RepackboxWidenersTitan ReloadingLoad Data
Lee PrecisionRotoMetals2MidSouth Shooters SupplyInline Fabrication
Reloading Everything
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 55 of 55

Thread: 45ACP Seating Depth Issue

  1. #41
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,063
    A 228-1R resembles 230 FMJ not at all, and rounds with both bullets loaded to the same approximate 1.262- 1.265” which duplicates factory 230 FMJ will result in the 228-1R not chambering fully even in barrels that have some throat.

    Said by a guy who has loaded both type bullets and casts the 228-1R. That OAL is a problem when confusing the two bullets is a well settled issue and not open to doubt.

  2. #42
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,063
    Examples of bullets that match the 230 FMJ profile much better than the 228-1R are available in plenty. Examine the other 230 RN Lee offers and take that as but one example. Hint….it’s a 2R. Also look up the Lyman and RCBS iterations among others.

  3. #43
    Boolit Master Forrest r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    2,079
    There's a lot of 1r & 1.25r bullet designs for the 45acp out there that have been used for decades. Just because a bullet is a swc doesn't mean that it will need a different oal then a 1r round nose to feed correctly.

    H&G #130
    Lyman 452488
    cramer #5
    Mihec 200gr hp
    LEE 228-1r

    All those bullets should be in the +/- 1.20" oal range. Milspec bbl's use longer oal's, match grade bbl's shorter oal's.

    Left: cramer #5 It's a clone of the h&g #130, the lyman 452488 is also a clone of the h&g #130
    Center: H&G #68
    right: Mihec 200gr hp
    [IMG][/IMG]

    It's been posted countless times on this website that "I set my oal with a thumb nail thickness of the bullet's shoulder sticking above the rim."

    That is excellent advice for any semi-auto cartridge anyone reloads for. Myself I always say +/- 20/1000 sticking above and then do a plunk test.

    The cramer #5 & mihec 200gr hp have a oal of 1.18". The cramer #5 has +/- 20/1000th's of the bullets body sticking above the top of the rim. The mihec 200gr hp is seated so that the bullets body is +/- 5/1000th's above the top of the rim. The mihec is seated deeper for reliable function/100% feed.

    Do yourself a huge favor and start testing oal's of a load with +/- 20/1000th's of the bullets body sticking out above the rim. Plunk test to dial the oal in & then test for function.

    The op more than most likely had +/- 60/1000th's of the bullets body sticking out above the top of the case.

    Myself, I crimp everything. I could care less about case life!!! Consistent ignition & consistent oal's ='s accuracy. Bullet setback is something I don't worry about between the correct expander for a consistent neck tension and a good crimp.

    Quickloads will make graphs showing pressures per seating depths. A 9mm graph
    [IMG][/IMG]

    Ramshot puts this out in their reloading manuals
    [IMG][/IMG]

    Bullseye used to be the bad boy on the block claiming many revolvers with wc loads. Hercules (before alliant) used to put this out as a aid for reloading and the affects of oal's
    [IMG][/IMG]

    Anyway, be safe & try to keep the amount of the bullets body +/- 20/1000th's" above the top of the case.

  4. #44
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,299
    The graphs and illustrations Forrest r posted above coincides very well with what my actual pressure measurements increases were with deeper seating depths for a given load.
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  5. #45
    Boolit Grand Master Char-Gar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Deep South Texas
    Posts
    12,820
    That graphic of deep seated and double charged 38 Special Wadcutters was published in the American Rifleman and was the results of testing done by H.P. White lab at the requested of AR magazine. The word was floating around that revolvers were being "blow up" with the standard target load of 2.7/BE under the solid base wadcutter. AR did the research to counter this myth.
    Disclaimer: The above is not holy writ. It is just my opinion based on my experience and knowledge. Your mileage may vary.

  6. #46
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    South Western NC
    Posts
    3,820
    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Gibson View Post
    ... all else being equal, a set back of .2" will get a 10,000 psi plus increase in pressure at lease.
    Larry, I don't know what you tested nor how. I have no such "test" data, and you know it. But I am an old space electronics system tech and I do have a detailed analytical approach to technical questions.

    The OP stated his concern about dangerous pressure spikes from a minor seating depth change; I only addressed what he said, not all possible events. (And I don't think it's necessary to blow the barrel off to qualify as a "blow-up".)

    The OP was specifically concerned that a (very small) change in his .45 ACP seating depth might be dangerous; it is not. Your mention of a .200" seating change is not small.

    First, modern 9mm and 10mm cartridges pressures normally run very high and their case volume is quite limited. So, by (Boyle's Law) of physics, we know that small decreases in volume can make oversized differences in pressure. But that volume effect simply isn't a player with our older pistol cartridges so, IMHO, the OP need have no fear with normally loaded .45 ACP.

    Second, the only real "spike" in chamber pressure occurs shortly after ignition and that comes before the bullet has moved much. Anything such as crimping that retards initial bullet movement will increase the peak start pressure. Your mention of seeing massive bullet set back because of cartridges hitting the feed ramp says those bullets were held so loosely they could not have appreciably resisted forward movement so the shortened seating depth, as such, couldn't have amounted to much.

    Finally, I cannot imagine having a normally loaded bullet seated so loosely that simply chambering the round would cause .200" of set back. BUT, if it happened, that same loosely held bullet would also move forward very easily to expand the volume of the combustion chamber and that rapid volume increase would have greatly reduced the attainable pressure.

    So, no; small changes in the seating depth of older modest pressure cartridges are not dangerous.

  7. #47
    Boolit Master


    Burnt Fingers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Tejas
    Posts
    1,938
    Quote Originally Posted by 1hole View Post
    Larry, I don't know what you tested nor how. I have no such "test" data, and you know it. But I am an old space electronics system tech and I do have a detailed analytical approach to technical questions.

    The OP stated his concern about dangerous pressure spikes from a minor seating depth change; I only addressed what he said, not all possible events. (And I don't think it's necessary to blow the barrel off to qualify as a "blow-up".)

    The OP was specifically concerned that a (very small) change in his .45 ACP seating depth might be dangerous; it is not. Your mention of a .200" seating change is not small.

    First, modern 9mm and 10mm cartridges pressures normally run very high and their case volume is quite limited. So, by (Boyle's Law) of physics, we know that small decreases in volume can make oversized differences in pressure. But that volume effect simply isn't a player with our older pistol cartridges so, IMHO, the OP need have no fear with normally loaded .45 ACP.

    Second, the only real "spike" in chamber pressure occurs shortly after ignition and that comes before the bullet has moved much. Anything such as crimping that retards initial bullet movement will increase the peak start pressure. Your mention of seeing massive bullet set back because of cartridges hitting the feed ramp says those bullets were held so loosely they could not have appreciably resisted forward movement so the shortened seating depth, as such, couldn't have amounted to much.

    Finally, I cannot imagine having a normally loaded bullet seated so loosely that simply chambering the round would cause .200" of set back. BUT, if it happened, that same loosely held bullet would also move forward very easily to expand the volume of the combustion chamber and that rapid volume increase would have greatly reduced the attainable pressure.

    So, no; small changes in the seating depth of older modest pressure cartridges are not dangerous.
    Case capacity of the 10mm is slightly less than the 45 ACP.

    10mm 24.1 gr H2O
    45 ACP 26.7 gr H2O
    9mm 13.3 gr H2O.
    NRA Benefactor.

  8. #48
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,299
    1hole

    Larry, I don't know what you tested nor how. I have no such "test" data, and you know it. But I am an old space electronics system tech and I do have a detailed analytical approach to technical questions.

    That is excellent because you should have an open mind and understand that many times what we think may happen isn't always what will happen.

    The OP stated his concern about dangerous pressure spikes from a minor seating depth change; I only addressed what he said, not all possible events. (And I don't think it's necessary to blow the barrel off to qualify as a "blow-up".)

    We are certainly in agreement there. However, my response wasn't necessarly to you alone. many read such a seemingly simple statement and take it as gospel. I was only adding a caution.

    The OP was specifically concerned that a (very small) change in his .45 ACP seating depth might be dangerous; it is not. Your mention of a .200" seating change is not small.

    If the OP were to seat the Lee bullet to it's correct depth there would not be any "dangerous" pressure with the load he is using. Never said there would be and I believe i told him to seat it to the correct depth and he would be ok. Yes, .2" setback is a lot but I have seen such, especially with lighter loads that do not take up a lot of case volume. Here is one I saved to get a picture of and to dissect the round. The 200 gr hard cast commercial bullet set back .153" and probably would have set back more had it not been stopped by the powder charge. The shooter had a M1911 with an "un-ramped" barrel that left a small amount of the bottom of the barrel overhanging the feed ramp of the frame. He'd had no problems with FMJ and RN cast feeding but had went to the 200 gr SWC hard cast. He was shooting 7 gr Unique under the bullet. He also had put a 22 lb spring in the pistol. I stopped him after he tried the round (1st one out of the magazine) 3 or 4 times. The bullet nose hung up on the bottom of the barrel "ramp" each time. I saw the bullet was rammed back into the case as he dropped the round straight into the camber to fire it. I stopped him. So I guess we really don't know if that would have been "dangerous" but I convinced him it might not be. He stopped shooting and got the barrel "ramped" and fitted properly and then shot up that load w/o any problems.

    If you look close you might also see the case mouth flare was not completely straightened out. We did run the loaded ammo through my Lee FCD before he shot it up. He has subsequently got his own FCD and uses it religiously......

    Attachment 287067

    First, modern 9mm and 10mm cartridges pressures normally run very high and their case volume is quite limited. So, by (Boyle's Law) of physics, we know that small decreases in volume can make oversized differences in pressure. But that volume effect simply isn't a player with our older pistol cartridges so, IMHO, the OP need have no fear with normally loaded .45 ACP.

    My pressure measurements of other pistol cartridges with deeper seating of the bullets included similar higher pressure cartridges such as the 357 magnum and the 44 magnum along with the 9mm. They also are proportionally susceptible to Boyles Law. In Ballistics we use the "expansion ratio" to express it. You certainly are entitled to your opinion but my pressure measurement data of varied seating depths in "our older pistol cartridges" shows that "volume effect" is indeed a player and can be a serious player at that. And no, as I've mentioned, the OP should have "no fear" with "normally loaded" 45 ACP ammunition.

    Second, the only real "spike" in chamber pressure occurs shortly after ignition and that comes before the bullet has moved much. Anything such as crimping that retards initial bullet movement will increase the peak start pressure. Your mention of seeing massive bullet set back because of cartridges hitting the feed ramp says those bullets were held so loosely they could not have appreciably resisted forward movement so the shortened seating depth, as such, couldn't have amounted to much.

    Again, actual pressure measurement data, the time /pressure traces specifically, shows us there are indeed secondary pressure "spikes". Take a close look ath the secondary pressure spike in this 38 SPL load.....

    Attachment 287070

    .....then tell us there aren't any........Those "spikes" occurred well after the bullet started moving and had left the chamber.

    Finally, I cannot imagine having a normally loaded bullet seated so loosely that simply chambering the round would cause .200" of set back. BUT, if it happened, that same loosely held bullet would also move forward very easily to expand the volume of the combustion chamber and that rapid volume increase would have greatly reduced the attainable pressure.
    It indeed can happen as illustrated in the picture previously posted. I may just have to test that load to see what the pressure may have been......But I still wouldn't bet the farm it would be good......

    So, no; small changes in the seating depth of older modest pressure cartridges are not dangerous.

    Perhaps......
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  9. #49
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,299
    1hole

    Please don't get me wrong. I'm not being critical of you. The assumptions you've proffered are what many think. I did too at one time until i actually began questioning some of those assumptions and actually testing them. I've found much of what we thought, and the old time gunwriters thought have proven not to be correct. Looking at time/pressure curves is a good example. The one I posted above does look pretty radical. Most of us have for years become accustomed to nice smooth curves we've seen in books and magazines. But those are either drawings or computer generations. Actual traces, even the older oscilloscope ones, many times show a different trace.

    Here's a data sheet taken with a different load in the same test barrel.....

    Attachment 287088

    Quite a difference with no secondary pressure spike........

    The more I test, the more I learn......
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  10. #50
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    South Western NC
    Posts
    3,820
    No offense was meant and none was taken. If I took offense at everyone who disagrees with me I couldn't even talk with my wife!

    I do have a detailed analytical approach to technical questions.

    That is excellent because you should have an open mind and understand that many times what we think may happen isn't always what will happen....
    Open mind? Well, I know some folk who would simply say I have an extra hole in my head. (Good friends can be hard to find these days so we have to live with the ones we have. )

    Again, actual pressure measurement data, the time/pressure traces specifically, shows us there are indeed secondary pressure "spikes". Take a close look at the secondary pressure spike in this 38 SPL load.....

    Attachment 287070
    THAT spike blows me away. IF it's valid, I can't fathom what could have caused such a spike inside the cartridge. What I CAN fathom is that it looks like an electronics problem, not chamber.

    Part of what I used to do at the Cape was repair and calibrate high precision storage scopes (Tektronix and Hewlett Packard) and spectrum analyzers. I suspect something internal to or near the instrument itself caused that otherwise unexplainable (and brief) pressure trace deviation. Perhaps a distant power line pulse or an electron phart?

    Whatever, even if that strangely detached pressure trace was/is somehow valid, it only reaches as high as the initial pressure before the bullet moved, then the trace immediately drops back to where it started and continues to fall normally (that detached "coming and going" spike is really weird!) so nothing unsafe should have happened. ???

  11. #51
    Boolit Grand Master


    Larry Gibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Lake Havasu City, Arizona
    Posts
    21,299
    While that is a severe example of a secondary pressure spike such spikes are more common than we would like to think and not really such an anomaly. Many would think it was an electrical problem or or other glitch with the system. However, when we look at the trace's (as in post #49) measured with the same test barrel and equipment having only the ammunition being different we see it was not the equipment or an electrical problem. I most often have a "standard" load, either commercial or my own load, that has given consistent performance with me such being referred to as "reference" ammunition. When I see such an anomaly I test a few rounds of the reference ammunition to be sure.

    Ever wonder why we've never really seen many of the traces of manufactures of load manual ammunition tests? My guess is because they know they would get the same reactions from the un-informed public that I often get on this forum. Here is another example from a 1975 published book called "The 30-06 by W.L. Godfrey. The book has many time/pressure traces as recorded on an oscilloscope. As was back in the day before transducers and strain gauges were commonly used only one test per load is used. We see with this powder we see what the author calls "mini" spikes and on others he refers to them as "camel humps". Regardless of what they're called we see the secondary pressure spikes are there with some loads in most all cartridges. This anomaly or phenomenon has been known for some time since the advent of the oscilloscope, transducers and strain gauges to produce time/pressure curve/traces. Ballisticians were not aware of such secondary spikes with C.U.P. measurements because that method can only measured to peak pressure whether obtained from the primary or the secondary pressure.

    Attachment 287100
    Larry Gibson

    “Deficient observation is merely a form of ignorance and responsible for the many morbid notions and foolish ideas prevailing.”
    ― Nikola Tesla

  12. #52
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,222
    A 228-1R resembles 230 FMJ not at all,
    Hmmm...
    1.) 0.608" vs. 0.665" for the FMJ, okay, some difference there, which is why I mentioned fine-tuning. A difference in length of 0.057" is quite easily adjusted out with a SMALL turn of the seating plug screw.
    2.) Both noses are round & pointed, and bereft of a discernible shoulder.
    3.) TL-230-2R (thanks AWFULLY for the "2R" hint, NEVER woulda found it without you) has a more similar length to the 230 gr. FMJRN, which might help matters. But WAIT! What's that THING located .365" aft of the nose? It appears to be a SHOULDER! I don't recall seeing one of THOSE on a FMJRN! And I'm QUITE sure that it'll be NO issue in determining where the loaded round stops in the chamber.
    Now, just so I'm SURE that I have it right, WHICH of the Lee bullets resembles the 230 gr. FMJLRN "not at all"? I'll concede a bit of difference in overall projectile lengths, but I see NO SHOULDER on the 228-1R NOR on the FMJRN.
    I've loaded and shot the 228-1R a little. I've loaded and shot other 230 gr. LRNs from HEAVEN ONLY KNOWS which molds, a great deal. I've seated both with similar practices, plus or minus a few tweaks, obtaining similar and good performance from both, and problems from neither. I guess I lack your "experience" in encountering problems when switching from the 1R to other projectiles resembling the 230 gr. FMJRN even LESS "not at all." <SMH>
    For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow. Ecclesiastes 1:18
    He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind: and the fool become servant to the wise of heart. Proverbs 11:29
    ...Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Matthew 25:40


    Carpe SCOTCH!

  13. #53
    Boolit Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    6,063
    The OP started the thread wondering why the 228-1R did not allow an OAL that was functional except when it was seated to produce a short OAL, much shorter than standard ball ammo.

    A 230-2R does allow a duplication of ball or standard factory FMJ OAL.. A 228-1R does not. Problem solved.

    If he was using the 230-2R he likely would never had the question of why the OAL to produce functionality differed from spec. I load and cast the 230-2R as well.

    In terms of producing ammo that most duplicates the feeding characteristics and overall length of FMJRN, the statement that the 228-1R resembles 230 FMJRN “not at all” is quite correct. If you want to duplicate ball, choose the 230-2R. Functionality at a comparable overall length is the issue here. The features of the 230-2R facilitate that. The features of the 228-1R do not.

    A helpful hint: First, swap the 230-2R for FMJ when the seating die is adjusted for 1.265” for the FMJ. Make no change in seating stem adjustment. Second, try the 228-1R. The first example will work, chamber freely, and function through the gun. The second one won’t.

  14. #54
    Boolit Master
    BD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Moosehead Lake
    Posts
    1,815
    This has been an interesting and wide ranging thread. I do not claim to be an expert, but I have some experience with 1911s in .45 acp. 30 years ago when I first started shooting action pistol sports competitively, 1911s of one sort or another in .45acp made up about 90% of the guns we'd see at matches. As RO I've seen my share. At a rough guess I'd say I've witnessed 7 or 8 "over pressure events" in these pistols over the years. I only saw one serious injury as a result. That was a Para Ordinance which blew out the bottom of the case, and detonated 6 of the cartridges in the mag below, carrying everything out the bottom of the grip frame and swelling the slide. It also burst the grips which led to the serious part of the injury. The rest of the injury was brass shrapnel in the shooters face. I believe that one was likely a double charge as I was not able to easily set back any of the cartridges that survived intact. The other 6 or seven events resulted only in blowing the lower rear out of the fired case which blew the mag out of the bottom of the grip frame. In each of those cases I was able to set back a boolit in the surviving cartridges just by squeezing the the cartridge in my hand. The other thing they all had in common was that they were all seated too short IMO. Little or no drive band was apparent forward of the case mouth. IMO seating short like that in an attempt to get them to chamber reliably in an un-throated barrel does not allow the case mouth to get a real "bite" into the boolit from the taper crimp leaving it liable to being set back by the ramp as it is stripped from the mag. When this happens the boolit will nearly always set all the way back to the powder charge. Easily .20" when using the #68 style over Bullseye, (which was the most common load in those days). These occurrences are what led me to start looking at throats, and throating barrels. In the '90s all of the older pistols had some throat from the factory. Since then, proper throating seems to have been left to the consumer. These days I don't see many new shooters starting out with 1911s in .45acp. I only attend the local matches any more and it's rare if there is more than one or two other old farts competing with me using 1911s in the single stack division. Most of the Super Seniors in our area have gone to optics on some form of high cap plastic pistol.
    I would hazard that over all the 1911 is a pretty safe platform in this regard. These events rarely cause serious physical injuries, (maybe some dirty underwear), and they rarely destroy the firearm.
    Nothing like what I saw when Glock first started chambering the .40SW

  15. #55
    Boolit Master Forrest r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    2,079
    Thank you for your input Larry.

    As usual Larry always has interesting tops for discussion. I wish info like this was around in the 80's/90's. Sure would of made it a heck of a lot easier having such a quality learning curve at my finger tips.

    Pressure spikes
    Secondary pressure spikes
    Bullet setback
    Seating depths affect on pressure
    Crimping & short start pressure

    Understanding these things leads to a safe quality reload that puts bugholes in targets.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check