45 colt 300gr+ standard pressure loads?

[BDecho]

Hi,

First off I'm a long time lurker but this is my first post. If this subject has been written about before I apologize but I haven't come across it yet.

I just recently acquired a new rossi 92 in 45 colt with a 16" barrel. I had the idea of possibly threading it for a suppressor and was curious about heavy bullet sub-sonic loads for it. I would like to shoot 300gr or bigger bullets through it but have run into a problem... All of the information i have found regarding heavy bullets were for ruger only loads that leave a carbine barrel faster than 1500fps. Most all of these loads have used powders like h110 that can't be loaded less than 90% case capacity. Any time a heavy bullet is mentioned in an article the author states they see no reason to load any slower.

With that said I currently have universal, blue dot, and trail boss powder to work with. I wouldn't mind picking something up along the lines of 2400 or h4227 if i needed to. If i were to pick up premade cast bullets the beartooth 330gr wfnpb would probably be my first choice. Where would i start to get 1050fps out of a 16" barrel? Thanks in advance!

[3leggedturtle]

Sierra or Speer had some standard pressure loads for 45 colt with those bullets, Hodgden might have too. I don't have my books with me on this trip. Lee has a fair amount of loads in his book but cannot remember if they went heavier that the Lyman 270gr. Look up Brian Pierce from handloader magazine he might have some of his pages on the web. Todd/3leg
I had a stainless 16" Puma in 45 Colt, my favorite loads were a 200gr RNFP at 1100fps and the Lee 255gr RNFP at 1400fps. I sold it cause it had an oversized chamber.

[BDecho]

Thank you Todd for some ideas on where to look! I have read a few of Brain Pierce's articles and have come to the conclusion that he is obsessed with the rcbs 270-saa lol. I have looked on hodgdens website but the only 300gr option in the standard section was for a speer(i believe) 300gr jsp. I would prefer to have data for a cast bullet to go off of just to eliminate that variable. Also, the standard pressure statement is a loose guideline, i know the rifle can handle quite a lot of pressure but mainly stated "standard" to keep someone from thinking i was looking for the high end data. I would like to add a pistol into the equation soon, so i think i would like to keep pressures in the <21000psi range to keep my options open.

I'm sorry to hear the chamber was loose on your rifle. It sounds like a pretty common issue for these rossi's, i hope mine isn't too far out of spec. I know a little higher pressure keeps blowback down with the oversize chamber. I was thinking if my chamber was a little too far out of line I might look into having my sizing die opened up a bit to match... I think that would cut down on the blowby and make life a little easier on the brass..

Did you ever chronograph loads out of your rifle? I'm curious as to how much velocity is actually increased over the pistol data. Thanks!

[Moonie]

I believe part of the issue is that these long boolits like speed to stabilize properly. You really really don't want a baffle strike with a 300gr boolit. You should do some testing to determine if the load you want to use is stable before shooting them through a can.

[John Boy]

http://reloadammo.com/45cload.htm
Use the jacket bullet loads - they are below SAMMI pressure the 45 Colt

[BDecho]

Moonie, yes baffle strikes are definitely a concern and if I end up buying a suppressor I'll have 6 months worth of wait time to do some testing. I have run numbers through the berger stability calculator. According to it i can run a bullet up to .915" as slow as 750fps and still be at thier recommended 1.5 for a stable bullet, however I don't know how a wfn bullet compares to a rifle bullet the calculator is designed for. I would imagine that the length and weight of the bullet and the twist of the barrel are the only figures that truly matter... If anyone has any information on the contrary please correct me. I want to learn as much as i possibly can.


John Boy, thanks for the link. It looks like their universal load is the same as what hodgdon lists on their website for the 300gr jsp. I would probably end up starting from there.

[3leggedturtle]

I had the 255 going almost 1600fps, but backed it down to 1400. The 200 I ran from 900-1500, the load at 1100fps was the most consistent accuracy wise at 100 yards. Was sweet and mild load. These were all chronoed using HS7 powder. my 4 5/8 Blackhawk was brutal with the top loads and the black plastic checkered grips. With the 255 in it, I know I stopped when it was going 900fps.

[MSD MIke]

In my opinion and based on my personal experience you will have better luck using standard weight (255gr) bullet with standard pressure loads. Heavier bullet need faster twist and more speed for good results. Wont know until you try though

Thanks
Mike

[44MAG#1]

Hodgdons has STANDARD (meaning STANDARD PRESSURE and not high pressure. STANDARD which is within SAAMI specs for the LOW pressures safe in a Colt SAA) pressure data for the 300 Sierra. That is a hard bullet for much higher velocity.
Should do well,with the flat nose it has. Most 45 Colts have a 1-16 twist and should stabilize the bullet.

[BDecho]

44mag#1, I mentioned being aware of that hodgdons data above. The trouble with that is the jsp is a different bullet design from that of a wfn cast bullet, and i have no dimensions for the sierra in regards to bullet oal and the distance from the meplat to the cannellure to reference. Without that information i feel that it would be irresponsible of me to use that data to load a wfn without knowing how much volume of the case is being dispaced. With that said, it is a 13k psi load being chambered in a gun that can handle 40k+ psi so there is a large margin for error. Fast pistol powders do strange things in large volume cases though...

[44MAG#1]

44mag#1, I mentioned being aware of that hodgdons data above. The trouble with that is the jsp is a different bullet design from that of a wfn cast bullet, and i have no dimensions for the sierra in regards to bullet oal and the distance from the meplat to the cannellure to reference. Without that information i feel that it would be irresponsible of me to use that data to load a wfn without knowing how much volume of the case is being dispaced. With that said, it is a 13k psi load being chambered in a gun that can handle 40k+ psi so there is a large margin for error. Fast pistol powders do strange things in large volume cases though...

Since you seem to be very knowledgeable person concerning loads I would wonder why you would even need to come on a shooting forum to ask about data. I understand doing it because of questioning oneself. I look at case capacity etc. too. Since the gun you are using is strong enough to take much more than standard loads why worry about it. Hodgdons has loads for that bullet weight, or close enough to it, for government work. Although they are higher chamber pressure. Using 2400 and dropping it down (which can be done despite some people grabbing their chest in the Fred Sanford method) and a chrono you should be able to do a good job of developing a good load yourself.

[44MAG#1]

Concerning the Sierra 300 gr. Overall .808". From base to center of CG is .417" From center of CG to nose is .391"

[BDecho]

Thank you 44mag with all your insight. I have done a lot of research about reduced power loads for other calibers and I noticed they usually use powders the 45 colt would be reloaded with. It is part of what got me back into the caliber. I am far from an expert on the subject, I've reloaded 45 colt in the past but I never really experimented with it. From everything I've read I 'should' be able to load a subsonic 350gr bullet and the barrel twist 'should' be enough to stabilize it. However, it sounds like from others' experience that it might not. I'm curious as to why people have the stability issues with the big bullets at slower speeds. Bullet stability as I understand it is a product of the length and the rpm of the bullet in flight. I understand there are other factors. A wfn should be more stable than a swc of the same length because the weight is further forward on the bullet and the momentum of that weight moving forward should reduce the yaw of the bullet in flight. Is the turbulence created by the wide meplat what causes the problem? When a bullet transitions from supersonic to transonic to sub sonic it can also cause stability issues. Is it possible that when testing the bigger bullets slower than magnum loads they were still leaving the barrel supersonic and it was the transition that causes the instability?
I really don't know. That's why I posted on here asking if anyone has loaded these larger bullets subsonic. There are a ton of people on this website with much more experience than I have and I was hoping to learn from their experiences.
I really appreciate everyone's input.

[DougGuy]

Two things. First off yes there is the lack of spin at lower velocities. How much spin is needed would vary with twist rate given the same load in different guns, you will just have to try some loads in yours.

Secondly, do not try to use fast powders with a heavy boolit, you run out of headroom REAL quick. Generally the heavier the boolit, the slower the powder. 2400 and LilGun can both be loaded to much less capacity than H110/W296.

Other than these two pointers, it's hard to provide more info than this because using such a heavy boolit in less than magnum loads is fairly pointless and so you won't find much if any published load data for these recipes. It goes without saying that if you can't find a heavy boolit load for a powder such as Unique, then by it's absence, it is not recommended. Either unsafe, or impractical or both.

[44MAG#1]

Let me say this about that. I know in a 45 Colt Ruger RedHawk with a 4.2 inch barrel a 410 to 415 gr bullet will stabilize well slightly under 1000 fps. One is a LFN and the other is a WLN LBT GC bullets. I've done it.
A 350 should have no problem being stabilized at a lesser velocity. On the use of a fast (relative term) in large cases. Most will still give a wide velocity variation is the powder is in the front or the back of the case even with a heavy for caliber bullet. The saving grace of a revolver is when the cylinder rotates is will have a tendency to level out the powder of something to that effect to help keep velocity consistent.
Now before someone thinks Im crazy just do the test. Developed a load with say Red Dot, or a similar powder that people thinks will be consistent due to the fact that the faster powders SUPPOSE to be consistent and try the front and back test. Most on here will be surprised.
There is a gentleman on here occasionally that has a Red Dot load for a 325 grain 45 Colt thereabouts that is a good load accuracy wise but will still give the Wild velocity shots. I know I have tried the load and as long as the powder is near the same place in the case it is okay.
2400 will do the same thing but not as bad as some due to the volumn it has at somewhat reduced loads. I don't use magnum primers with fast powders or 2400. No point in it.
Oh BTW, Hodgdons does list fast powders for the 44 Mag with a 300 gr Hornady. So there you go.

[Gray Fox]

One other factor in your planning is the question of whether or not your rifle will feed the longer, heavier boolit in a Rossi .45 Colt, of which I have 2 that have shot a couple thousand rounds each in SASS matches. The Lee 300 grain RNF boolit crimped in the top crimping groove functions and shoots well in both with a load about 10% less than what Hogdon lists as the max load of HC110. That load shoots well out to about 115 yards which is all the range I have available to me. I have had no reason or desire to try that load at subsonic velocities, and it may not be stable at that speed, but at least it runs through the action. GF

[BDecho]

Yes, whether or not I can get the bullet to feed is a whole nother ballgame! It seems like the oal of the cartridge is what hangs up the Rossis, and I'm not looking to cram as much powder as i can in the case so crimping on the forward groove is not an issue.
Why would loading the larger bullet subsonic be pointless or useless? For one, the larger bullet has a better bc. If you run the data through a ballistics calculator you would see that the larger bullet at 1050fps sighted at 100 yards hits 3" high at 50. You only have 115 yards available.... All that extra velocity isn't giving you a flatter trajectory, at least not enough to justify burning more powder and having heavier recoil. According to beartooth bullets article regarding meplat diameters and killing power the velocity won't make a significantly bigger hole in game either.
On the other hand going from a 250gr swc to a 300+ wfn at 1050fps you will gain sectional density, mass, and make a larger diameter hole. Higher sectional density increases penetration, it improves bullet tracking through your target as well. Mass gives you more energy at the target. 50gr more mass is 20% more energy... Thats significant.

I don't expect to be shooting more than 100-150 yards. There is absolutely no advantage to magnum type velocity at that distance.
I strongly disagree that just because no one has load data for it means its dangerous or impractical. There are two types of loads for the 45 colt, replica cowboy loads and magnum "its bigger than a 44 mag" loads. There is a huge and useful area in between these two. No one does it because a) they are shooting cowboy action or want to recreate the experience of a traditional sixgun or b) cuz they want the biggest baddest performance they can squeeze out of there bisley vaquero

[DougGuy]

Oh BTW, Hodgdons does list fast powders for the 44 Mag with a 300 gr Hornady. So there you go.

Not for 45 Colt, which is what OP posted about..


I don't expect to be shooting more than 100-150 yards.

Subsonic, 300gr boolit, 100+ yards? All in the same load? It's becoming quite obvious that there is a distinct lack of real experience pertaining to this subject. You go on out there and set up some targets and load up some with whatever powder you decide to go with, and come back and post some photos of the results okay?

[44MAG#1]

Dougguy said,
"Not for 45 Colt, which is what OP posted about",
You are correct as you usually are but you also said ina post that: ". It goes without saying that if you can't find a heavy boolit load for a powder such as Unique, then by it's absence, it is not recommended. Either unsafe, or impractical or both."

I was showing that there are some fast powder load for heavy bullets. The way you stated it it sounded like you meant no fast powder loads for heavy bullets.
I am not dumb. I know what caliber he was talking about. I was making a point as so many on here do occasionally.
BTW Hodgdons lists a Titegroup load for a 300 gr jacketed in the high pressure loads for the 45 Colt.
BTW again if you look at page 440 in the Lyman 49th loading book you will see fast powders listed for a 325 gr cast. One of them is a Red Dot load.

[nockhunter]

I would try Blue Dot, or Unique, both have been loaded in reduced rifle loads for years. You will be loading these long bullets shorter to cycle in the M92 so available space is reduced somewhat. This should take care of any problems associated with the"large volume/fast powder" combo. I use Blue Dot in my 480 Ruger SBH with the Lee 400g at 950-1000fps.

Mike

P.S. I don't give specific load info.

[DougGuy]

Dougguy said,
"Not for 45 Colt, which is what OP posted about",
You are correct as you usually are but you also said ina post that: ". It goes without saying that if you can't find a heavy boolit load for a powder such as Unique, then by it's absence, it is not recommended. Either unsafe, or impractical or both."

I was showing that there are some fast powder load for heavy bullets. The way you stated it it sounded like you meant no fast powder loads for heavy bullets.
I am not dumb. I know what caliber he was talking about. I was making a point as so many on here do occasionally.
BTW Hodgdons lists a Titegroup load for a 300 gr jacketed in the high pressure loads for the 45 Colt.
BTW again if you look at page 440 in the Lyman 49th loading book you will see fast powders listed for a 325 gr cast. One of them is a Red Dot load.

I'm not knocking you by any means. Yes there are some loads for heavies using faster powders than unique but I just can't wrap my head around launching anything over about 260 grains with red dot, tite group, both of which are faster than Unique. There is a load listed for 300gr and 10gr of W231 which is faster still. These are for 44 magnum none listed for 45 Colt I am certain Hogdgon is just steering well clear of anyone dropping one of these wrist rocket loads into a Colt clone.

Back to the point of the post. There is a conspicuous void of heavy boolit/fast powder load data because it comes down to this.. Loading a fast burning powder under a heavy for caliber boolit is ALMOST the same thing as shooting a load into a somewhat obstructed barrel. The heavy boolit takes a LOT of inertia to start it moving, and in this time the pressure curve can go sky high in 1/10th of the time it would take with a slower burning powder. There really is no room for safety, let alone room for error. It's just not good sound principles to cook up such recipes.

Guns are 100% physics. ALL of the laws of physics govern and define reloading and those published guidelines are there because scientific principles associated with the study and implementation of the laws of physics dictate the limits of pressure, velocity, momentum, energy, it's all figured out and then tested and proven with pressure barrels and other tools much more sophisticated for the average handloader to use.

There are GAPS in this information where the limits are reached. They are there because the pursuit of usable data has reached a stopping place. Hence you won't find Unique listed as a suitable powder for a 300gr boolit in 45 Colt. Even in the strong Ruger revolvers, pressure is unpredictable and spiky, this is a KNOWN ATTRIBUTE of this double based powder so nobody publishes data for it. Not to say it cannot be done, but to say it SHOULD NOT be done.

[44MAG#1]

Doug,

So you are saying that Hodgdons is in error posting a Titegroup load for a heavy bullet?
What about the Lyman data for the 325 gr?
There is a lot of things we can't wrap our heads around but that doesn't make it true or not true.
You must get over the fact that you me or anyone else isnt the last word on data.

[DougGuy]

Doug,

So you are saying that Hodgdons is in error posting a Titegroup load for a heavy bullet?
What about the Lyman data for the 325 gr?
There is a lot of things we can't wrap our heads around but that doesn't make it true or not true.
You must get over the fact that you me or anyone else isnt the last word on data.

No not saying they are in error at all. This is also for the 44 magnum cartridge, for which there are NO Colt SAA or exact SAA clones chambered in this cartridge. (The Italian made SAA replicas in 44 magnum are a LOT beefier than the old Colt they copied). There are no 1917 revolvers chambered in 44 magnum.

In a modern revolver, Ruger or similar, I suppose the comparable loads between 44 magnum and 45 Colt would be interpolatable from one caliber to the other but no published data does this.

Never claimed to be an authority on load data. I learned a long time ago what was good and what was not good with assembling handloaded ammo. I for one think that those of us having a lifetime of good experiences and sound practices should pass this on to others. People don't take time to read anymore. They google and the first thing they find is what they go and do. I wonder how many shooters look up 100% of their loads online and never read or even own a published manual? If they find our forum by google, and MANY find my services this way, then it's up to us to post the best information we have, and the best practices for all aspects of handloading should go right along with that.

If OP wants to devote a summer to trying to make a 300gr oilcan group at 100+ yds and stay at 1000fps doing so, with a 1:30" twist barrel, THEN and only then will he understand why I said it was pointless. Personally I think it will be very difficult to do, if not near impossible, but hey I have been wrong before so... So much for my opinion.

If the older more experienced guys take the time to try and explain why things either work or don't work, this should and I say SHOULD be a help to many who are coming up still learning. I have a few guys who have taken my loads and bought the same boolits and powder that I used for them and have excellent results with the ammo, they couple this with cylinder throat and forcing cone work and now they got something that shoots a whole world better than what they had before. It's not hard to teach guys that are open to learning. The ones that seem to want to continue in a direction that more knowledgeable shooters won't go or have already been, I dunno.

[44MAG#1]

Dougguy,

At what point do we take responsibility for our own actions. I am 65 and have been loading since I was between 17 and 18. I still read the preamble on ALL load data. How about the HIGH PRESSURE data for the 45 Colt? Let's take that since people don't read anymore. We have loads from Hodgdons that run 30,000 CUPS with the Speer bullet of 300 grains. The length of the cartridge is 1.650. You do know that length will fit in a Colt clone don't you? What do you say about that? How do we stop that ? We don't. By your admission we don't read anymore. When I used to shoot 357 Mag I used mostly the 173 Keith loaded in 38 Special brass with 13.5 gr 2400. Did I know not to drop that cartridge into my M36 Special Smith? Yes I read. But according to you we don't read anymore. How do we stop that? We don't. Okay we have the neophyte that loads the 250 gr Hornady XTP in a 45 Colt at 30,000 CUP and drops it into granddads old Colt SAA? How do we STOP that? We can't because we don't read anymore according to you.
We can't undo what other people do by being the load data police. All we can do is say check your data. Be careful. And send them on their way. That is like teenage kids. We can teach them safe driving, ask where they are going, tell them to be careful and send them on their way. When they get out of sight they do what they want. I bet your children were perfect though like me and most parents though, right? Well guess what? Most of us labored under false delusions. Just like you are here.
Just warn people let it go because in the end once most log out of the sight they are going to do what they want anyway. You know why? Because we are an instant gratification society and we want it now. We don't read.
So it goes. Kinda like a business putting up a no firearms allowed sigh. That way if there is a shooting they can tell everyone that they did their part. I PUT UP A NO FIREARMS SIGN. I did my part to make the place safe just to make the owner feel good about themselves. While at the same time punish everyone else that has a carry permit.
Well I guess all that matters is you have done your part. But once that "teenage" reloader leave the house of CASTBOOLITS they will do what they want. Just like our teenage children did when they left our house.
Let me ask you one more thing. How about the neophyte that wants a REAL load for his 45 Colt clone and orders a box of Buffalo Bore heavy 45 Colt ammo with the 300 gr jacketed bullet? What do we do now? Sundles puts warnings on the box and also the website. Oh no we don't read.
Let me address the statement about gaps in data. There are two main reasons why there are gaps. Safety and money. I would say mostly money but I would also say when asked it would almost never be stated it was because of money. It would be for safety. Know why? It sounds better. If every load that could be possibly a good load was worked up and tested for every cartridge that is tested for a loading data book time,and money would be great. Not to mention the size of said book. Just because a powder isn't listed doesn't mean it would be unsafe. It may not be needed because a powder that is closer may fill the gap and said powder is not tested because of safety or, hey now,money constraints . Do you really know? Do you have proof of which one it is? I sure don't. In this day and time my bet would be on the money thing. With most companies it is. Don't automatically assume that it is because it is dangerous to use.
Let me add this about his bullet choices. Would I waste my time on a heavy bullet slow velocity load in a slow twist barrel. I'm too lazy since in my opinion the outcome IS NOT going to be good accuracy wise. But then again I cannot bet the farm on it. All reasonable things point to a waste of time. But it is his time. Not mine or yours. He can always try some development and see. Maybe he can get someone in here to send him some 335 to 350 grain bullets to try. I could but I am too lazy to cast any and mine has noses too long more than likely. But there again my crystal ball needs batteries.
Maybe he is not reading enough on Heavy Slow Bullets at Low Velocity in Slow Twist Barrels pamphlet.
As you say
I DUNNO.

[BDecho]

Dougguy. I made it very clear that I don't have experience loading 300gr + bullets subsonic in a 45 colt. If I did I wouldn't have to ask about it. However, you said yourself that you find it pointless so what load did you try that resulted in this unsatisfactory opinion on the subject? What do yoou believe was the contributing factor for the poor result? What was your muzzle velocity, what was your twist rate, and what was the length of the bullet you used?

If you read through my posts I didn't once say that you or anyone else on the matter was wrong, that i know it all, or that it is or isn't possible. What i have been getting at is that using stability and trajectory calculators the MATH says I should expect the results that I want. I then got a few replies that suggest it won't work. Ok, so it may or may not work. I have the math that says it will and I have a guy that thinks the whole idea is pointless to begin with scoff at my goals and tounge in cheek insult my efforts in figuring it out.
There is very sound reasoning behind what I'm trying to accomplish. There IS a point to it. You don't see that point and thats fine with me.
As far as the 'if there's no load data it means its not safe or relevant' comments, you should have been there for Elmer Keith, your advice could have saved him a lot of time and effort. I noticed a few powders now that have listings for 14000psi loads AND ruger only loads. Are you saying there is nothing in between those few grains of powder that is safe? Until the new vaquero came around you have replica guns and loads for them and blackhawks that can handle magnum loads and very little in between. Why go through the trouble of developing and publishing loads that only a few people will utilize? Cowboy action shooting is popular and sells guns, magnum revolvers are extraordinary and magazines tout their abilities which sell guns. Does that make middle of the road loads irrelevant? Hardly.

[44MAG#1]

I dont believe it will work accuracy wise either. But, I say give it a try. Who knows strange positive things have been known to happen.
Now on load data. On every site you have one or two that are self appointed load data police. EVERY SITE.
If they cant understand it, can't wrap their head around it, isn't something they have done, isn't some data that is prolifically published, isn't up to the minute time wise it is wrong or dangerous.
If you choose to stay on shooting forums this is something you will have to developed a thick skin for. Most of the time I have a thick skin but since I am not perfect my feelings show through sometimes.
I have an Encore 12 inch 454 Casull that shoots a 45/70 515 gr bullet sized down to .452 that shoots very well. Know why? It has a 1-16 twist. I don't push the loads and it still shoots well. Or as well as I can shoot iron sights at 100 yards.
Try your experiment and let us know. I am interested even if no one else is. I like to learn new things.

[BDecho]

Thanks.

My theory rides on the accuracy of that stability calculator. Its on the berger bullets website and have a hard time believing that it would steer me that far off. I used the noe 454-350 mould for reference just now and in a 30:1 twist it comes out comfortably stable. For kicks I changed the twist to marlins 36:1 twist and all the numbers went to hell quick. I think some of the information regarding the slow twist comes from that... Who knows. I think I'm going to give it a try. I'm going to search around for universal and blue dot loads i feel comfortable working from. If not I'll pick up a pound of 2400 and go from there. Thanks everyone for your help. It wasn't my intention to start an argument, and i apologize if I rubbed anyone the wrong way. If the answer to a question is a simple no nothing is learned.
If there is an explanation for why its a no everyone can benefit. If the answer is no based on a rumor or a guess everyone comes up short. That's the way I see it anyways...

[Quiettime]

Hah! I plan on doing the same thing using my Rugged Obsidian. I plan on TB but I also have some 4227 to try if it's too bulky. Thinking about grabbing the Lee 300 RNFP.

Might just hold out for a Winchester for the 1:26 rifling and go 325 or 340 grains.

[Finn45Colt]

Well I got NOE 454-285-SWC 2 cavity PB (45-270-SAA RCBS) few days ago and it cast 290gr lead/tin boolit. Gun is Marlin 1894CB Limited. With that 36:1 twist hope to boolit stabilize around 1000-1200fps, suitable most of my hunting and all around shooting. To hunt whitetails must push speed just over 1700fps following hunting laws. I guess at that speed this boolit works fine.

So most loading tests aiming to get some loads in subsonic area. My powders are Vihtavuori: N310, N320 and N32C(Tinstar).
http://www.vihtavuori.com/en/homepage.html

Waitinging for all results from you with heavy bullets in .45colt

[Outpost75]

Accurate 45-290H is not 300 grains, but 290 grains in wheelweights.

211832

Its long nose length is suited for the Ruger revolvers. In others you will need to use .45 Schofield brass.

This bullet is stable and accurate in the .455 Webley Mark VI loading it in the 0.87" length MkI case from Reeds Custom Ammo, with 3.5 grains of Bullseye, with velocity about 550 fps from the Webley MkVI. The .455 load was pressure tested by Larry Gibson using Schofield brass cut-off to .87" and firing in his .45 Colt T/C Contender with Oehler 43 Ballistic Test strain gage interface and is most quiet and accurate in an H&R single-shot chambered in .455 with 20-inch barrel which I had built especially for a "Blooper Gun."

LARRY GIBSON: 455 Webley w/45-290H with 3.5 grains of Bullseye: This heavier bullet picked up a bit on velocity and psi given the same 3.5 gr charge of Bullseye. The MAP was a very uniform 12,600 psi(M43) which is still very mild actually. All ten shots were measured by the M43. Again we see very low ES’s across the board. Accuracy also was excellent. I called the 2 high shots as I over compensated for the glare…….my bad…….This load (3.5 gr Alliant Bullseye) proved to be an excellent one for the 455 Webley. Given the low psi MAPs all three bullets over this load should be excellent performers in 455 revolvers. The weight of the bullets plus the large meplat should give very good terminal performance on target.


I found it also stable and accurate loading in .45 Schofield brass with 4 grains of Bullseye or .45 Colt brass with 5 grains of Bullseye.

The 5 grain charge in the .45 Colt is quite safe, Larry having tested heavier charges of 6 to 7 grains to establish safe limits for the Colts and the Ruger revolver. I do not recommend reducing charges further than those suggested.

LARRY GIBSON:
45 Colt 45-290H with 6 grains of Bullseye: The 1st thing that strikes me about this longer, heavier bullet is that at the so far tested lower velocities stability may be an issue in the 16” twist test barrels. I called the lower shot but that flyer at 9 o’clock came out of nowhere. Given the excellent internals this load had the accuracy should have been better if stability was not an issue. The MAP at 14,600 psi(M43) on this one is slightly over the SAAMI MAP for the 45 Colt. I wouldn’t worry about it with any revolver made for smokeless powder loads though. The “classic” 45 Colt load of the 454190 RNFP over 8.5 gr Unique used for many years in such “older” revolvers gave a MAP of 18,000 psi(M43). I would suspect this load to give 750 +/- fps in revolvers.

45 Colt Ruger Level w/45-290H with 7 grains of Bullseye; Very interesting here as we see the longer, heavier 45-290H bullet over 7 gr Bullseye come into its own as velocity increases which perhaps has improved the stability(?). Looking at both the velocity (M35P and the M43) and psi measurements for each shot we see they are very uniform for the 1st 8 shots. Then for whatever reason the bottom fell out on the last 2 shots. Both the velocity and psi for both shots was low. Those two shots also are the low two hits in that otherwise excellent group. While the MAP is listed at 17,400 psi(M43) it includes the 2 low shots. If we look at the first 8 shots the MAP is actually closer to 18,200 psi(M43).

[bigboredad]

If you look at the Lyman cast bullet handbook it has a 300 grain loaded with fast powders it may be a good place to. Hope this helps some. Personally I use 6.5 grains of red dot and a 300gr -340. My 340gr is the most accurate by far but my 300 is way more accurate than any 250-255. Good luck I hope you find what you're looking for

Sent from my SM-T377V using Tapatalk