Heavy 45 acp boolit?

[StarMetal]

Dunno Tony...I've shot alot of rounds out of my pistols and using dirty ammo too, that is Javelina lube and Bullseye and Unique powder, and they still keep on funtioning. I built that 30 Luger upper for the 70 Series Gold Cup and man oh days is the slide tight, in fact racking it back it stays back. After I put some rounds through it, it come around some. Couple this with a too strong recoil spring, a very heavy barrel/slide for caliber, and the anemic target loads I'm firing, it's a wonder it functions at all, but it does. I think is has all to do with ones ability to build and tune 1911's....I LOVE 1911's and I made it my goal to be able to build them right. I wasn't paying some top gunsmith thousands of dollars to do it for me when it was possible to learn how to do it myself alot cheaper and with alot more satisfaction. I'm an experimentor and have shot everything imaginable out of my 1911's, some I don't care to mention. I've been fooling with 1911's since 1970's, so I think I know some about them. I done so by talking to and watching gunsmiths that work on them, read, and buy books about building them.

My Glock 21, without having done anything to it, also feeds anything I've tried in it so far. That impresses me for as much as alot of folks run them down. My semi-auto Tommy gun also feeds EVERYTHING, that's impressive too.

Joe

[Dale53]

Tony;
My experience does not mirror yours.
Over a period of five years, I averaged 15,000 rounds a year shooting and practicing IPSC (when it was practiced as a martial art). That is 75,000 rounds, actual count, of cast bullets. I used various versions of the H&G #68 for the most part but also did some work with the H&G #130. The bullets were sized .452" and were used in a couple of "full house" hard ball match guns. The guns will (I still have them) shoot 2" at fifty yards from a Ransom Rest. The barrels were both National Match Soft Ball barrels (I don't have them here or I could give you the #'s - Nat'l Match barrels came in two varieties. The "Soft Ball" barrel chamber was about .001" larger than the "hard ball" barrel, if I remember correctly.

At any rate, these were the most reliable pistols that I have seen in action. Others may equal mine but I saw none that did better. In five years, I had ONE malfunction that cost me a match (no alibis in IPSC) and that was MY fault (thumb tight against the slide that retarded rear movement).

I did discover that it was necessary to gauge EVERY load used in competition. Most loads were loaded on a C&H Progressive Press and I turned them out by the thousands and each and every one of them were match quality.

I found that with Teflon in the gun lubricant (Break Free, etc) I could shoot 300 rounds without cleaning. So, I put them on a schedule, and cleaned every 300 rounds. Before a match, I would clean, and fire fifty shots. Then the gun was dead reliable during the match.

I was extremely fortunate that I had a top line pistol smith. Harold Johnson was a retired Marine Gunnery Sgt. that had done McMillan's guns when the Marines OWNED Camp Perry. He was just about the best that there was. I ran IPSC matches (with help) that averaged about fifty competitors a match, eight matches a year. Many times, a ompetitor would show up with the latest "wonder gun" from a famous smith that was NOT reliable. They came from several states away to shoot with us. I would send them by Harold's and when they got their "tricked out" guns back from Harold, they were NOW reliable. The 1911, when smithed properly, is the BEST damn pistol ever! However, everyone cannot build one to both shoot accurately and also work reliably. Even famous smiths...

FWIW
Dale53

[StarMetal]

Well done Dale, that's what I've been trying to say.

Joe

[AnthonyB]

Joe; I'm sure your 30 Luger is a great pistol, but I don't see how it is relevant to the discussion. As I posted earlier, I am talking only about heavy for caliber boolits fired from a stock 45 ACP. I've not tested any "trick" guns but am sure my basic conclusions apply to them as well. Please read my posts carefully and tell me exactly what I said that you disagree with; I don't think I have discovered any real shocking truths here.

Dale; you are comparing your apples to my oranges. The H&G 68 and 130 are comparative lightweights and have noses designed to feed in the 45 ACP. There is no comparison between those two and the Lyman 454423, 454424, 454190, and 452490, just to name a few I have tried. These are the heavy bullets I am talking about, and none have noses designed to feed in a 1911.

I think we are talking around one another, and you guys are missing my points. A tight gun, especially one with a tight chamber, is likely to malfunction sooner than a loose one. I am not saying a tight gun won't feed reliably, and it may go many rounds before malfunctions begin. Dale got 300 rounds of lightweight boolits designed for the 45 ACP boolits through his guns before he needed to clean. My tests have been with heavy boolits not designed for the 45 ACP with more than 300 rounds per range session. Why is it so hard to accept that the heavy SWC boolits tend to lessen the number of rounds before malfunctioning may occur? Stated differently, I find I can shoot more standard weight boolits than heavy SWCs in my 1911s before malfunctioning begins. The number of rounds I can go differ for each pistol, but the trend is obvious. Tony

[KYCaster]

Well, I wasn't going to say anything......but, I have to agree with Tony. Joe and Dale, it sounds like you both agree with him more than you'd like to admit.

Tony said:
" The real problem is tight chambers - I have tested two Springfield Armory Trophy Match guns that wouldn't feed a RN 452374 when sized .452. Sizing to .451 helped them run better, but they still didn't last very long as the dirt accumulated. I advised the owner to have the ream the chambers with a standard reamer or stick to jacketed bullets.

Joe, your custom fitted gun is an exception. My comments were based on tests with standard factory offerings from Colt, Kimber, Springfield Armory, and Glock. Still, I'd be willing to bet that you'd get stoppages as the round count accumulated that a looser pistol would not."

Joe said:
"I think is has all to do with ones ability to build and tune 1911's....".

and earlier, he said:
"The 70 Series has a Clark match barrel in it, the 80 Series has a the Colt Match barrel welded up by Jimmy Clark, fitted by me. Both guns built by me. They feed ANYTHING reliably including empt cases."

and Dale said:
"I was extremely fortunate that I had a top line pistol smith. Harold Johnson was a retired Marine Gunnery Sgt. that had done McMillan's guns when the Marines OWNED Camp Perry. He was just about the best that there was."

Tony also said:
"I agree that "clean and tight" 1911 will work very well, even the heavy SWCs. I clean my guns more than most, but they are still no longer clean after the first magazine has been fired. I typically fire 300-500 rounds per range session, so the pistol of the day is far from clean when we are finished. The target grade Kimber will begin to choke occasionally as the fouling accumulates, but the "looser" Colt's will continue to function normally. "

and while claiming to disagree, Dale said:
"I found that with Teflon in the gun lubricant (Break Free, etc) I could shoot 300 rounds without cleaning. So, I put them on a schedule, and cleaned every 300 rounds. Before a match, I would clean, and fire fifty shots. Then the gun was dead reliable during the match."

and:
"I did discover that it was necessary to gauge EVERY load used in competition. Most loads were loaded on a C&H Progressive Press and I turned them out by the thousands and each and every one of them were match quality."


So, I don't see anything here that contradicts Tony's statements. As a matter of fact, I think both of you are supporting his views. I agree that a gun can be built to be 100% reliable, I have a couple of them myself. I have three different 1911's in .45ACP that will run "thousands" of rounds with no cleaning at all.

I have also seen guns that wouldn't run, no matter what they were fed.

But, back to the original topic....heavy boolits in .45ACP....You can do this successfully (I met a guy at the '99 USPSA nationals using 325gr.), but there are issues you must address, both in altering the gun to be reliable and in loading the ammo to be both consistantly reliable and consistantly safe. And the heavier the boolit, the harder it is to do.

All of the issues I had to deal with when loading 265gr. RNFP have already been mentioned, good advice from everyone, but the further you get from the original design specs, the harder it gets. "The Devil is in the details".

Jerry

[StarMetal]

Tony,

On the 30 Luger, I mentioned that because the gun still functioned under very adverse conditions. It had nothing to do with heavy for caliber in the 45 acp, but it was heavy for caliber in the 30 Luger. Point is if the gun is set up correctly it'll do it's upmost to function.

You asked what it was I disagreed with you on the most. It's this statement in the list you gave: 2. A "tight" 1911 built for target accuracy may not feed the heavies well or at all, and tight chambers make themselves known in a hurry.

By reading that I get two statements, one being a 1911 built for target accuracy may not feed the heavies well or not at all. And two, tight chambers make themselves known in a hurry.

Lets dissect that. To me if the cartridge doesn't fit the chamber there isn't going to be any feeding. So setting that aside, a heavy bullet doesn't have alot to do with the feeding process. Remember we're leaving out the cartridge is too big (and I take that as in diameter) to fit the chamber. The things that have to do with feeding are magazine...it's follower and it's lips shape. The feed ramp on the frame, it's angle , contour, and smoothness AND a point often most overlooked, how far behind the top of the feed ramp lip lies the barrel. Contrary to popular belief the feed ramp and the relief ramp in the barrel are NOT suppose to be one smooth non interrupted ramp. The edge of the barrel must be approxiamately 1/32th an inch away from the top of the feed ramp lip. Continuing, the relief in the mouth of the chamber on the barrel, how far the slide lock open nose that is actuated by the magazine follower extends into pistol and magazine, how the extractor hook is shaped, the smoothness of the breech face and a slight bevel at it's bottom edge, and the power of the recoil spring. I'm leaving out anything to do with the cartridge itself. Most important things having to do with the bullet nose configuration are how the mouth of the barrel is relieved, how the feed ramp configured, and at what angle the magazine presents the cartridge. If a pistol is set up to feed some drastically shaped wad or semi-was cutters, it's a very high probable that it's going to feed a heavy.

In a non combat use of the gun, the most likely thing I feel that will tie a gun up first is a cartridge that doesn't fit the chamber, not what weight the bullet it is. Dale or myself didn't/don't have to shoot 250 to ??? grain bullets to demonstrate that a tight match pistol will run a long time.

I'm also in a big disagreement with BD that sizing bullets to .451 rather then .452 is the best. I know I've done the best with .452 out of all 45acp's I've owned which are quite a few, including subguns and carbines and revolvers.

Joe

[AnthonyB]

Joe said:

"By reading that I get two statements, one being a 1911 built for target accuracy may not feed the heavies well or not at all. And two, tight chambers make themselves known in a hurry.

Lets dissect that. To me if the cartridge doesn't fit the chamber there isn't going to be any feeding. So setting that aside, a heavy bullet doesn't have alot to do with the feeding process. Remember we're leaving out the cartridge is too big (and I take that as in diameter) to fit the chamber."


This is my point exactly. You can’t set that aside; it is one of the problems in loading heavy boolits. As I said, a tight chamber will make itself known in a hurry, especially with heavy boolits sitting deeply into the case where the brass is thicker. All guns have tolerance issues, and a loose chamber will accept rounds a tight chamber will not.

Joe said:

“The things that have to do with feeding are magazine...it's follower and it's lips shape. The feed ramp on the frame, it's angle, contour, and smoothness AND a point often most overlooked, how far behind the top of the feed ramp lip lies the barrel."

I agree on the importance of magazines and feed ramps, but the difference is the big SWC doesn't have a nice rounded nose to bounce off the feed ramp and guide the round into the chamber. The flat of the nose makes contact with the ramp, and then you have that full caliber shoulder that must somehow find its way into the chamber. Again, a loose chamber is an aide to feeding. With the exception of the 454190, none of the boolits I’m talking about has a round nose to bounce off the feed ramp.

Joe said:

"In a non combat use of the gun, the most likely thing I feel that will tie a gun up first is a cartridge that doesn't fit the chamber, not what weight the bullet it is."

Again, loading the heavy boolits so that they fit the chamber is the problem we are talking about. I agree the weight isn't the issue; it is the SWC nose combined with the deeply seated boolit.

Joe said:

Dale or myself didn't/don't have to shoot 250 to ??? grain bullets to demonstrate that a tight match pistol will run a long time."

You do if you want to show that a tight match pistol will run a long time with 250 to ??? grain boolits, and especially if you want to show it will run longer than a looser gun.


Tony

[lar45]

Question, how deep can we seat a plain base bullet and still have it chamber? in which brand of brass?
The first scetches of the bullet looks like we will be shooting a gas check style bullet without the check if the base is rebated.
It is looking like for 300gns the bullet length will be .770" with the tapered shank being around .150". I'm almost thinking that we could put a gas check on it to shoot in other rounds?
I was thinking of no crimp groove, but with the gas check thought, maybe we should put a crimp groove on?
Thoughts?

[ANeat]

One point here is that a "tight" gun doesnt have to have a tight chamber by any means. On my bullseye guns they actually have a little more freebore in the throat to allow for a little buildup of fouling/dirt/lead or whatever and still function. Also the chamber was cut with a standard 45acp reamer (Kart Barrel) On my gun I usually go 3 matches between cleanings, I use it in both the centerfire and 45 portions of tha match so that is 540 rounds. Plus whatever practice I may or may not get in. I size my bullets to .4525 also. I can ransom rest the gun after all that or anywhere in between and it will still shoot under 2" @ 50 yards.

Its funny that Dale should mention Harold Johnson as that is who built my gun. I was fortunate enough that he allowed me to sit there and watch him, taking notes and asking questions. I wanted to get enough out of it so I could build another or at least be able to keep the gun I have up and running. He could build a heck of a gun, its a shame he retired a few years ago.


I do agree that a gun can be set up loose and function for a longer time with a greater variety of loads but I think it gets down to the individual owner of the firearm as to what level of accuracy/reliability is acceptable. Ive seen tests where a gun is fired 10000 rounds without cleaning and I certainly dont expect that.
Adam

[StarMetal]

Lars45

It depends on how much of the bullet material (weight) is in the nose, as to how deep you can seat the bullet in the case. Then you have to worry about OAL when the nose is long.

Tony,

I can seat an RCBS 255 gr SWC for the 45 Colt as deep as I want it for any of my guns including the Clark match barrel and have no fitting problems.

The gun that gives me any problem (notice I didn't say the most as that would imply my other guns do too, which they don't) is my Ruger 45 acp cylinder for my Ruger Blackhawk. That has the tightest dimensions that I've seen on ANY 45acp chamber.

Okay...can we drop this, you think you know more aboue 1911's and heavy bullets in them then me and I think I know more about then you. Let's call it a draw.

Joe

[Dale53]

Gentlemen,
It is obvious that there is a lot of saavy 1911 people here. Frankly, I didn't disagree with much here, just that my experience may be some different from some of you. I spent many hours with Harold Johnson and he built a number of guns for me and my sons. I learned a great deal, but am by no means a 1911 gunsmith. However, I DO have a pretty good idea of what works.

Part of what "colors" my opinion, is that I have been thru the "heavy bullet" phase with a 1911 and have settled on the 200 gr SWC at 900-1000 fps to solve my .45 ACP "problems" when practicing and will rely on Federal's Hydra-Shok for self defense. I have multible moulds for the 200 gr bullets but kind of go with Factory loads for self defense for "political" reasons. Of the factory loads, it is hard to beat the track record of Hydra-Shok.

Of course, there is the cautionary comment to always shoot enough of your chosen ammo to be SURE it will function when the chips are down (and a magazine full is NOT enough to confirm that).

Dale53

[StarMetal]

Dale,

My experience pretty much matches your, except I didn't shoot competition. We're probably close to the same age too. I too settled on the 200 gr SWC for my general shooting. My defense load though it the Starfire by PMC. I played with the heavy 45 slugs clean back in the 70's. This isn't anything new, as I read you've gone through that phase too.

As far as building 1911's I've done everything except building long barrel extended slide model. Everything else I've done to them. I've even rebushed firing pin hole to either convert from a large to small firing or to center the firing pin strike on the primer. This is needed sometimes when you fully seat barrels. I know my way around 1911's and I'm the kind of guy that goes after a challenge especially if someone says it can't be done.

Joe

[AnthonyB]

Joe, I don't think I know more about heavy boolits in the 45 than you. Our problem is that I keep talking in generalities concerning my experiments with stock pistols and you keep talking specifics about your tuned pistols. Dropping the conversation is probably a good idea.

Dale, my heavy boolit phase is now over as well. I've settled on the RCBS45-230 CM as the be-all 45 ACP boolit and try to run it around 900-950 fps depending on barrel length. The BD45ACP is very good but won't feed as well as the RCBS in my pistols, and I haven't worked enough with the group buy BD45CM to have an opinion on it. That said, one of my "loose" Colt's dotes on the LBT 200 WFN at over 1100fps with a less than max load of Blue Dot, and I'll probably keep a few of those around for when I want to play 10mm auto.

I've enjoyed the discussion.
Tony

[StarMetal]

Hey Tony,

Hey you may very well know more then me, who knows. Tell you one thing we both agree on the best heavy bullet...the RCBS you just named...we may be in the same groove and not know it. By the way that RCBS bullet shoots real good out of my Blackhawk too with the 45acp cylinder. I bet RCBS never thought that it was going to be used as a heavy 45acp bullet.

Joe

[AnthonyB]

Joe, I definitely agree on the RCBS45-230CM, but don't want to confuse anyone about it being heavy for the caliber. My WW boolits weigh 228 grains naked, so I consider that a "normal" weight boolit. My 452423 comes in a 250, and the 454424 at 258. Tony

[StarMetal]

Tony,

I'll have to weigh some of my RCBS Cowboys. My RCBS 255 gr SWC for the 45 Colt weighs about 260 grs with WW's.

Joe

[porkchop bob]

Take 308 brass and trim for 45 acp length and then bore out the case to take the width and depth needed for the really heavy bullets being discussed here.

Bob

[lar45]

Take 308 brass and trim for 45 acp length and then bore out the case to take the width and depth needed for the really heavy bullets being discussed here.

Bob

I hear that a fairly popular wildcat in Canada is the 45-08 with a 200 SWC at 1300fps. He sent me a couple of cases made from 308 and 243. The reamed part looks like it would make a nice sholder to seat the bullets to, that way they couldn't get seated deeper from getting battered in the magazine.

I suppose that would work great, then I can just shoot all the heavy 45 molds that I already have.

Now the question, can I make a reamer and die that will work?
Maybe start with a 45 acp size die, anneal it and bore out the top to take a reamer.

[porkchop bob]

_ Now the question, can I make a reamer and die that will work?
Maybe start with a 45 acp size die, anneal it and bore out the top to take a reamer.

Think about using a 308 or 30-06 size die as the height is needed to contain more of the reamer inside the body. Make an adjustable stop to control the depth of cut. Change out or modify the top hardward to keep the reamer centered. Keeping the reamer centered may be easier with a size die body longer than that of the 45acp die. That is the hard part of this process.

Bob

[lar45]

I have a set of dies for the 44 Automag. Maybe I can setup and ream some cases extra deep and see what they turn out like when cut down and expanded to take a .451" bullet? It probably won't work with the difference in bullet sizes. A 45 win mag and 45 acp empty will chamber in the 44 Automag though. maybe just a new .451" reamer to fit the automag die?

I like the idea of useing a 308 or 30-06 size die to start from. I've picked up a few of the Lee RGB die sets just to use for parts. $10.99 is pretty cheap for a 2 die set, especially if I mess up on the first couple.