H&G 130 vs H&G 68 for competition would like opinions [Archive]

Strtspdlx

06-06-2016, 08:31 AM

I'm very seriously considering getting into competition shooting in the near future. I have an m&p pistol in 45acp. I have an H&G 130 mold and so far my pistol loves these bullets. I also have a Lee H&G 68 clone that doesn't cast worth a darn. I'd like to try the 68 but with recently purchasing a house funds are becoming non existent for my hobbies. Is it worth findin a good H&G mold? I love my steel on so is want another actual H&G mold. Or should I just focus on shooting what the pistol likes? I wish I could try the 68 but my mold won't drop good bullets.

runfiverun

06-06-2016, 10:34 AM

it doesn't have to be an actual H&G mold.
LEE makes a good nuff copy for 20 bucks to find out.
I shoot the lyman version which has a shorter nose [the 452430] it feeds in everything 45 I have.
once I tried it out in the pistols I kept the 4 cavity mold and got rid of my faithful H&G copy from magma.

fecmech

06-06-2016, 10:58 AM

There is nothing sacred about the H&G 68. If your gun is accurate and feeds the #130 well you won't gain a thing going to the 68 except using more lead. In my wad gun the most accurate bullet is the Lyman 452460,then the Saeco 130 followed by the 68. All will hold the 10 ring at 50yds but my gun does slightly better with 2 other bullets than the 68. Another advantage to your 130 is less recoil and better suited to timed and rapid stages.

MtGun44

06-07-2016, 10:39 PM

H&G 68 is a 100% feeder in most 1911s if loaded to 1.250 LOA and taper crimped as a
separate operation. Don't omit the TC.

H&G 130 is so short that some guns won't feed it properly.

IMO, they are about the same accy in my guns.

Bill

Strtspdlx

06-07-2016, 11:15 PM

I have a mold for both. I can't the the 68 mold to work though. The 130 has been feeding in my gun fine but I've only put 30-40 rods through it. Usually with this gun if it doesn't like it I'll get a failure to feed in the first 10 rounds. If I don't I run 4-500 more through it. After that I consider it to be fairly reliable. If round 501 is a failure to feed then I scrap the whole idea and start over.

bilco

06-08-2016, 07:47 AM

I've never had anything bad to say about the HG68's I own and they feed reliably, if loaded straight to 1.25, in any gun I shoot.. If your gun likes the 130 I doubt you'd see a difference between the two.

lightman

06-08-2016, 08:27 AM

If your pistol is reliable with the 130 theres nothing wrong with using it. Both the 68 and the 130 are classics in the Bullseye game. Congrats on the new house!

earplug

07-14-2016, 03:14 PM

What type of competition? If you have to make power factor such as in USPSA shooting. Most use a heavier bullet that has less recoil. The Lyman RN at 228 grains has worked for me. A big RN is easy to cast and will feed without issue. If you don't have a minimum power requirement consider the SAECO # 65 at 185 grains loaded light. I bought a 1911 set up for Bianchi Cup matches and this weight with a light load of Bullseye or other fast powder has been fun and accurate. I have used the 185 grain load for indoor Bullseye matches.

NoZombies

07-14-2016, 04:08 PM

I've got several guns that will shoot either, but at least 2 .45's that will digest the 130 and choke on the 68's. I've tried the Lee version, a Mihec version and the H&G original. I found they all ran the same in my guns.

I sold off my H&G 68 and stuck with the 130 and haven't looked back.

toallmy

07-14-2016, 05:36 PM

I have 2 45s and one prefers 130 and the other likes the 68 better both are saeco clones .

Echo

07-14-2016, 06:17 PM

I have used the Lyman -460 for decades. I'm not competitive anymore, but hte -460 worked fine for me back when. I've also used the 68, with no issues, but not competitively.

BigCheese

07-20-2016, 10:23 AM

I have a 6 cavity #130 and used it for years in bullseye competition; later added #68. The 130 is very accurate, but has one disadvantage in that the holes in paper targets are not sharply defined and sometimes hard to score. This is due to the sloping shoulder. The #68 design cuts a much cleaner hole. Both of these designs are sized to .452 and feed without problems in my Clark .45 longslide.

DerekP Houston

07-20-2016, 10:25 AM

PM sent regarding #68.

gtgeorge

07-20-2016, 10:38 AM

I have never shot the 130's but shoot 500-1K a month of the 68's (MP Mold) We get comments at every match with the size and sharpness of the holes they create. A 200gr bullet is easy to make Power factor in IDPA and is VERY accurate. They run great in all our 1911's and even a Bersa 45UC. If you have had good success with the 130 I see no reason to change.

Strtspdlx

07-21-2016, 10:12 AM

Well my entire #130 reliability went down the tubes. Loaded a bunch up and keep having failure to feeds on the first and last round of magazines. I'm I ly taper crimping to .472~. I'm goi g to adjust crimp and try .470. I also cannot load to 1.250". My barrel has no throat to it so I have to load really short. If I remember correctly it's something like 1.146" oal for my smith and Wesson m&p.

TenTea

07-21-2016, 10:31 AM

Saeco 130 is my number one revolver bullet.
Saeco 69 is my number one auto bullet.

I tested a heap of molds coming to this *conclusion* for myself.

Good luck in your endeavors.

DerekP Houston

07-22-2016, 10:50 PM

Took me longer than promised but here's the results.

172773

My super fancy casting station. This was my first time using the MP 68 clone, found it liked the lead set at 750f and the mold HOT! Culled around 20-30 pours to get it broken in, hopefully these make it to you in decent condition. Depending on when I wake up they will be in the mail tomorrow or on monday.

Best of luck to you sir!

Strtspdlx

07-23-2016, 10:14 PM