on it. It maybe to tight but I doubt it. Modern CNC machinery runs at very close tolerances.

Take Care

Bob

Take Care

Bob

[DougGuy]

I just did a Para barrel today that was finicky about feeding and plunking. Not now! :bigsmyl2:

ALL these in the photo pass the plunk test now, and I can get a .4525" pin gage about .200" into the throat.

http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/bb374/DougGuy/Cylinder%20Services/DSC03146_zps7d63b486.jpg (http://s1202.photobucket.com/user/DougGuy/media/Cylinder%20Services/DSC03146_zps7d63b486.jpg.html)

[Love Life]

Good luck in your endeavors.

[35remington]

Would you measure the nonfeeding rounds already and tell me what that dimension is? Then you'll know.

What's out in left field is your steadfast refusal to let us know whether your nonfeeding rounds are in spec or not.

The big picture is the chamber's dimensions. That dictates whether reaming is needed or not. If the nonfeeding rounds meet spec, it's the chamber.

How about stop dinking around and getting that done? Then if they are within spec, what needs to be done is obvious. Then it needs to happen because of what you did correctly, rather than just danced around in trying to address the wrong thing.

That's obviously what you're doing up to this point. Enough typing already. Get to measuring. Then we can discuss the rationality of your choices.

Use common sense. Don't lose the forest for the trees. Run down that runaway train. Let us know dimensionality on the nonfeeding stuff.

If the chamber is incorrect (loaded rounds within spec) due to the wealth of knowledge and years of experience here reaming the chamber IS the correct response you'll get, whether you want to acknowledge it or not. We won't know that until you get to business and drop the argumentative banter. Get busy.

[newton]

.473" at the crimp
.475" at where the bulge is
rest of the cartridge is standard for what a Lee full length sizer does.

125421

125422

125423

Should be able to see the bright spots on the brass showing where it sticks. Not sure if you can see the one, but it has bright spot all on the neck where I tried to crimp it further to rule it out of the question.

[35remington]

If the rounds are within spec and reaming is off the table as an answer, so is common sense. When something is not within spec you fix that which is not properly dimensioned, not that which is properly dimensioned already.

This is known as "common sense." It is on you if you don't want to apply it.

Failing to use common sense has consequences. You're the one that's going to experience those consequences, and we've already discussed them.

If you want to do the right thing, all solutions are on the table as answers. You don't get to pre decide which is right or not before knowing what the true source of the problem is.....if you want to do something correctly. If you want to pursue incorrect solutions for simple problems, that's on you as well, but those that deliberately pursue the wrong course of action often get the degree of problems that they deserve.

[35remington]

FINALLY! Great jumping Jehosephat, we could have avoided all this had you had simply bothered to state this first thing!

Next time do all of us a favor and attend to the correct course of measurement.

Since many of us (I have one) don't have a LFCD you might want to see if another bullet or mould has this same seating problem causing bulges.

If you are desperately desiring to fix with the LFCD what can be fixed and don't care about crooked bullet seating (which may be an accuracy issue if a bandaid solution is pursued that does not address it) then have at it.

Just don't be a skinflint. Pay the cost for the die, know that you haven't fixed the crooked bullet seating issue, and be happy with whatever results you get.

[Love Life]

OK. So now you know the bulge is out of spec and the true problem. Looking back, I see you are seating to 1.170. Why so short/deep? Is that all that will feed? Try seating out further and see if that eliminates the bulge.

Could be as simple as the base of the boolit hitting the thicker part of the case and pushing it out. You may not be crooked, just to deep.

[35remington]

Also know that the 1911 tends to favor OAL's of in the vicinity of 1.200" and longer. Shorter makes a later feed ramp strike and a more angular feed into the chamber. A steeper feed angle makes the rim approach the extractor at more of an angle and reduces the size of the "window" the rim must fit in to get under the extractor. If the rim doesn't get under the extractor, the gun likely misfeeds. So short is bad.

A different seating stem may fix the crooked issue if crookedness is the problem.

[newton]

I arrived at the OAL via trial and error. It is where the boolit shoulder is just at/under the rim*error - mouth*. Longer and it does not headspace on the rim*error - mouth*. However, it just so happens that it is the OAL called out for use with this boolit(actually the TL version) by the Lyman cast bullet handbook #4.

There were no FTF in my testing, only failure to go into complete battery. Only the bulge is giving the problem. I had thought about a different seating die. I think it's hornady that actually holds the bullet straight as its guided in the case. But I am going to try the FCD first. What I can almost see myself doing is lapping the carbide ring out to just touch the brass and only catch the rounds that end up getting the little bulge.

[35remington]

IF you can get it to chamber, for correct feeding the OAL of the truncated cone bullets is better in the 1.200" vicinity. Lyman is not a great repository of 1911 knowledge. I presume you mean the case mouth rather than "rim" since the ACP case is rimless and no rim is in the vicinity of the bullet shoulder.

It would be best to see if you can fix the seating issue with a different, and cheap, seating stem. That way you don't have crooked bullets, which is more desirable than squashing a crooked bullet in the case to get it to fit. Better to have a straight bullet.

Good luck lapping carbide.

[robertbank]

One last attempt. I have seen cases weaken just ahead of the webbing causing a bump and the cartridges won't seat. That isn't the same thing as not feeding. Sometimes it is a case of the sizing die it it's attempt at resizing the case forces the case to bulge out close to the webbing. I had that happen to me shooting my CZ 97B a couple of weeks ago. The cases had been reloaded several times. I held them up and could see where the case was bulged. Removed the bullet, primer and powder and tossed the bullet in my scrap pile and the case in the recycle bin.

I doubt there is anything wrong with the gun. There should be no need for the FCD and only sizing lead bullets .451 is no solution at all. If the gun is feeding most of the ammo you reload then the cases that won't feed or seat are the problem. Take them and examine them. They have to be different then the ones that will feed. Lastly slight swelling from loading cartridges with 452 sized lead bullets is normal and those cases should load in any 1911.

If you want to know how to determine the correct OAL for any bullet/gun combination PM me. It eliminates the guesswork.

Take Care

Bob

[35remington]

Just because a gun is feeding does not mean it is feeding optimally. If you can reduce the distance the round has to go before it hits the feed ramp it is better as a way to reduce feed angularity. The 1911 was set up and designed to work with rounds of a certain overall length. When this is deviated from things work less well than they could. What we're doing by pursuing that end is reducing the odds of a problem by directing things toward the middle of the tolerance of how the gun was set up to feed.

One should steer toward the design's preferences if possible. The round headspacing on the bullet is not undesirable as long as the generated OAL is still short enough to function through the gun and is less than max allowable.

It may interest you to know that ball ammo has a tolerance in overall length. There's a reason. Your bullet configuration has a tolerance as well. In the vicinity of 1.200" is closer to said tolerance.

If the existing seating stem is not doing what you need, and I believe it is set up for a roundnosed bullet, a fellow might inquire of Lee if another seating stem configuration is available.

If one can assure straighter bullet seating, this is the way to go in curing the problem.

You may not desire the things other people do.....but you might want to reassess whether what you desire is the proper course of action. Testing will answer that question.

I can assure you the directions I suggested to you aren't a matter of guessing on my part. It's a matter of knowing, hard won the hard way.

Nonstandard overall lengths, cartridges barely having room to fit the chamber and crooked bullets aren't the way to go with the 1911. Some effort to address these things is worthwhile.

That would be your preparation step.

[35remington]

Never said anything about reaming the throat, just that it is not improper to headspace on the bullet. No need to go there without trying things first. Why don't you let me finish my own conversations and keep to your own thoughts?

Let's go back where I was trying for several posts to get you to measure something so we would know what the problem was. One central theme has been that it's important to know what the problem is before doing anything. That hasn't changed. I never stated that you needed to ream or change anything before figuring out what the case diameter over the bullet was. Finally you brought forth that information. This should have been known immediately upon noticing the "bulge" over the bullet, and you wouldn't have had to argue about it.

In any future diagnosis of problems that may occur with your 1911, try to narrow down the potential problem with the resources you have at hand. That is why I asked you to measure things first.

You don't know much about the bullet you are shooting, or you wouldn't "assure" me the overall length you currently have is standard for it. It isn't.

We have not established that your barrel is too tight because you haven't measured it yet. We have established your ammo is very oversized. Try not to flail about with declarative statements of fact.....that aren't.

Just a bit of advice.......actually know before you make statements that you know. A more open mind and understanding of how the gun was designed to work will help you in the future. It is easier to cater to the gun's preferences than swim upstream against it.

Once, when I was having my Dad help me work on my truck, he showed me a particular way he wanted me to remove part of my drum brake assembly. After watching him work on it, I promptly did it the opposite of how he showed me. At that moment, he stated, "It never fails to amaze me how someone who's never done something thinks he knows more than someone who has."

What could I say? Guilty as charged. That's where you're at now. The point is to save you some time, but just like with my father you can accept advice or you can view it in retrospective, realizing you should have taken it. That takes making mistakes yourself, which is where many tend to go.

[dubber123]

35remington, you are a patient man. If I ever have trouble getting a 1911 to run, I will contact you.

[Love Life]

Try seating a handful to 1.200 or more and see if that eliminates your bulge issue.
In all the amount of ammo I've loaded over the years for a wide variety of firearms and calibers, I've never run into crooked ammo. For my progressive press runs I seriously just toss the bullet on the case and let the die straighten it out.

It's just something to try to see if it alleviates your bulge issues.

[35remington]

I've been there with all this 1911 stuff. I remember my first reload, which was the old style Hornady 200 SWC seated to the wrong depth. I wondered why it wouldn't feed through my magazines, which were GI. I knew nothing about magazine release timing and feeding angularity, nor proper seating depth.

I also remember things like my McCormick Shooting Stars experiencing bolt over base misfeeds on every other second to the last shot from the magazine. What the advertiser doesn't tell you.....that SS's are meant for lightly loaded ammo only....you sometimes have to figure out the hard way.

Absent advice, sometimes you have to live it before you learn it. If you can, and if you will listen, taking advice saves time, money and aggravation. Nobody around me had advice to give, and back then it was harder to seek it out.

I would not be doing my part if I didn't try to pass advice along. Whether it is taken or not depends upon a person's inclinations, just like me, Dad, and that brake drum. I don't fault that. I just fault someone trying to relate knowledgeably about something when they clearly don't know, just like that which irked Dad. A chip off the 'ol block, I guess.

[35remington]

Can't say I've run into crooked ammo to that degree either. I wonder what's going on there as well.

[robertbank]

Fellows communication is difficult and when we are not face to face it becomes even more difficult be it verbal or written. Sometimes we hear/read what we want to hear/read and ignore what we don't want to hear/read.

To the OP. I use Lyman molds in the main. When I do I always read the Lyman manual and do my best to reload my cartridges to Lyman's recommended suggested OAL's.

That said sometimes there are advantages in loading the longest possible OAL for a cartridge and the gun in hand. Other times I have a custom mold in my hand or a mold where there are no laid down specifications for OAL and I am either forced to guess or measure. I prefer to measure.

For any semi-auto the folowing method will determine the maximum OAL for any bullet/caliber/gun combination. Once calculated the reloader must ensure the cartridges will load in the guns magazine and two, feed into his gun. Sometimes the max OAL conflicts with the latter two important requirements.

!. Remove the barrel from the gun.
2. Using Veneer Calipers measure the length of the bullet and record it.
3. Drop the bullet into the chamber of the gun and using your caliper measure from the base of the bullet to the top of the barrel hood where the case rim would lie flush with the hood.
4. Add the two measurements together and reduce by a couple of thousandths to allow for hobby press play.

You will now have the maximum OAL for a cartridge for that bullet in that gun. You must then check to see if a cartridge of that length will load in the guns magazine and if it will feed into the gun. If it does both of these things , Voila! as the French would say you have the maximum length for your cartridges for that gun using that bullet.

As to your problem 35Remington knows of what he speaks, others do to, and they are trying to help you and also trying to avoid you spending money on fixes that either won't work or that have nothing to do with the problem you are having.

I suspect a close inspection of the rounds that won't feed vs those that will may lead you to the answer to your problems. Do not look for one specific difference, just look for differences. You might be well advised to assume for now there is nothing wrong with the guns dimensions as it loads some ammo just fine. While case length might be a source of the problem I have never found any consistency in quality 45acp brass. I have new unfired Winchester brass that is shorter than the SAMMI specifications. None of my 45acp brass are the same length and all function just fine in a variety of 1911/45acp pistols. Eventually over time the 45acp case will shorten to the point where I might get failures to fire but I have not experienced that...yet. The cases usually split after 16 to 20 reloads and go to the recycle bin. Swelling from loading 452 lead bullets into cases designed for 451 jacketed bullets has never caused me a failure to feed.

From my experience:

1. To long/to short a cartridge has caused problems in some guns.
2. Throat dimensions on one of my guns would not allow semi-wadcutter designs to feed. An easy fix for a gunsmith.
3. Improper crimping as in not removing the bell applied to the case to ease the loading of the bullet, for me, has been the biggest cause. Sometimes a bullet will slip off the press and miss the crimping cycle. Not often, and not often not caught, but it has happened to me.

That is it. Those are my experiences with the 45acp cartridge and 1911 guns. I am sure others have had more experiences than me and may have had other issues. Those are just mine and are not a definitive list.

Take Care

Bob

[Love Life]

I just picked up on something else you posted. You say that "1.180" is as long as you can seat due to the throat. That may be an issue there. That means the full diameter of the bullet, "ogive" if you will, is contacting the rifling at 1.180? That is no Bueno in my opinion. Do you have any 230 gr ball? You should be able to seat a 230 gr ball bullet to 1.270 without issue. If you can't, then you may in fact need to have the throat cut CORRECTLY as it is incorrect or sharp if it makes you load short. As long and slim as the TC nose is, you should be able to seat farther out.

This pistol barrel is cut correctly:
125462 125461





As you can see, even loaded a tad beyond max length per the manual, it passes the plunk test. The full diameter of the boolit does not engage the rifling, and the cartridge still headspaces off the case mouth as it is DESIGNED to do.

I may be grasping at straws here, but I really do want you to have a gun that runs 100% with in spec ammo.

In my thinking, your seating so deep may be causing your bulge in brass that I thicker than your other brass leading to the randomness of it. I mean, if you are seating crooked in some rds, and not others, even though you are loading the same way, then it leads to believe that your seating depth coupled with brass variances may be the cause of your out of spec bulge.

[35remington]

If the past thread content is any indication, I suspect he doesn't want to do anything to the gun, ever, even if it makes it better, but then I'm guessing based on his past responses. Since I didn't want him speaking for me, I'll try not to do that to him, and I'll let him turn you down on that suggestion as to reaming. I see that he rejected the idea already although it may well improve things given we don't know how abrupt his leade is.

The problem with rejecting possible cures before you know what the problem is, is that you may be rejecting the best solution to the problem, which leaves you trying to fix things with the second best solution. This is not the frame of mind to be in, but that may be where he's at. I'm letting him elaborate on that as well as I don't know for sure.

Factory ball has little issue chambering at proper OAL (which is usually 1.262-1.265") even in fairly short throated guns due to the long curved 2 radius ogive that allows little full diameter ahead of the case mouth, combined with a slightly smaller .451" jacketed diameter. I'll bet that chambers in his gun fine as is. He mentioned factory ammo works and I'm presuming that includes factory ball.

As to your slightly longer suggested 1.270" OAL, well, we'll see what he says.

[Love Life]

The only 230 gr boolit I have ever "had" to deep seat is that.452 tube that lee sells as a roundball boolit.

You can see a bit of the full diameter sitting above the case mouth in the round I have posted using that ball boolit.

[newton]

Quick update,

Tried Bobs suggestion and from base of boolit to top of hood was .550"

These boolits run .620"

That adds up to 1.170"

Those are measurements, not guesses.

[Love Life]

Wow. Just wow. People tried to help you. Stop reloading crappy ammo and have fun.

[35remington]

Can't see the "putting myself on a pedestal" part when I'm relaying information. That may be simply your take on it when your ideas, after being disseminated, elicit alternative suggestions that may accomplish your ends in a better way. All I'm saying is I've been there before, and am trying to save you time. Ask yourself......in a thread where you're trying to discover something, is is possible someone else has already addressed that problem and has a good way to overcome it, or is it likely that, since you're feeling your way through the issue, that you'll just happen to come up with the best way to do it the very first time you think of something?

I didn't when I first experienced some of these issues and admitted as much earlier in this thread. If that's putting myself on a pedestal.....I'd certainly like to know how.

When have I addressed or brought up issues not relevant to your particular situation? I'd appreciate specifics, please, otherwise your analogy about brakes and seat covers completely escapes me. I think your sensitivity to getting advice that may contradict your own ideas is getting the better of you.

Here's a quicker way to see if your 1.170 or 1.180 or 1.200" is too long. Make a round at these respective overall lengths. Drop them in your dismounted barrel. See if said rounds protrude beyond the barrel hood when fully seated. Then you'll know. If the hood does not fit flush with the breechface when the gun is assembled some small amount of the rim protruding longer than the hood is tolerable as long as it doesn't exceed the total length of hood and breechface gap.

Since the cartridge is in one piece when this is measured, and is not a separate unit, accumulative errors are less likely, and you're testing with an actual cartridge, which is the actual situation. Less likelihood for error.

My advice to you is to take the advice of an alternative when needed, rather than ruling it out before you do anything. It might take you awhile before you're ready to apply such advice, but at least consider it and the source that's trying to help rather than assuming you know better right off the bat.

"Wisdom is knowing when to share and help others with that experience and knowledge."

Since that's just what I'm doing, it appears someone has a problem with accepting wisdom. It would help if you don't forward definitions meant as a riposte that back you into a corner in terms of defining your own behavior. I would say that refusal to accept the wisdom freely and sincerely offered says quite a lot about the person doing the refusing.

[robertbank]

Quick update,

Tried Bobs suggestion and from base of boolit to top of hood was .550"

These boolits run .620"

That adds up to 1.170"

Those are measurements, not guesses.

OK now go back and do the measurements again. If you are off by a thousandth don't worry about it. In any event add the two measurements and divided them in two. Subtract a couple of thousandths. Your press or your bullets may well vary a tad. Load a few rounds and see how they feed.

35 Remington. The problem with loading three different cartridges is you have just added three more variables where errors may occur. He has now or will have the maximum length his gun will accept for that bullet. Not yours, not mine but the one he is using. Lets see where he goes with the information. newton load five rounds carefully. Measure them all and see how they feed and seat. Make sure you just remove the belling on your cartridges. No roll to the crimp. The case mouth should feel flat with no outward flare or inward turn.

Take Care

Bob

[robertbank]

newton why the over tight crimp? Why not just load the darn cartridges like you should or know how to and leave out the extra variables like to tight of crimp. You are loading lead bullets that are held in place by case friction not by the crimp.

Soldier on I have given you all I can to solve your problem.

Bob

[newton]

The one on the right is the one that is 1.200". It will not allow complete closure of the slide. As you can see from the ring, it's right at the shoulder. The other two show better signs, but I personally don't care for the fact that the slide has to slam them into battery. They will not go in with a plunk or a loose slide let down and push.

under normal gun operation it might not be an issue. But I see the posibilty of there being one. A factory round sits much more under the hood, as do the 1.170" rounds.

i got called in for dinner, but I'll continue on. I still think 1.180" will be the number to shoot for. Also, lightly placing the boolit on top of the case seems to be working. I still see a slight bulge here and there, but none that will not chamber because of it.

125500

[robertbank]

If the 1.170 OAL results in cartridges below the hood then your measurements were in error. If you measured of 1.170 was the maximum length bullet your guns would chamber why would you think a longer bullet would work? Makes no sense.

Bob

[newton]

newton why the over tight crimp? Why not just load the darn cartridges like you should or know how to and leave out the extra variables like to tight of crimp. You are loading lead bullets that are held in place by case friction not by the crimp.

Soldier on I have given you all I can to solve your problem.

Bob

honestly, because I am not above trying anything. The others seem to think that a .469"-.470" crimp is the best so I tried it. I cannot say I like it or have good feelings about it. But it didn't hurt to try.

The rounds I made up Thursday did not have near that crimp. More along the lines of .473". They were feeding fine and did not go into the case from recoil or by a strike on the reloading bench. So I know that a really tight crimp is not needed. Just wanted to show that I tried.

[robertbank]

Why not make it easy on yourself. Strive for a straight walled case. Do remeasure per my suggestion above as it would appear your measurements are not correct. Try to deal with one variable at a time. Otherwise you will never know which change actually worked and which one didn't.

Bob

[DougGuy]

1.200" and above is for sure a no go. 1.190" is potentially ok, while it plunks in, it does need a 'ram' from the breech face to seat. At that, it takes a good yank to bring out of battery leaving a shiny lead ring. This is right at the boolit shoulder.

THIS is what throating the barrel alleviates. A lot of 1911 barrels only have a miniscule ring for a throat, some barely .060" in front of the case mouth before the rifling starts, simply not enough. Many of these are under .452" which if you force a .452" into battery and have to tap it out by yanking the slide, it's telling you, just like reading a book, where it is hanging up, and why. You have a slight interference fit going on when the round goes into battery. And this is NOT taking into account, any bulge in the case farther down, this is an altogether separate issue, this is boolit fit in the throat. This is why I get them in the mail for throating and why they shoot lights out when they go back to their owners because the boolit fits in the throat with no interference, seated at whatever COA they want to run in it. It doesn't hurt ANYTHING for there to be .080" or .120" of freebore in front of the ojive of the boolit WHEN it is in battery. At least it GOES into battery. It's fine with .020" of freebore. The freebore is not critical. There just needs to be enough freebore. However, the DIAMETER of the freebore, IS.

After throating, THESE (with red arrow) will feed like butter, all day long:

http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/bb374/DougGuy/Reloading/45ACPimage_zpsff0dfea0.jpg (http://s1202.photobucket.com/user/DougGuy/media/Reloading/45ACPimage_zpsff0dfea0.jpg.html)

[newton]

If the 1.170 OAL results in cartridges below the hood then your measurements were in error. If you measured of 1.170 was the maximum length bullet your guns would chamber why would you think a longer bullet would work? Makes no sense.

Bob

Lol. I don't know bob, I don't know. I just figured I would try. I went through all of this on Wednesday and Thursday, but I did not actually write down the results. I guess with all this talk I started doubting my original findings and had to try again.

Ill be going back to my original findings, but just changing my seating technique. I do think it's possible to get a 1.180" OAL, but I would wonder how long till that would not work due to crud build up.

I stand by my original statement that the barrel is on the minimum side of SAAMI specs. It's a tight barrel. I think the FCD will be fine for this gun. I read the other day where Larry G had a similar experience. He used the FCD without any bad results. I had hoped he might chime in on this conversation, but understand if he stays out.

[newton]

Doug, believe me, I undetstand. And if I didnt care about my warranty, or about finding another solution, then this is what I would do. It's one reason I asked you about it a few weeks ago. But I made my mind up to not do it. It would be a last resort.

As naive as some make me out to be, I think there is another way around it. I'm going to pursue that way first as it takes less time and cost less, notwithstanding it does not do anything permenant to any part of the gun.

The gun shoots great right now. Just the bulging case issue. That's it. I know from the conversation it seems like more, but it's not. Lol. We just have digressed that far.

[35remington]

rb, I haven't added any variables except the intended incremental overall length increases as the bullets should be the same, and the overall length is known because it's measured beforehand. All we're looking for is whether incremental increases in overall length make the case rim protrude beyond the barrel hood, which is why I suggested three overall lengths. One of these three should be close to fitting as need be. This method is well known as a way to check for functionality, a well circulated picture of how to do it has been posted here several times, and the idea didn't originate with me.

It's been well approved as correct by most who've used it.

newton's info seems to indicate 1.180" is about max without the bullet biting into the leade. This result is what I intended when I suggested it.

It would have been better had newton taken the barrel out of the gun to see if the rim is flush with the hood, because we want to eliminate the need for the gun to "ram" the bullet/cartridge into battery. This may lead to the gun pulling the bullet when the slide is racked. I have a Ruger P97 that would do just that with a bullet seated too long, which because of the short/abrupt leade wasn't very long at all. Some of the rounds I have already loaded for my 1911's wouldn't fit and allow ejection without pulling the bullet. That is awkward on the range when you don't have a range rod to get it out. Hard rifling contact to get the round to chamber is undesirable. Since this was a home test, though, it didn't do any real harm. It got the job done.

newton's choices are to live with it or ream the leade slightly if he wants a little more overall length. Given his expressed preferences so far, I'm pretty sure which way he'll go. Since I have a number of 1911's and other 45 ACP's, having a nonuniform chamber (too short leade that does not allow uniform bullet seating) is an aggravation in terms of dealing with it as a problem child when none of the other handguns need special attention. When I load ammo, I don't know beforehand which gun it may go in. If I had a single pistol it would be less of an issue and I am sure newton is nodding in agreement to that point right now.

A .469" case mouth diameter shouldn't preclude headspacing on the case mouth if the bullet is seated deeply enough to allow it. But I get rb's point about reducing variables to one at a time. I'd just like to reiterate that loading to several possible OAL's was a way to determine suitability for a particular pistol.

If newton pulled the barrel out of the pistol he could load long and gradually reduce seating depth and OAL on a single cartridge until the fit I described as desirable was achieved. That way it could be known to the nth degree, and at that point he could build in some tolerance that he deemed suited to what he wanted to do.

[DougGuy]

The other thing you could do, and it would be the same physical relationship, same boolit fitment in the throat, is to size to .4515" and if you still weren't able to run the COA that it feeds good with, go to .451" you can get a .451" Lee push through die pretty easy, and hone it to .4515" very easily. There is no law saying the throat has to be bigger than the groove diameter. There is a law of physics that says a .452" boolit don't like being forced into a .4515" throat, and this will get you around that one.

It does appear that seating deeper either compounds the bulge in the case or is the cause of it totally. It's typical to seat deeper when a round won't go into battery to get the gun to cycle then. And I think you can see my point when I point out that doing this creates a secondary problem to solve the primary problem when the correct thing to do, is A. Either throat the barrel so you can run whatever COA you want to, or B. Size smaller so you can run the COA you want to.

[35remington]

Since you are already voiding your warranty by handloading ammo, you might consider that issue to be somewhat more moot than when you started.

DougGuy isn't selling you snake oil, for sure. The service he supplies is sorely needed a lot of the time, and provides advantages should an ill throated barrel get out. If my own pistols did not allow what I considered to be correct seating depths I had them altered. It's all part and parcel of making the gun run reliably.

The advantage of what DG does is that not only is the throat cut for the specific bullet/seating depth you desire, it's the correct diameter as well. You get exactly what you need, no more, no less.

All you know for sure is that you have an abrupt leade or very little freebore/throat with your current barrel, which may be present in ordinary chambers....like my P97. Since you have not stated measuring its interior diameter, you don't yet know if it's "tight" or not. Since you haven't measured its length from stop shoulder to hood/breechface, you also don't know if it's short or not and where it falls in the rather generous 1911 tolerance range.

It also may interest you to know a short/abrupt leade does not a match barrel make. Many match barrels have more gradual leades more suited to the match bullets they will fire that leave some amount of full bullet diameter ahead of the case mouth, especially the 185-200 grain SWC's used for formal bullseye shooting. My Bar Sto match barrels do not have abrupt/short leades, but they are somewhat smaller than possible everywhere else, and they shoot well. An abrupt leade is often the sign that the finish reaming on the barrel was less than it could be.

[robertbank]

[QUOTE=35remington;3065550]r

newton's info seems to indicate 1.180" is about max without the bullet biting into the leade. This result is what I intended when I suggested it.

/QUOTE]

Only if you ignore his measurement of 1.170. Either his measurement of 1.170 is wrong - he now says a cartridge with an OAL sits below the barrel hood which would mean his measurement of 1.170 is wrong - or you are suggesting a cartridge length that by measurement is to long. I am beginning to quickly lose interest here.

He apparently wants to buy a FCD to solve his problem. If by some chance it does then all is well in his world.

Take care

Bob

[35remington]

That's why I also suggested removing the barrel and incrementally seating deeper if he wanted to fine tune it exactly. That removes the hard seating slam and he throws in personal preference for his clearance to suit him. I don't know anything for sure yet until he does that. I am making a guess based on what is known so far.

At least we know how it behaves when he slams it home. Some more measuring would help.

[newton]

lol. Hey guys. I'm here. Not dead yet. [smilie=s:

I did pull the barrel. I did try it outside of the frame, but I wanted to try it inside the frame also. Your correct, this is a home test, no worries about bullet bring stuck. I'm blessed to be able to step out the reloading door and shoot if I do choose.

[newton]

The other thing you could do, and it would be the same physical relationship, same boolit fitment in the throat, is to size to .4515" and if you still weren't able to run the COA that it feeds good with, go to .451" you can get a .451" Lee push through die pretty easy, and hone it to .4515" very easily. There is no law saying the throat has to be bigger than the groove diameter. There is a law of physics that says a .452" boolit don't like being forced into a .4515" throat, and this will get you around that one.

It does appear that seating deeper either compounds the bulge in the case or is the cause of it totally. It's typical to seat deeper when a round won't go into battery to get the gun to cycle then. And I think you can see my point when I point out that doing this creates a secondary problem to solve the primary problem when the correct thing to do, is A. Either throat the barrel so you can run whatever COA you want to, or B. Size smaller so you can run the COA you want to.

Bingo. Yes, you are correct. This is my very thought. However, I am going to try the FCD first because I want seperate dies for seating and crimping. I will pull the boolits after running them through and see what they get sized too. I'm hoping I get luck and it sizes them to .4515".

Im still not sure if seating at 1.170" is the bulge cause. Go back and look, only 1 in 10, if that, has a bulge that causes issues. They were all seated to 1.170". So if depth was the cause then I would assume more would have had issues.

[DougGuy]

Bingo. Yes, you are correct. This is my very thought. However, I am going to try the FCD first because I want seperate dies for seating and crimping. I will pull the boolits after running them through and see what they get sized too. I'm hoping I get luck and it sizes them to .4515".

Im still not sure if seating at 1.170" is the bulge cause. Go back and look, only 1 in 10, if that, has a bulge that causes issues. They were all seated to 1.170". So if depth was the cause then I would assume more would have had issues.

The FCD only works on the case, not the exposed boolit. If the boolit diameter is .452" and the FCD sizes it down, it will only resize the part of the boolit that is seated in the case, and will leave the part of the boolit in front of the case mouth the same diameter it was. You will see this if you run one through the FCD then pull the boolit. It won't do anything to solve the failure to go into battery or hanging the loaded round in the throat where it is difficult to extract.

My TC boolits are seated to 1.208" average fwiw, the nickel case second from left.


http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/bb374/DougGuy/Cylinder%20Services/DSC03146_zps7d63b486.jpg (http://s1202.photobucket.com/user/DougGuy/media/Cylinder%20Services/DSC03146_zps7d63b486.jpg.html)

[newton]

The FCD only works on the case, not the exposed boolit. If the boolit diameter is .452" and the FCD sizes it down, it will only resize the part of the boolit that is seated in the case, and will leave the part of the boolit in front of the case mouth the same diameter it was. You will see this if you run one through the FCD then pull the boolit. It won't do anything to solve the failure to go into battery or hanging the loaded round in the throat where it is difficult to extract.


i understand. I only want to iron out the bulge. That's it really. The ones without the bulge work great. It's just the ones with the bulge. That's it. Just a little bulge. The FCD will make sure each round meets a certain 'diameter' in the middle and that's all I need.

Might be a wishful thought, but does anyone out there have a FCD they could measure and tell me what it's inner diameter is in the carbide?

[Bullwolf]

This probably isn't going to be any help, but MY Lee carbide FCD will squeeze even my hardest Linotype .4525 cast boolits down to .451 diameter.

Which seems counter productive to me after sizing to .4525 with a polished out Lee push through sizing die to get that diameter in the first place.

I ran this test by loading up a few 45 ACP boolits following my standard loading procedure, I then removed the guts from the Lee Carbide factory crimp die and ran the loaded rounds through the Lee Carbide FCD and pulled the boolit and measured it.

(measured with a micrometer, the digital calipers just photograph better)

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/picture.php?albumid=539&pictureid=3879


My carefully sized boolit got squeezed from .4525 down to .451 after using the factory crimp die, which is simply unacceptable for me.

Maybe the dies other folks are using are larger and don't do that, but mine most definitely swages my boolits down to .451

IF one needs .451 boolits in the first place, I would be more prone to size my boolits to .451 using a Lee push through sizer, than post sizing my finished loaded rounds and reducing my case tension by using the Lee 45 Carbide Factory Crimp Die.

This die is a solution for a problem that I don't have, so I went back to loading with my old Steel RCBS dies that work just fine, and saved the Lee Carbide FCD for use as a spare, or maybe bulge buster, or else for use with jacketed ammo only. I don't load using it - and before you ask... No, it is not for sale.

That being said, using one to fix crooked boolit seating resulting from using the incorrect profile boolit seating stem, or a bulge from an oversize boolit, or too deeply seated boolit will likely result in a loss of case tension and a later boolit set back kaboom disaster.

Fix the problem in your loading process before using this band-aid die.

Still you asked the question, here is the answer even if you do choose to ignore the advice of every else - including myself.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=125515&d=1419737251

The carbide insert in my Lee FCD measures roughly at .4665 - however that's an inside caliper measurement and I wouldn't use it for anything other than a very rough ballpark idea.

A full length sized case which will fit snugly inside the Lee Carbide FCD also measures around .466 with calipers.


- Bullwolf

[DougGuy]

Actually, they vary. Lee makes these supposedly out of leftover pieces of carbide, and I have read that some will resize a loaded round down below groove diameter, and others do not. It depends on the luck of the draw how big the one you get is.

[newton]

Well I finally slugged the barrel. It was .450" at the chamber and .005" more at the barrel. Did it three times to make sure. I could be off a thousand here or there, but it's under .451" for sure.

I think I could use a .451" boolit just fine. I guess I'll get a sizer and the crimp die.

[newton]

Thanks bullwolf, that helps a lot.

[newton]

Actually, they vary. Lee makes these supposedly out of leftover pieces of carbide, and I have read that some will resize a loaded round down below groove diameter, and others do not. It depends on the luck of the draw how big the one you get is.

I think I'll lap it if that's the case. Get it to the right diameter. Like they say, you can always take away but you can't add too.

[Bullwolf]

I think I'll lap it if that's the case. Get it to the right diameter. Like they say, you can always take away but you can't add too.

I have not lapped out a carbide die, but I believe you will need diamond impregnated grit to do it, and lots and lots of patience. Carbide is quite hard.

If you use the search engine here, you can probably find someone who has done it successfully.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?112241-Honing-out-a-CARBIDE-resizing-die

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?111978-Lapping-Carbide-dies


From what I have read it is NOT easy, and it does not sound like it will be cost effective. I would try shooting boolits sized to .451 first using a plain old inexpensive Lee steel push through boolit sizer die, long before I tried to lap out a carbide die.

You could ask a machinist what they would charge to do it, but I bet most will balk when you mention the word carbide.

You are getting to the point where it would be cheaper and easier pay someone else to finish ream your pistol barrel, or simply buy a spare barrel that's already been throated properly rather than jumping through all of these hoops.


- Bullwolf

[robertbank]

If a 452 bullet causes the case to swell and the FCD removes the swelling the bullet will be sized down. This concept about two things occupying the same space I believe was settled by Newton in England some time ago. Bullwolf has been kind enough to illustrate that point.

Why would Lee used left over pieces of carbide? I have to call horse puckey on that. Manufacturing processes being what they are it just doesn't ring true.

One question earlier today I suggested a measuring system to determine the maximum OAL. Later, but today newton reported the length to be 1.170. In his Post 148 we get a different way of he he arrived at 1.170 only he came to that exact same measurement two days ago. I am off the Merry Go Round. It has been fun. Good luck newton.

35Remington try my method it takes the guess work out of determining OAL for any bullet and saves you the time in guessing.

Happy New Year

Bob

[35remington]

The LFCD will not size down anywhere near the dimension that was measured with calipers earlier.....that would be ridiculously small and they're not that crazy. My own die sizes the body over the case to about 0.471" finished diameter, less any springback, of course. In a perfect world that diameter would be more like .472" for jacketed bullets, a bit more for any and all cast to include .452" diameter bullets. This would guarantee no bullet squeezing but it may be not their policy to spend that much time on holding the diameter to exacting tolerances as a way to hold down costs.

Bullwolf, could you seat a .452" diameter bullet, run it through the FCD, and tell us what the diameter of the case over the bullet is with your FCD? I want case with bullet, not case alone.

rb, the incremental approach to measuring clearance has worked well for me so far.

The length of the chamber is easy to measure via caliper depth measuring from stop shoulder to hood. Feeler gauges approximate the hood/breechface gap, if any. Adding the two together will get the headspace measurement to within a thou or two, which for our purposes is good enough. Even a short "match" chamber is longer than the longest brass. Despite what was recently said in Handloader magazine, this still does not make the case apt to headspace on the extractor if it does not headspace on the bullet.

I am the curious sort and the final thing for me would be to measure chamber diameter. Failing some kind of chamber or pound cast, which would be best, it sometimes works to flare a case mouth then drag it (an empty flared case) inside the (clean) chamber. The case mouth can be incrementally taper crimped until it goes from drag to much less drag, which would approximate diameter.

It is not impossible to think that if the barrel will accept a smaller than standard bullet and the chamber is not unreasonably sized that a LFCD would not do any harm. You'll have to get lucky (according to some their dies size more than mine does) in your LFCD finished diameter. I have not done a wholesale comparison of 45 ACP LFCD finished diameters so I don't know how typical mine is. Your final desired bullet diameter would have to be equal to or smaller than the LFCD would squeeze it to.

Resolve the bullet seating issue and all of this matters much less, but the measuring is still worthwhile information and will suggest options that may be pursued.

I'm just passing this along as I cannot verify it, but according to Lee those carbide inserts that were too oversized to make effective primary sizing rings are ground a few thou larger for the LFCD, sort of a second chance of getting it right. Whether that's true all the time or only some of the time I do not know.

[robertbank]

35remington I don't disagree but having read what the OP has said to date I suspect measuring the chamber and barrel will yield little real information. If you measure wrong your conclusions will be worse than not knowing at all.

I suspect you are right. The issue is with his OAL. Once he gets that right and makes sure he leaves no belling on his cases the gun should run fine.

The only problem I have ever found in modern pistols made in the uS has been Ruger cylinder throats which almost always to small. I have yet to find a problem with the barrels from any of the manufacturers. I am sure problems do occur. I just have not run into any. CZ, SIG, Glock, and Tanfoglio have all been excellent in this regard as well.

Take Care

Bob

[35remington]

I want to know clearance to the degree possible when I'm loading for a pistol, and some of this information will help the OP in making a "best guess" at whether his plans for a LFCD will work. If a "tighter match chamber" is claimed, I'd like an attempt at quantifying it. There are resources that can be used that will approximate its dimensions, and that will answer something about whether other things will work.

The OP can gather those resources if he wishes. Properly done I'm confident he won't measure "wrong enough" to matter. If I can do it, anybody can.

There's still that nettlesome thing about case bulges on the seating step that are clogging up the works. Can't say I've ever had a case bulged to .455" over the bullet on the seating step before, so that's a new one on me.

I'd like to see about said seating step before applying a LFCD to anything. IF a LFCD is applied, some measurements of his existing chamber may help quantify whether it will do any harm. The wild card is just what diameters his LFCD will produce after re squashing the bullet in the case.

[robertbank]

The FCD may only get the gun going boom when you pull the trigger. Where the bullet might end up is anyone's guess.

Take Care

Bob

[35remington]

Yes, no doubt. They are as likely to hurt as to help, if not more so.

[newton]

Not trying to drudge up old discussion, but maybe a clear and present description of how OAL causes a few boolits to bulge the cases, but not the majority? I understand that the further you push one down the more brass it's going to displace outward. However, if this was standard I would think it would happen with at least half of the rounds I make.

Ill work on on measuring the chamber. I might could use a real soft slug, I have an idea.

No one finds my barrel slug measurements interesting? I think that by sizing down further than .452" would help not only with case bulge but may allow a longer OAL. I don't see any reason to shoot a boolit .002" oversize.

[35remington]

It won't allow a much longer overall length. Leade contact is likely what is preventing your bullets from protruding from the case and another thou won't help that much. Best guess is that your leade is abrupt. Since lands average about 0.003"-0.004" in height you can see the problem there. From your slug measurements, if accurate, .451" diameter appears to be your target.

I'm not sure how OAL would cause some cases to bulge and not others. If seating depth is the same for all, so should case diameter over the bullet. A few thou variance in seating depth wouldn't cause the problem either.

[35remington]

If you have a single stage or semi progressive press (in other words a press that handles one shell at a time) bump seating often gives better bullet alignment. The nose of the bullet is gently tapped against the seating stem a couple of times before giving the bullet the full seating stroke. This aligns the bullet with the axis of the case and tends to prevent crooked bullet seating even if the seating stem does not ideally fit the bullet.

[newton]

If you have a single stage or semi progressive press (in other words a press that handles one shell at a time) bump seating often gives better bullet alignment. The nose of the bullet is gently tapped against the seating stem a couple of times before giving the bullet the full seating stroke. This aligns the bullet with the axis of the case and tends to prevent crooked bullet seating even if the seating stem does not ideally fit the bullet.

Your correct on this. I tried this very thing the second day of my trials. That and I ground the seating plug flat. Thought that the nose might have been catching the plug and not being able to rotate in the plug cone. But, the biggest improvement in my seating came when I started bumping them. Guess I didn't really think of it logically when I did it, there was just a little voice in my head that said to try it. Good to hear it's an actual method. Lol

if you look into my barrel with a light you can see that my leade is short, almost nonexistent. Maybe it will show up on my slug. I'm going to try that now.

[NavyVet1959]

The FCD only works on the case, not the exposed boolit. If the boolit diameter is .452" and the FCD sizes it down, it will only resize the part of the boolit that is seated in the case, and will leave the part of the boolit in front of the case mouth the same diameter it was. You will see this if you run one through the FCD then pull the boolit. It won't do anything to solve the failure to go into battery or hanging the loaded round in the throat where it is difficult to extract.

My TC boolits are seated to 1.208" average fwiw, the nickel case second from left.

http://s1202.photobucket.com/user/DougGuy/media/Cylinder%20Services/DSC03146_zps7d63b486.jpg.html



That wadcutter on the left is quite a bit shorter than any of the other rounds. Are you still able to get it to feed in a M1911? I recently tried getting a resized 0.360" round ball to load in a CZ-75 and it would not feed.

[DougGuy]

That full wadcutter on the left was loaded for a TC with a Bulberry barrel for shooting dots. I use it in my throating tooling as a go/no go gauge. I have normally been able to get my 1911s to feed empty cases so I see no reason why it wouldn't feed.

[newton]

Ok, rough measurements, but within .001

.470" at the mouth
.475" at mid chamber
.478" at the head

[newton]

Well, looking at that SAAMI spec sheet, if my mouth is really that small there is an issue. The mouth was the one that I was not sure about because of the slug. The other two are for sure right there within the .001" leeway.

So its for sure a tight chamber. I might just have to get a chamber casting kit to settle this for absolute. I knew it was tight, but it seems to be bordering on too tight.

[35remington]

Not really that tight. Measure a loaded cartridge at the same points....you'll average about .472" at the base to .471" at the mouth if a jacketed bullet is seated and it is a factory load. So you've got six thou total or about three thou per side at the base, tapering to less at the mouth, but I'm not quite buying your mouth measurement or the factory ammo wouldn't chamber fully in your gun.

Pending a redo on that mouth measurement, I'd term your chamber rather average.

[newton]

I was going off of the SAAMI pdf that was posted.

[35remington]

The problem with the SAAMI pdf is it isn't what many makers do with "match" barrels because there's no spec for match barrels.

Barrelmakers are pretty well aware that 45 ACP cases come out as pretty much cylindrical as they get sized, because the sizing die is cylindrical. About the biggest the case can possibly be over a jacketed bullet is the .471" mentioned, and .472" for a cast bullet. Knowing this, they flaunt the low side of chamber dimensions considerably more than the SAAMI spec in some instances.

A chamber like you have I would not criticize as "too tight" as you've got ample clearance for any reasonable bullet and some crud as well.

[BD]

The chamber sounds about normal. The 1.170 max OAL with the Lee TC sized .451 is too short. I'd be interested in a pic of the chamber/throat. Sounds like there may not be any throat at all. The difference between individual rounds, (some have more "bulge" than others), is most likely due to differences in the individual brass. The case wall tapers from the head to about 1/2 way to the mouth. This taper is not real consistent, even among brass from the same manufacturer. That Lee TC 230 grainer has a fairly long straight shank. My belief is that the heel of the bullet is seated deeply enough that it is getting into the thicker area of the case wall in some instances, but not all. A FCD may cure the feeding issue, but it may not address the real cause of the problem. ANY 1911 throat should allow that 230 grain TC bullet sized at .451 and seated to 1.270 to chamber every time as the design intent for both the firearm in question, and the bullet design in question, were for that COAL when used together.

[35remington]

BD, I think you meant around 1.200-1.220." 1.270" is longer than most ball ammo and is too long for this bullet. At that length so much bearing surface would be out of the case that no gun would chamber it, even one with an average to longer than average throat.

As for the bulge, if it's asymetrical, it's not the brass. If it's symmetrical, it is.

[Love Life]

Different brass brands will vary in thickness. The randomness I alluded to earlier. As this thread continues on, I continue to ell oh ell.

[BD]

35, maybe we're talking about two different boolits? I put about 30,000 of the Lee 230 gr TC design downrange sized 1.250 downrange out of 1911s back in the 90's. Lee's original literature listed it at 1.270. I used a pair of the Lee six bangers in rotation to cast in those days. They seated with about .08" of shank out of the case. 1.20 is the OAL I use with the 452460, a much squatter design. I use 1.230 with the BDacp. Off the top of my head, I can't recall any .45acp boolit needing to be seated shorter than 1.20
Military ball spec is 1.265 IMS.
I'm sure I haven't tried all of them, but I've tried quite a few of them.

[Bullwolf]

The LFCD will not size down anywhere near the dimension that was measured with calipers earlier.....that would be ridiculously small and they're not that crazy. My own die sizes the body over the case to about 0.471" finished diameter, less any springback, of course. In a perfect world that diameter would be more like .472" for jacketed bullets, a bit more for any and all cast to include .452" diameter bullets. This would guarantee no bullet squeezing but it may be not their policy to spend that much time on holding the diameter to exacting tolerances as a way to hold down costs.

Bullwolf, could you seat a .452" diameter bullet, run it through the FCD, and tell us what the diameter of the case over the bullet is with your FCD? I want case with bullet, not case alone.


I would be happy to 35Remington.

But allow me to emphasize this disclaimer again:



The carbide insert in my Lee FCD measures roughly at .4665 - However that's an inside caliper measurement and I wouldn't use it for anything other than a very rough ballpark idea.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=125515&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1419737251
A full length sized case which will fit snugly inside the Lee Carbide FCD also measures around .466 with calipers.
- Bullwolf

I keep a few dummy cast boolit cartridges on my bench top to check things with, or to use to quickly set up my dies. These are set to an OAL of 1.265, using the Lee 230 grain TL452-230-2R. These will plunk easily in both my Colt and Springfield 1911 barrels, and fit in a Wilson case gauge.


http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=117712&d=1411960835&thumb=1 http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=117713&d=1411960844&thumb=1

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=117714&d=1411960872&thumb=1 http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=117715&d=1411960880&thumb=1

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=117717&d=1411960905&thumb=1 http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=117716&d=1411960890&thumb=1

I grabbed a dummy I assembled using a .451 cast lead boolit, (from the Lee CFCD) and one with my standard .452 cast boolit.

After reading your request, I pulled all of the internals out of my 45ACP Lee Carbide Factory crimp die, and screwed it down to the point where it almost contacts the shell holder.

I ran the previously mentioned 45 ACP dummy cartridges into the Lee CFCD, and out. I could feel the carbide ring lightly contacting both cases through the press handle while doing so.

Dummy cartridge with .451 boolit measurement after use of the Lee CFCD.
.471 at the neck, below the crimp.
.467 middle of the cartridge. *Little bit of a wasp waist*
.472 at the base of the cartridge, a bit above the rim.

Dummy cartridge with a .452 boolit measurement after Lee CFCD use.
.472 at the neck, below the crimp. (Spring back maybe?)
.468 middle of the cartridge. *This round also has a little wasp waist*
.472 at the base of the cartridge, a bit above the rim.

Sorry for the potential inaccuracy of the Lee CFCD inside measurement. I do own a micrometer, and I know how to use it. But, I do not own an inside micrometer, and taking any inside diameter measurements using a pair of calipers is not advised or to be recommended - hence my disclaimer after doing just that.

If I wanted a more accurate measurement, I would have checked using pin gauges, or mic'd a dead soft lead ball to get a closer idea of the actual size, but I was trying to give a quick ball park estimation.

This helps emphasize why digital calipers are best used for things like measuring OAL, and not to obtain accurate inside diameter measurements.

Hope that this helps some, and clears up any confusion.



- Bullwolf

[35remington]

BD, you're talking about a too long OAL for the TC design at 1.270." Proper for the Lee TC, which approximates several other designs, is 1.200-1.220."

Factory and military ball spec is 1.265." Max cartridge length is 1.275." Due to the large flat point the TC bullet can't be seated anywhere near that long. Longer throated that average pistols may get away with 1.230."

Absolutely, positively flat no way does the Lee 230 TC work at 1.270." Only if DougGuy reamed the throats extra, extra long.

[35remington]

Bullwolf, the common measurement, and the relevant one, is the diameter of the case over the bullet after being run through the carbide section of the LFCD. You measured just below the crimp at 0.471-.472", which is pretty much what mine does to maybe a bit looser.

newton, there you go. Study Bullwolf's picture of the dismounted barrel with the round flush or below the hood. That's what your chambered rounds should look like when properly fit. If you have hood/breechface gap you can be proud of the hood a little bit. Think about that .471" finished LFCD dimension and what it means to you as well.

[newton]

I've got dies coming. Soon as they get here, I'll be able to update. Till then it's a waiting game.

[newton]

Bullwolf, the common measurement, and the relevant one, is the diameter of the case over the bullet after being run through the carbide section of the LFCD. You measured just below the crimp at 0.471-.472", which is pretty much what mine does to maybe a bit looser.

newton, there you go. Study Bullwolf's picture of the dismounted barrel with the round flush or below the hood. That's what your chambered rounds should look like when properly fit. If you have hood/breechface gap you can be proud of the hood a little bit. Think about that .471" finished LFCD dimension and what it means to you as well.

I think it's the ticket really. Then it will be to see how it shoots. I have a good rest to keep things steady and get a good idea. Then of course if it leads. All in all, I have a good feeling about it.

[newton]

One other thing, I think a smaller boolit will allow longer OAL. All the test rounds that I saw the bright ring was right at the shoulder.

[35remington]

Yeah, but the leade is high enough that an extra thou won't help much.

[NavyVet1959]

That full wadcutter on the left was loaded for a TC with a Bulberry barrel for shooting dots. I use it in my throating tooling as a go/no go gauge. I have normally been able to get my 1911s to feed empty cases so I see no reason why it wouldn't feed.

I have never tried that in a M1911, so I tried an empty case in a compact M1911 that I was carrying today. No such luck and to add insult to injury, it damaged the brass in the process. So, for the rest of my testing, I loaded a dummy round with the bullet backwards and just barely sticking past the brass. This also would not work in that firearm (Para Warthog), so I figured it would still be good to test with while also not damaging my brass in the process. This test round would also not work in my Para P14.45 LDA, Citadel "Compact" (Officer Model size), and Glock 21 (converted to .45 SUPER +P+). On the other hand, this test round would work with my Colt Combat Elite an my Kimber (both are single stack full size models). I don't have a round ball mold in a size that could be resized for a .45 that I could test with, so I don't know which of the guns that failed this test might work with a round ball.

[35remington]

Try with an earliest release magazine like a Shooting Star or Power Mag. While less than ideal in many respects, these magazines have the earlier release timing most likely to give success with ultra short rounds.

Don't be terribly impressed with a 1911 that feeds empty cases. That does not mean it is more inherently reliable than one that does not. It just means that the gun is feeding something that it is not supposed to be able to feed. The two are not necessarily related, despite some ideas to the contrary. Think about release timing and why timing for an empty case is not ideal for a loaded one.

[DougGuy]

BD, you're talking about a too long OAL for the TC design at 1.270." Proper for the Lee TC, which approximates several other designs, is 1.200-1.220."

Factory and military ball spec is 1.265." Max cartridge length is 1.275." Due to the large flat point the TC bullet can't be seated anywhere near that long. Longer throated that average pistols may get away with 1.230."

Absolutely, positively flat no way does the Lee 230 TC work at 1.270." Only if DougGuy reamed the throats extra, extra long.

My TC loads are right at 1.208" and they have .070" of shoulder out in front of the case mouth. These have fed in every 1911 I have owned, and this is way before I bought my first throating reamer.

Edit.. I take that back.. I have ONE now, a Kahr CW45 with it's barrel made by Lothar Walther, that will not plunk ANY boolit greater than .451" no matter what design it is, if there is any of the boolit out in front of the case mouth (as there should be!). It doesn't have any issues with my edc ammo, so I see no need to "fix" it. When I wanted to load for it's 300rd break in period, I just found some .451" plated rnfp hp boolits and it gobbled them right up.

[BD]

Well, we may be talking about two different boolits here. I dug out a couple of the old Lee TC's left from the '90s and my "dummy round" that I used to set up the seating die. The dummy round is 1.255. My TC boolits measure .647 long with a shank of .324 and nose of .323. If I seated it to 1.20 in an average case of .890 the crimp would be just above flush with the the end of the shank. Not my preferred situation. This is the lube groove version, not the tumble lube TC, and those molds were new circa 1995. I would not describe this boolit as having a large flat meplat. These are a little larger than the meplat on my H&G #68 designs, but have a visible radius leading into the meplat, so the actual "flat" is not that much larger. I sized these .451 and went through many thousands of them seated to 1.250 +/- without a problem. It is a good, reliable design, but uses more lead than necessary for targets, and is far less effective than the BDacp for social work, so I moved on. I still maintain that if 1.170 is as long as you can seat these and still chamber them, you have an issue, either with boolit diameter, or lack of throat. And if your version of this mold is dropping them as long as mine, that's a fair bit of shank you've got in the case at 1.170, so a little bulge is not surprising.

[newton]

Knock about .027" off your measurement and you'll be about where the "new" lee 230 TC boolit is. So, 1.250" - .027" is 1.098". Still a little longer than will chamber. At the end of the week I'll have the new dies.

Honestly, I'm not concerned about OAL. I've dug and dug, 1.170" and there shouts IS what most everyone seats this boolit too. I'm not taking about the TC design, but the specific boolit that Lee makes and produces molds for. It is .620" long. I have yet to find but a few(less than a handful) who seat it longer than 1.190".

All those who seat it at the 1.170" and around, have yet to indicate any feeding issues. I spent the better part of the day(don't tell my boss...lol) researching this. WAY to much evidence points to the "short" OAL. Most people DO in fact believe it's short, but when tried they find out it's what 'works' the best. Must be something about its design. I don't know. Like I said, it all happens way to fast for me to catch a glimpse.

[newton]

I do see a 200 grain SWC mold on my future though. Lol. I like the looks of it and it would save a tad bit more lead.

[35remington]

Keep looking, newton. You're not there yet. Check your math.

BD, the bullet I speak of reasonably approximates the Hornady 230 FMJ-FP design. Same page or not?

[35remington]

DG's comments on the OAL of his rounds are sorta in sync with the more recent acclaimed HP's designs as well. I find GS to be the longest and a bit of an exception. Trying to be more ball like it appears.

[newton]

Keep looking, newton. You're not there yet. Check your math.

BD, the bullet I speak of reasonably approximates the Hornady 230 FMJ-FP design. Same page or not?

Woops....lol.... yea, the math was off I recon. Long day, dark night.

Regardless, for sure I know what I spent the better part of yesterday looking up, and post after post - not only on this site but many others - people were using that 'shorter' OAL. I ran across many of your replies to people talking about how their OAL was too short. They are not all using 1.170", but if not I would say 90% used OAL of 1.190" or less. On top of that, several people use an even shorter OAL. I know of one guy in particular, who I asked specifically a little while back, who uses 1.155" as his OAL. He shoots way more than I do. However, he does not shoot a 1911.

The interesting point about that is IF the boolit, being in the case 1.170", is contributing to the bulge that is not allowing the rounds to chamber, then 1.155" surely would be significantly worse. On top of this, I asked his sizing diameter. .452". So he either has a ridiculously large chamber, or the boolits are fine to be set in that deep. He has been loading it like this for quite some time now, I would imagine he would have said if there were issues.

This is just one example, of a personal conversation I had. I found many more like it, even of guys using this shorter OAL, that go back years. They found that the shoulder of the boolit needed to be below the case mouth completely. However, NONE of them EVER talked about failure to feed issues. Seems to me, if FTF was an issue, with a short OAL and this boolit, then there would be SOME talk about it. I find none.

I think its the angle/shape of the nose that lends itself to the good feeding. I only found one place, and I do not think they were talking about the Lee boolit specifically, but they were discussing different OAL and feeding issues. One guy was able to take the boolit drawing specs of factory ball ammo and whichever boolit they were talking about. Laid them over the top of each other and found that the angle the round entered the chamber, and place where the nose touched, were right on with each other even though the OAL was different. I have enough to look at, but eventually I can see doing the same type of experimenting with the Lee boolit.

So, I was off on my math, but the fact that it is a shorter boolit may also mean that the angle/shape of the nose is also different. Which would lead to a different OAL. I did not choose this OAL haphazardly. I did a LOT of looking here a while back, and came to the same conclusion. Yesterday's searching just made it that much clearer. I have NO doubt that some use a long OAL with this boolit. I think it could be done in my gun if I had a long leade. But that's the way it is with guns. Each one has the potential to be different. Even the feeding can be different in what would be normally called 'standard' GI guns. If we are only talking about .08" of difference between a "standard" OAL and a "short" OAL, I can see how the way a round is chambered, the angle it enters the chamber, can vary that much in a gun.

All in all. OAL is the LEAST of my concerns. lol. We have talked a lot about it, but I think its chasing a rabbit really. I could see if I was pioneering this, but I am not.

[35remington]

Talking oneself into a particular course of action is not the same thing as being correct.

[robertbank]

Newton baring something mechanical with the pistol itself the problem you are having is the OAL of the bullet. You have not measured the maximum cartridge length your gun will accept for the bullet you are using and until you do you are going to be spinning wheels.

A second, if you discount the mechanical problems that might be with your pistol, is you maybe collapsing your brass just ahead of the webbing when seating your bullet. Not every time but enough to be a nuisance. I have had that happen to me in both .45acp and 9MM with cases that have either grown weak from reloading or from a poorly belled case. Other causes can be a to tight of sizing die. Sized to narrow the belled case receives to much pressure as the bullet seats causing a ridge at the base of the bullet.

I would solve the OAL question before moving on to anything else. We are at page 5 on this subject and my sense is no nearer to the solution to your problem. The sized bullet at .452 would be the least likely cause of the problem IMHO.

Take Care

Bob

[newton]

Talking oneself into a particular course of action is not the same thing as being correct.

Just for grins and giggles....lets make my 1,000 post special.

What, pray tell, makes something correct?

[newton]

Newton baring something mechanical with the pistol itself the problem you are having is the OAL of the bullet. You have not measured the maximum cartridge length your gun will accept for the bullet you are using and until you do you are going to be spinning wheels.

A second, if you discount the mechanical problems that might be with your pistol, is you maybe collapsing your brass just ahead of the webbing when seating your bullet. Not every time but enough to be a nuisance. I have had that happen to me in both .45acp and 9MM with cases that have either grown weak from reloading or from a poorly belled case. Other causes can be a to tight of sizing die. Sized to narrow the belled case receives to much pressure as the bullet seats causing a ridge at the base of the bullet.

I would solve the OAL question before moving on to anything else. We are at page 5 on this subject and my sense is no nearer to the solution to your problem. The sized bullet at .452 would be the least likely cause of the problem IMHO.

Take Care

Bob

I am not sure how mechanical problems with the pistol have even come into this conversation? It is functioning, and has functioned, flawlessly. I am not sure how a bulged case, that has not been fired, is related in any way, shape, or form to the mechanical operation of the pistol? I have measured it, the OAL. But it varies on what you consider maximum. Is the boolit completely not touching, kind of touching, or crammed into the lands? I have tried all three, and all three will shoot from the gun. However, I went with the boolit not touching, which is 1.170". I can cram it into the lands at 1.180", but any filth or slide momentum lost and it will not lock up. So please, if you are seeing something here that I am not, enlighten me. I assure you, my wheels are not spinning.

Now your thoughts on the case webbing collapsing may indeed be viable. I have no idea how many times this brass has been fired, and its all mixed head stamp. It very, very well could be the brass weakening. I am using Lee dies for all operations. I have never had any issues with these in my 45acp cylinder and I have run hundreds through it.

I have solved my OAL question.....er......everyone elses question. See, I have never had a question about it since the beginning. I researched before I ever got the gun - my findings were a OAL ~1.170". I tested rounds after I got the gun - my findings were an OAL of ~1.170". I spent hours and hours yesterday researching again - my findings were a OAL of ~1.170". I have no questions about OAL.

Like I said, it would be different if I was the only one using this OAL with this EXACT boolit - much less if I was even in a minority of people who used this OAL. But the fact, undeniable and completely provable, is that this particular Lee boolit is used by many, MANY, people with an OAL of ~1.170". I am not sure how clearer that can get.

Guys, OAL is NOT the issue here. I know you all insist that it is, but there is no proof of that. You all do not have my gun, you don't have my barrel, I do. I am the one looking at it, I am the one firing it, I am the one testing it. You all can suggest that I consider OAL, but when I come back with solid, rock hard evidence, that it is not what is causing this issue, then you have to understand - OAL is not causing this issue.

I get it that some people have a hard time letting go of the "old" ways. I just had a conversation with my boss about this and something we do here at work. Old guys, as wise and full of knowledge and experience as they may be, have a hard time of letting go of "the way its always been". We have seen it through the years - indoor plumbing, electricity, cars, planes, credit cards, etc. When something else, that does not make sense to you, comes along, its natural to try and say its wrong. It may be wrong in some situations, but if it works in others - well, then it works. Hey, you guys are talking on a PC. Yes, you are doing something that used to be taboo. But we have come to find out that it is helpful. Sure, PC's have been the demise of a lot of things, but they have "worked well" for others.

My 1.170" OAL works in my gun. I have proven this. Yes, I tried 1.200", and above, and it would not work. I am not sure how else to put this. Yes, we are on page 5, if you go back you will see that when this started I made it known that I believe its a boolit seating issue. I still believe that's the case. It may also be a brass issue, but it is very random if so. And those rounds that do not work in the 1911 barrel work just fine in the 45acp cylinder. So, the round is very close to spec. Within .001".

I am not hashing this out anymore. Its ludicrous. You all have taken a thread that I meant to help others who would be coming along with their new Para Experts, wondering about cast boolits, and turned it into a discussion about "what is standard". Well, its "standard" to develop a load that works in your gun. That's standard. There is no exact in reloading. Everything is relative to something else. You can get close, but you will never see exact. We are muddying up the water with a .08" difference in OAL. Pathetic.

If you all want to keep on, then please start another thread about how everyone should seat to X OAL when reloading for the 1911. Please leave this thread alone if your not going to look at the facts given and respond to them in like manner.

[newton]

Have you solved the issue yet?

Well, you will have to be more specific please. Are you talking about my issue, or what others think my issue is. lol

If you are referring to the random case bulge, then no, I have not solved it yet. It is either the boolit seating a tad crooked or the brass being weak. It may even be the type of brass I am using, or rather how they made it, because headstamp does not seam to matter. The bulge is not prejudice when it comes to what case it seeks out. lol

However, I may never know what the true cause of it is or why it works in some guns and not others. As you can see from previous posts, most cast boolits in a 45acp case will bulge it to some degree. I wish I had an older 1911, or just another one for that matter, to see if the bulged cases that wont fit into mine would fit into another. I still have a degree of belief that my chamber is on the tighter side, and maybe one day I will cast it just to see.

But, if you really want to know the outcome stay tuned. I have a new die and new sizer on the way. I am going to put some theories to the test. I am not far from resolving the issue I believe.

[Bodine]

Gentlemen
Please refrain from continuing this I'm right, your wrong form of banter. If you cant post constructively, dont post at all.
Thank you
Bodine
Moderator

[35remington]

This has run its course. I replied as I did as it has become more about argument than action.


In making any "video" you might want to see that you're not actually making a video on how not to do things.


The righteous indignation bit you're affecting is ringing a bit hollow right now and it's ceased to be about the topic. Get to doing whatever you want to do and be done with it.

[NavyVet1959]

Gentlemen
Please refrain from continuing this I'm right, your wrong form of banter. If you cant post constructively, dont post at all.
Thank you
Bodine
Moderator

It's "you're", not "your"... Is that constructive enough? ;)

Seriously though... It is getting a bit tired. It is like a train wreck though... You know what is about to happen, but you just *have* to watch.

I'm not sure what the OP is doing wrong, but I have *never* had *that* much trouble getting a round set up in my dies.

[35remington]

At some point it becomes evident the OP is "playing" those trying to help with or discuss a topic. We're there and well past there.

I have never heard of anyone having this much trouble with a simple seating step. That draws some degree of suspicion as well.

I am done with helping perpetuate this.

[newton]

Good grief....

[DougGuy]

Correct me if I am wrong.. The thread was about some rounds not chambering in a PO .45 ACP..

See if I can diagram this out in a simple fashion.

The round doesn't chamber because:

A. The diameter of the boolit won't fit into the throat of the barrel. Two things to check, the diameter of the throat, AND the length of the throat.
Possible solutions:
Seat the boolit deeper so it doesn't go into the throat. *
Ream the throat diameter to accept the diameter boolit the shooter wants to load.
Lengthen the throat to accept the COA that the shooter wants to load.
Use a smaller diameter boolit.

B. The case has a bulge at the base of the boolit when assembled.
Possible solutions:
Lengthen the COA so the base of the boolit is not seated in the thicker part of the case.**
Use a shorter boolit.
Use a smaller diameter boolit.
Use a carbide FCD to size down the assembled round and remove the bulge.
___________________________________________

Have I left out anything?

Notes:

* = This solution is often used and is generally accepted by many, even though it can raise pressures dangerously UNLESS tested and published load data can be used to insure safety at the shorter COA. This is not a good choice, even though many do it.

** = This problem usually results from choosing to seat deeper in the case, generally as a poor workaround for problem A listed above. It can be remedied by separating headstamps and using cases that will accept the chosen COA without bulging, OR by taking the necessary steps to permit the use of the correct COA as suggested in the load data.

[newton]

I think your close Doug. Or rather, one of those is the "issue" if you want to say it that way, B to be exact.

On A, I did exactly what you put the astric by. But it was when I was determining my Max OAL. That was my very first step when I got the gun. In fact, I had the barrel out and testing OAL within an hour after picking the gun up. The boolit hitting the throat is what kept me from going larger though. However, on your note, the beauty of this OAL is that it is a published OAL. I did run a few over the chrony. They ran right about where the published data said.

Also, on this note, when seated out longer and pressed into the lands, you can see where it's hitting on the boolit shoulder. I am going to do some picture taking tonight. This will be apart of it. I have no doubt that if the throat was reamed that it would then allow a longer OAL. But as it stands, the 1.170" is quite fine for the gun.

On B, you are correct. It varies with different rounds, the degree as to which it rubs on the chamber wall, but it's alwsys just in one area or another. Not the entire way around. My very first thought was to use the FCD to size it down, but I'm going to try smaller boolits first. Then, I'll try the FCD. I want to use this boolit, and the OAL won't allow it out further.

So A is a set thing, but B is what I'm working on. Really does bring things into perspective and eliminate the notion that this is a troublesome issue I'm having. I only figured out what was happening on Friday, and ordered the tools I need Sunday. I guess it just sounds worse than it is because of all the dialog. But you have very well "boiled" it down and brought us back on track. Thanks.

One other thing. I do see where a lot of people don't think of crimping as potentially causing an issue. That can be eliminated because I tried all manner of crimps down to some very extreme ones that really burry the mouth into the boolit. That did nothing to help the bulge, but I could go back and see how much OAL I could get. However, that would just be a test because I do not trim all my brass to the same length and that would potentially cause different clambering depths I would think. Regardless, it is something I don't want to have as a finished round.

[NavyVet1959]

I remember reading about how they used to hand fit the pieces of a firearm by blackening the piece of metal with the soot from a candle flame and then seeing where it was removed when the pieces were brought together. I wonder if something similar could be done with the barrel to see definitively where the bullet is coming into contact with the chamber. You might have to paint a very light coat of white on the bullet to see the carbon better though.

If the bullet does not get any soot on it, then the issue is probably with the diameter of the brass.

Although I like being able to use the FCD to separate bullet seating from the actual crimping stages, I initially started with just the regular taper crimp die and it worked well enough for me. I found that I could set up my dies to a particular OAL quicker though when I separated the seating and crimping stages. Probably could have done the same thing with just another taper crimp die with the bullet seating stem removed.

[newton]

Actually, I have tried what your suggesting navy. I painted the boolit with a magic marker. You can see the ring of bright lead when I put the rounds in that are too long.

Ive been crimping with my seating die. It does ok, but it will be nice to have a seperate crimp die.

[newton]

Ok, got measurements and pictures done. It's a pain to load from my phone so I'll do it tomorrow on the computer. In the end, looks like 1.180" is going to be the best. It leaves a tad bit of the shoulder exposed which is nice because when the shoulder is dead even or below the mouth, the crimp likes to pull the boolit deeper on occasion. I'm not sure if the FCD will work any different though.

All of them, when placed in the chamber, and spun, would leave a bright ring. So none of the rounds were headspacing off the mouth. Correct me if I'm wrong though, but even really short rounds tend to be held back by the extractor and don't really headspace off the mouth anyways. Guess it's a moot point anyways, I really don't want to go deeper.

[newton]

why would you want the boolit to ram into the rifling on an auto pistol. I thought the 45 hedspaced off the case mouth.

Good question. Ideally I don't. I'm actually hoping the .451" boolits will work better. But if not, it's a trade off I guess. I would rather ram into the lands than to have the boolit ram backwards. Although, it seems like if the boolit was pushed any further back it would not chamber because of the bulge.

[DougGuy]

No you do not want any setback. Pressures can rise dramatically with as little as .040" boolit movement. There should actually be -no- resistance from interference in front of the case mouth. This is the same as an obstructed barrel.

[newton]

Just got word from a fellow Para owner. He had issues until he did exactly what I'm planning on doing.

[RobS]

Considering you don't want to do any modification to your barrel then your current situation you will need a boolit that has no full diameter front drive band or very little sticking out from case mouth. With the Lee 230 TC you have to seat it far enough into the case so it chambers but then it bulges the case as the brass thickens toward the case head. You have a very short/abrupt barrel throat and that is that. Either use a different boolit design and or lighter/shorter bullet to not have any full diameter front drive band that interferes with the short throat of your barrel.

[newton]

Considering you don't want to do any modification to your barrel and with that your current situation you will need a boolit that has no full diameter front drive band or very little sticking out from case mouth. The situation you have is that with the Lee 230 TC you have to seat it far enough into the case that it bulges as the brass thickens toward the case head. You have a very short/abrupt barrel throat and that is that. Either use a different boolit design and or lighter/shorter bullet to not have any full diameter front drive band that interferes with the short throat of your barrel.

Definitely a way to do it. I might get a SWC in the future. These boolits shoot extremely well out of my 45 colt though. Soon as I get back to the office I'll post pictures. It will show a lot.

[RobS]

If you like try the Lee 200 RF if you want a two for one design. You could also just keep the 230 TC for the Colt and then like you said have a dedicated mold that will work for your Para. The Lyman 452374 comes to mind.

[newton]

As promised, the pictures. Hope they help a little.

Best I could get of the leade. Barrel is a little dirty. As you can see, about a 90 degree corner there. I may, just may lap that down some. I imagine if I had run the recommended 250 factory loads through the barrel then it would be a little smother transition. But good grief, 250 factory loads would be in the neighborhood of over $100. Call me cheap....
125846


Here is the barrel hood to breech fit. I did not measure the distance with gauges, but its very minimal. One thing there is about this is when testing my rounds via the plunk method, as long as I stay even with the hood then I know I am not cramming my rounds into the lands.
125847

Here is a sized case. It measures .469"
125848

One of the boolit anc case, and of it just sitting in the flared part of the case
125849
125851

[newton]

The next series of pictures are self explanatory. I did each OAL with two different crimps. The crimp on the left is .471" and on the right is .469". The plunk test pics are with the .469" crimp. I took the side by side pictures to show the crimp and to show where the shoulder is in relation to the case mouth.

125853
125854
125855
125856
125857

125858
125859
125860
125861
125862

[newton]

Here is a picture of me putting the round in and turning it, while pressing down slightly, to get a ring mark showing where it contacts the throat.
125863
Also, note the bright spots on the case. That is where this particular round would rub slightly in the chamber. It would go in, but just ever so slightly rub. It did this on a couple, but not all of them.
125864

Here is a factory round, and it in the chamber. I am not positive, but pretty sure its 230 ball. I forgot to look.
125865
125866

Well, there you have it. I'll take a few more pictures of my new rounds made up with the .451" sizer and FCD. I am not sure how much visible difference there will be.

[Boolit_Head]

First off it looks like you are crimping to much. The crimps appear to be starting to roll over. That may be a visual thing in the pictures though. I ran that same bullet for a few days before I returned the mold because it was misaligned. I did not have the issues you are in my Para Expert. I only crimped until the flare was just removed with a bit of the shoulder showing. Pretty much I adjusted things until dropping them into the chamber worked out well. From that point on no issues with the loads. Since I moved quickly to another bullet design I don't remember the numbers off the top of my head. But it is possible to seat it to deep and get into the thicker part of the case and cause a bulge. Since that design carries a lot of it's weight in the rear and has little mass in the nose it may be very prone to that.

Oh I also sized to .452.

[NavyVet1959]

I see you are powdercoating the bullet. Have you tried a non-powdercoated bullet to see how it does?

[Boolit_Head]

That is true the PC could be adding size, unless you size it after the PC which would take it off and negate the benefits.

[newton]

First off it looks like you are crimping to much. The crimps appear to be starting to roll over. That may be a visual thing in the pictures though. I ran that same bullet for a few days before I returned the mold because it was misaligned. I did not have the issues you are in my Para Expert. I only crimped until the flare was just removed with a bit of the shoulder showing. Pretty much I adjusted things until dropping them into the chamber worked out well. From that point on no issues with the loads. Since I moved quickly to another bullet design I don't remember the numbers off the top of my head. But it is possible to seat it to deep and get into the thicker part of the case and cause a bulge. Since that design carries a lot of it's weight in the rear and has little mass in the nose it may be very prone to that.

Oh I also sized to .452.

Too much of a crimp seems to be another one of those topics that everyone has an opinion on. But I agree with you, I do not normally crimp that much. I too just crimp till the flare is out. Usually, on a .452" boolit, its about .473"-.471". Those were just fine feeding into my chamber, unless one happened to have a bulge associated with it. I did put a heavier crimp just to show that a heavy crimp does not make any difference in how it plunks into my barrel. I know its been brought up before, so I figured I would just cover that base while I was at it.

I sure wish you had written down some numbers, just for comparisons sake. Is your Para Expert the GI model?

[newton]

I see you are powdercoating the bullet. Have you tried a non-powdercoated bullet to see how it does?


That is true the PC could be adding size, unless you size it after the PC which would take it off and negate the benefits.

No, never tried it without PC. However, yes I do size afterwards, so I believe it would negate the difference - at least in the bulge category. I could be wrong though, but the PC is really not all that thick. In the end, it would be a very small difference in how it effected OAL.

[newton]

FYI, for those who do not know, if you click on the pictures it makes them bigger and easier to see.

[Boolit_Head]

The Experts were sort of a moving target there for a while. They had the GI, then the GI Expert, Then just dropped the GI and called it the Expert. Pretty much the only difference was the Beaver tail.

[Boolit_Head]

No, never tried it without PC. However, yes I do size afterwards, so I believe it would negate the difference - at least in the bulge category. I could be wrong though, but the PC is really not all that thick. In the end, it would be a very small difference in how it effected OAL.

So you powder coat then size, so why PC at all? Size and Lube and drop the hassle of PC. If you scrape off the PC during the sizing process it negates the benefits. Without Lube that bullet will probably lead the barrel. I run a NOE 452-230 HP sized to 452 and lubed with Alox. I seat them a touch deep to just cover the crimp grove with no bulging to speak of. They drop right in, punch the center out of the targets, and leave no lead in the barrel. A lot less trouble.

[newton]

The Experts were sort of a moving target there for a while. They had the GI, then the GI Expert, Then just dropped the GI and called it the Expert. Pretty much the only difference was the Beaver tail.

The beaver tail, the sights, the trigger, and the barrel, and the finish coating were changed from the GI model. That's why I ask, mainly due to the barrel. If you have the GI Expert that might be why you never saw any issues with this boolit, other than the out of round thing with the mold.

[Boolit_Head]

The beaver tail, the sights, the trigger, and the barrel, and the finish coating were changed from the GI model. That's why I ask, mainly due to the barrel. If you have the GI Expert that might be why you never saw any issues with this boolit, other than the out of round thing with the mold.

Miniscule changes in the scheme of things. The GI Expert and the Expert got the fiber optic front sight. As far as I could tell they all had the same finish and the same barrel.

125879125880125881

[newton]

So you powder coat then size, so why PC at all? Size and Lube and drop the hassle of PC. If you scrape off the PC during the sizing process it negates the benefits. Without Lube that bullet will probably lead the barrel. I run a NOE 452-230 HP sized to 452 and lubed with Alox. I seat them a touch deep to just cover the crimp grove with no bulging to speak of. They drop right in, punch the center out of the targets, and leave no lead in the barrel. A lot less trouble.

The PC does not scrap off. Plus, for me, PC is a LOT easier to do than lubing. In fact, its the same process I used when lubing(tumble lubing) except after I tumble powder coat the boolit, I can then load them in 30 mins(this is after a 15 min trip in the oven and enough time for them to dry from the bath afterwards).

Look close at the one picture of the boolit sitting above the case. You can see the powder coat does not come off. Also, powder coating does not lead. You have to think of it as a plated boolit. Most people do not lube plated boolits.

I'll have to look at the NOE version. I am not familiar with it. I have no doubt that if I had a non-match barrel, and a different profile of boolit, then my OAL would be different.

To the other points, the rounds I did run through my 1911 did punch the center out of targets. Very nice shooting. No trouble at all.

I do think it will be a LONG time before PC'ing catches on. For those of us who have tried it, and it actually worked(some have had bad experiences with the tumble method), there really is no comparison to traditional lubing with handgun rounds. Now, I could see if I had a lubesizer and all the top punches and dies for it, but I am not going to sink that much money into something when a plastic tub, a container of powder, some plastic BB's, and a toaster oven(total combined price of $20) will do the trick of making a boolit of the same quality as plated ones.

Lol, ok, maybe that was a tad bit of an infomercial for PC'ing. But at least it makes it known where I stand.

[newton]

Miniscule changes in the scheme of things. The GI Expert and the Expert got the fiber optic front sight. As far as I could tell they all had the same finish and the same barrel.

125879125880125881


Do you have an non GI Expert? Just curious. I did the research, the differences I stated is what the company states. Seeing how I do not work there I suppose anything is possible, but generally I go off what the manufacturer states.

[NavyVet1959]

No, never tried it without PC. However, yes I do size afterwards, so I believe it would negate the difference - at least in the bulge category. I could be wrong though, but the PC is really not all that thick. In the end, it would be a very small difference in how it effected OAL.

When you add PC, it increases both the width and the length. When you resize afterwards, the lead has to go *somewhere*, so it also increases the length. It's probably pretty minor and might not have much of an effect on pressure, but the measurements that we're talking about here between working and not is pretty small also. When debugging a problem, it's always nice to take as many variables out of the equation as possible.

I use that same bullet in my Glock 21 converted to .45 SUPER +P+ (https://sites.google.com/site/navyvet1959/miscellaneous/glock-21-45-super-p-conversion), also powdercoated without a problem.

[Boolit_Head]

I have no doubt that if I had a non-match barrel, and a different profile of boolit, then my OAL would be different.

Don't be fooled by a marketing name, at that price point you got a mass produced barrel with tolerances to fit a large amount of pistols and ammo. Unless a smith custom reamed a barrel to tight tolerances you ended up with a one size fits all mass produced model. By deviating from the normal old school loading procedures you have created a problem for yourself. Now you have to sort through them and figure out what is making the difference. 45's for years have been sized to .452 and loaded to drop into the chamber without issues. You have to figure out why yours does not before you know you need to deviate and size smaller or some other extreme. It's not unusual to see a deviation in the reflection on brass at the base of the bullet or the beginnings of a bulge. That does not mean a bulge that causes issues.

I'll post up some pictures tonight of some of my loaded rounds and show you what I mean.

[newton]

I am trying to find the sources, but I cannot. All of that is beside the point. The true point I am trying to make is just because your gun/barrel combination allowed your loads to chamber does not mean my gun/barrel would have allowed your loads to chamber. Make sense? Everyone knows that guns are all different. No one doubts when someone says they have a Ruger cylinder that does not need reaming, instead they congratulate them for having such a rare find. I just highly doubt my barrel and your barrel were cut on the same day, by the same cutter.

Cool thing is, while this is all going on FedEx just showed up! Now just have to wait till quitting time to get home and try the new stuff out.

[Boolit_Head]

Do you have an non GI Expert? Just curious. I did the research, the differences I stated is what the company states. Seeing how I do not work there I suppose anything is possible, but generally I go off what the manufacturer states.

I did not buy one but at one point at a store I had a GI and a GI Expert in my hands at the same time and there was no discernible difference. Same with the Expert I did finally purchase.

[newton]

When you add PC, it increases both the width and the length. When you resize afterwards, the lead has to go *somewhere*, so it also increases the length. It's probably pretty minor and might not have much of an effect on pressure, but the measurements that we're talking about here between working and not is pretty small also. When debugging a problem, it's always nice to take as many variables out of the equation as possible.

I use that same bullet in my Glock 21 converted to .45 SUPER +P+ (https://sites.google.com/site/navyvet1959/miscellaneous/glock-21-45-super-p-conversion), also powdercoated without a problem.

True. Before I PC more I will take a before and after measurement of a few boolits. I know that on other boolits I have sized significantly(some of my ML boolits) the lead actually spreads into the lube grooves, or rather makes them wider.

[newton]

Don't be fooled by a marketing name, at that price point you got a mass produced barrel with tolerances to fit a large amount of pistols and ammo. Unless a smith custom reamed a barrel to tight tolerances you ended up with a one size fits all mass produced model. By deviating from the normal old school loading procedures you have created a problem for yourself. Now you have to sort through them and figure out what is making the difference. 45's for years have been sized to .452 and loaded to drop into the chamber without issues. You have to figure out why yours does not before you know you need to deviate and size smaller or some other extreme. It's not unusual to see a deviation in the reflection on brass at the base of the bullet or the beginnings of a bulge. That does not mean a bulge that causes issues.

I'll post up some pictures tonight of some of my loaded rounds and show you what I mean.

I'm not fooled. lol. I would have bought the gun regardless of that fact.

I will continue to argue the fact that I am not deviating from the old school way of loading. Ok, I am, but so is anyone else that uses anything but ball ammo look alike. I have not created a problem for myself, I simply have an obstacle to over come. I am not the first, nor will I be the last. I know EXACTLY why mine are not dropping into the chamber. lol.

Hey, after this weekend(hopefully sooner depending on time) all will be resolved and my gun will be chunking brass on the ground.

Please do post up pictures, take some measurements if you will also. I think that would help.

[NavyVet1959]

True. Before I PC more I will take a before and after measurement of a few boolits. I know that on other boolits I have sized significantly(some of my ML boolits) the lead actually spreads into the lube grooves, or rather makes them wider.

I have a 210 gr .41 mag bullet that I resize for 10mm after PCing and by the time I get through, there are no lube grooves left visible. It drops bullets at about 215 gr with a 50:50 alloy.

[bangerjim]

If the amount of sizing done DOES move lead around, it will always go into the grooves, not make the boolit longer. And even it DID grow in length, we are talking about a very tiny amount, mabe a thou?(I am talking about NORMAL in-cal sizing here, not some wild swaging effort from one cal to another!) It is much easier for lead to be forced down and into the grooves (making them narrower) than to force the much larger bulk of lead in the boolit up and make it longer. Another reason I thing NLG castings are not worth the $$ or money.....no place for the extra lead to go.

This is why I like revolvers and long guns. They will eat anything you cast and load!!!!!!!!

newton.....go get that FEDEX box and start playing around with the stuff we discussed in the PM. Let us know!

banger

[RobS]

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=125846&d=1420032590&thumb=1

Yep, little throat on that barrel.

[35remington]

Fair warning.

i can see where Newton is headed with this, as he's determined to make it an expose on "how I did this successfully." I see where robertbank was figuring this already. I'm a little slower on the uptake.

The trouble with posting this for everyone to see is it becomes about how not to do something, rather than how something was done. I predicted this earlier.

Instead of making a single correct choice, an alternative course of action will be chosen that not only involves more work, but will result in several drawbacks that could have been avoided. I would be remiss in not pointing this out.

newton, I promise to not let my patience slip. God knows it's been tested already, but I will be civil. If you're gonna hang this out for everyone to see, you're gonna take the critiques you have coming. Hopefully what will result is a learning experience .....for those who wish to learn.

You up for this?

[RobS]

Just curious what diameter is a fired case from your Para?

[Boolit_Head]

Please do post up pictures, take some measurements if you will also. I think that would help.

Ok here is the picture.

125919

COAL is 1.205
unsized .455
sized .452
bullet height .648 unsized .646 sized (suprisingly)
Loaded width at bullet .472

On that left loaded round you can just see the crease where the bullet ends. Well maybe not in the picture. Not as bad as yours but seeing a crease like that is normal. If you look close you can just see the top of the crimp groove squeaking out the top of the case I tried to get the case to just kiss the top of that band. These drop in to the Para chamber with no issues. I suspect the reamer used on yours and mine were built to the same spec and varly only marginally.

[newton]

Boolit head, do you have the dimensional spec drawings for that boolit? Looks like your case mouth sits right about where the boolit shoulder drops off the .452" mark, or what I like to call the shoulder. That's where I am crimping mine also. So it must be that from that point on your boolit is longer than the Lee boolit.

[newton]

Just curious what diameter is a fired case from your Para?
I'll measure tomorrow

[DougGuy]

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=125846&d=1420032590&thumb=1

Yep, little throat on that barrel.

VERY little!

[Boolit_Head]

Off the NOE website.

125933

I will say the little bit I had to do with that Lee TC bullet I did not get warm fuzzy feelings. I seem to remember having to seat them deeper than I liked and they tended to scatter all over the target as well.

[newton]

So I rushed home after work. Set the dies up and started sizing my boolits. I'm not sure what to make of it. The boolits had a little resistance going through the .451" sizer, but in the end they measured in at .452". I'm not sure if me sizing them to .452" already caused them to spring back? I have no other boolits that I have not sized to compare them with. Guess I'll have to make some and just run them through the .451" sizer. I really hope I did not get a Lee mess up...

i loaded them regardless. 1.180" OAL. Then ran them through the FCD. I can see where people are leery of this thing with .452" boolits. It was TIGHT going in and out of the sizer. I put just enough crimp on to close the flare. It passes the banging on the bench test for setback into the case. All rounds passed the plunk test with flying colors.

Downside is I did have 3 FTF. One was the second or third in the 8 round mag. The other two were the last one in the mag. All of these did chamber when put back into the mag and racked in. Next time it happens I'll keep them aside and measure them, but the fact they chambered tells me they are at least in spec.

Most noticable, and probably related to the failures, is each last round in the mag when fired flew straight back at me and hit my face/head. They did not fly where the others did off to the right a few feet and back a few feet. The slide locks back, but I'm curious if I am too light on my load. It is in the mid 20's, which is 30 degrees cooler than the last tests. I'm using 5.2 grains unique.

Being new to auto loaders in this regard I'm not sure what to make of it. I did up my charge and loaded a mag full for tomorrow. Maybe it's a mag issue? We shall see.

Im not happy with the sizing situation. I really wanted to try .451" boolits.

Accuracy is fine, but only 24 down the tube. Not bad for a quick load and shoot scenario with minimal rest. Once I have a good load I'll get a better rest. Shots were taken behind the 60' line.
125934

[newton]

Off the NOE website.

125933

I will say the little bit I had to do with that Lee TC bullet I did not get warm fuzzy feelings. I seem to remember having to seat them deeper than I liked and they tended to scatter all over the target as well.

thanks! I'll try to look lees up also. I'm leaning that way on my thoughts about the boolit. Might have to abandon it to just 45colt use. It is top notch in that gun.

Im still going to play before total divorce though. I like to look for the best in things before totally writing them off. Lol

[newton]

That was the third mag, these were mag one and two.
125935
125936

Its late, happy new year guys.

[newton]

I should say, third mag I tried a tighter crimp. Forgot to mention that. I did not like it at all. Just seemed different. But I was rushing at that point also. I'll have more time this weekend, although it doesn't help my sizing issue.

[35remington]

The nature of the jam and the exact location of the jammed round will tell you what caused it. Last round jams are usually inertial issues and eight round magazines are more subject to them than seven rounders are. If you up the power the inertial problems get worse. 5.2 grains Unique is reasonably light. Unless you can communicate the exact nature of the jam you can't necessarily pin this on what you're doing.

Noticeable effort to run a round through the carbide of the LFCD isn't good. Measure the case over the bullet and see how bad it is. Measure before running it through and after.

Lee could have misground the sizing die for the bullets. It still gives notice of possible effects with the most popular bullet size (452") when pushed through the LFCD.

The light bulb ought to be starting to flicker at this point.

What is not helping is rushing to apply the LFCD. The bulge should have been analyzed to see if it was crooked bullet seating (asymmetrical measurement around the case) or too deep bullet seating (case wall taper, symmetrical measurement) that was causing it. Then the proper solution could have been found.

You're learning the hard way that a short throat is a drawback that has implications you haven't fully discovered yet (witness the case bulge issue and possible relationship). Applying an alternative cure has probems.

DougGuy gets business for reasons that are very legitimate. Short/no throats just plain suck for the hand loader. They also cause problems with accuracy, more so the taper of the leade than the length of the freebore. This may be hard to prove with most people's abilities with a pistol, but I would be discouraged if I had that leade/throat in a rifle and not expect much from it with a cast bullet.

Last round ejection is often different due to not having a round to bump over on the way out. The main thing is that it ejects reliably.

Props for the apparently honest reporting.

[RobS]

Using the Lee FCD did you have any leading? That die as you experienced does have resistance as the loaded round enters and passes through the carbide ring. That resistance can if enough swage down on your boolits, the only way to tell is to pull one and see. The topside I see with your current situation if the boolits are swaged down beyond .451 at the base is that they are powder coated so there is some protection from the hot gasses and leading will be less likely however accuracy can suffer still from an undersized boolit. PC can be a bandaid and cover up things sometimes.

A thought to your .451 die and it not sizing to that diameter. If your alloy is harder it is entirely possible that it will size larger due to spring back. As an example an air cooled wheel weight 45 caliber boolit sized with a particular die can read .001 smaller than the same boolit that is water quenced or let's say a 12 BHN vs 20 BHN boolit. I've also noted that the more a boolit is sized down with certain alloys or BHN readings (hardness) there can be more of a likelihood of spring back. As an example a .455 boolit sized down to .452 vs .454.

This spring back is also why some people who shoot harder boolits seem to be able to work the Lee FCD without it sizing down on the boolits past a barrels diameter to cause leading. I too had used the Lee FCD for my 45 ACP and with water quenched WW alloy at 20 BHN I was having quite a bit of resistance but yet the boolits didn't lead the barrel becasue they were still coming out of the case and into the barrel larger than the barrel's groove diameter. Visa versa the Lee FCD can swage down on soft alloys such as what I use for my HP's, a 60% straight lead to 40% WW, and with the right load development i.e. use of a fast powder to bump up or obturate the base of the boolit this too can work. The Lee FCD has many people who say it works others who say it doesn't and due to the variables one can see why. I see it as a tool that some may need for a tight chamber however once I learned better reloading practices I've moved away from the die entirely.

What alloy or hardness are you working with for these boolits and was the .452 die measuring out at .452 boolit diameter. All this considering you are using the same measuring devise.

Newton, I'm telling you that I've run this path that you are traveling and where as I did make the Lee 230 TC work at 1.19 IIRC out of a short throated Springfield XD and ran the same loads through several 1911's without a hitch, I later changed bullet designs and then eventually said the hell with it and throated my damn barrel. Best thing I did was work on the throat and it is really crazy to see so many auto barrels in various calibers these days with such short throats. I've throated 40 S&W barrels both factory and aftermarket barrels and now all of my 45 Auto barrels too. I not too long ago worked on my SAR K2 45 barrel's throat as it too was very short, not as bad as yours but enough to make me work on it.

You will likely find success with no modification to your existing barrel but you'll have to find workarounds which can be a real PITA. By the way have you also experienced a ring of lead at the end of the chamber where the boolit may be scraping off lead pieces a little at a time. This often happens with barrels like yours and after so many rounds the round will still chamber but there will be the FTF as it is not completely in battery.

[RobS]

Off the NOE website.

125933

I will say the little bit I had to do with that Lee TC bullet I did not get warm fuzzy feelings. I seem to remember having to seat them deeper than I liked and they tended to scatter all over the target as well.

I own this same design and have shot it from my 45 autos too. At 1.205 seating depth it has nearly the same length of boolit in the case vs the Lee 230 TC that is seated at a reasonable COAL. The 452640 is longer and is originally a 260 grain solid where as the Lee is a shorter 230-235 grainer. I do like the this boolit and it can be made to work in a 45 auto. It's great for lighter 45 Colt work however I have switched to a 452374 HP that weights in at around 210 grains and doesn't have the large meplat. The 452640 still looks kick ars though in a 45 ACP case as you can see by my avatar.

[35remington]

Springback of most alloys is noticeably less than a thousandth of an inch, especially if the bullet's been sized already and has been sized again to try to get it to the desired diameter. Mere thousandth of an inch sizing won't spring back all the way to its original size. Not even close. So it's not springback.

What one never, ever hears of was hordes of unsuccessful handloaders that took up the hobby again because the LFCD was introduced. Before it existed the problem was correctly diagnosed and fixed at its source. This is the way to fix any problem. Pretty much everyone loaded the 45 ACP successfully (there was never any litany of complaints that it was hard to do) and all was well.

Now that the LFCD exists, instead of going through things and correcting them at their source, the temptation is to fix them another way and pray that other drawbacks to their use don't crop up. Sometimes they do, and the tragic thing is with a more disciplined approach to the problem........

Actually finding out what is wrong and fixing that.......

More irritation and expense could have been avoided.

That's what's happening here.

Here's another reality. Given typical 45 ACP brass thickness and a .452" bullet, the cartridge over the bullet can't measure over about .472", which is well less than even a pretty tight chamber.

Since the problem wasn't diagnosed correctly before applying a cure, we're still speculating, but consider this:

If it so happens that the bullet bulges the case oversized due to deep seating interfering with the case wall taper, the manufacturer of said case never intended for a bullet to be seated that deep. Given that reality, why would a rational choice be to do it anyway? In so doing several other undesirable things happen.

In diagnosing a problem, all solutions should be on the table. All presumptions should be too, including the presumption that the manufacturer may very well have left something unfinished that needs to be corrected. Throwing that out as a possible solution to the problem is possibly eliminating the best way to do it.

And.....handloading voids warranties according to all firearm manufacturers I'm aware of.

[DougGuy]

I later changed bullet designs and then eventually said the hell with it and throated my damn barrel. Best thing I did was work on the throat and it is really crazy to see so many auto barrels in various calibers these days with such short throats.

You will likely find success with no modification to your existing barrel but you'll have to find workarounds which can be a real PITA. By the way have you also experienced a ring of lead at the end of the chamber where the boolit may be scraping off lead pieces a little at a time. This often happens with barrels like yours and after so many rounds the round will still chamber but there will be the FTF as it is not completely in battery.

He is apparently more concerned with warranty than how well the gun runs. A valid concern but had this barrel been sent my way early on, fully 12 pages of this thread would never have been written. And the hell of it is, that the gun STILL does not run 100%!

I just got done with a Para barrel sent by a forum member in Texas, let's see if he will weigh in on how his runs.

[35remington]

"He is apparently more concerned with warranty than how well the gun runs. A valid concern but had this barrel been sent my way early on, fully 12 pages of this thread would never have been written."

Since he's a handloader and has already voided his gun's warranty, warranty concerns are really much less of an issue than it's made out to be. If it really was a concern handloads wouldn't be applied.

And yeah, agreed, if the barrel was to spec with a slight, much needed and very beneficial modification applied to it all the rest of this rigamarole that is the 6th best way to solve the problem would probably not be needed.

As it is a lot of ink is being spilled about how not to do something.

[newton]

A lot has been said, I don't have time to cover all of it right now. I had made a mag full last night, with a 5.5 grain charge, but it was too dark to shoot. So I shot it this morning.

I did measure the cases after the FCD. They are right at .472". They taper smaller towards the rim, and my crimp still sits at .471".
125961

Here re is a picture of a pre and post FCD case which has the cannelure, which, correct me if I'm wrong, is to keep the bullet from setting back any further. That seems to me that a bullet could be set up to that point and still feed reliably, of course this may only be for .451" bullets. Regardless, I found it interesting.
125962

The rounds shot great for my first of the morning coffee hands. I really figured the group would be spread out further.
125963

The last round did FTF again. I'm sure all will agree it's a mag issue based on this picture. I guess you could argue a OAL issue too. I put it back into the mag, and hit the slide stop, and it chambered just fine. Nice thing about this was this time the case did not come back at me. It ejected fine, like normal. I'll feel more confident when it happens for a few more mags though.
125969

[robertbank]

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=125846&d=1420032590&thumb=1

Yep, little throat on that barrel.

Looks like every barrel I have for every pistol I own where the case is supposed to head space off the case mouth. What were you expecting to see?

Take Care

Bob

[newton]

So tempting....but I'm a sucker for it I guess. Lmao

Hope I do better with my kids.

[newton]

Looks like every barrel I have for every pistol I own where the case is supposed to head space off the case mouth. What were you expecting to see?

Take Care

Bob

i think they are expecting to see a nice gentle taper into the lands. That's what they like on their guns. I'm fine with that personally, because it's their guns. I'd be fine with mine that way also, but that's not what I have. I wish I was 4" taller, 40 lbs lighter, and 10 years younger. Guess you just have to work with the hand your dealt.