Why 5.8? Why not 6.0

[Zorros]

Nick sisley wrote an article in the 2019 gun digest, ‘taming the .45 colt’. I was going to ask him the following 2 questions, but he wrote the article when he was 80 and died last year.
1. Using a 7.5” vaquero he loaded 6 gr of bullseye under a 255 gr lead bullet and got an average of 906 fps. I liked that cause i have been loading 6 gr BE ( as a total beginner) under a 250 gr lead bullet. And, he loads the same bullet with 5.8 gr of ww 231 for 759 fps. Why wouldn’t he just round it off to 6 gr even? Is it an accuracy thing? Can’t be a case size or power issue. All the other measurements in his published chart are even grains...6 gr power pistol (829fps); 8 gr unique (946); 5 gr trail boss (784fps) etc.
again, new to reloading and asking questions where i can (not like i am hanging around gun shops during the pandemic), so one more question...
2. He shows a BE load of 5.1 gr, same gun, same bullet, propelling the bullet down range at 841 fps. Compared to his 906 fps with 6 gr., it seems to my totally unknowing mind that the difference should be greater and that 5.1 would be a great target load versus the 6.0 gr load. . Can someone explain? Thank you in advance for your help. Z

 

[lazarus]

Nick sisley wrote an article in the 2019 gun digest, ‘taming the .45 colt’. I was going to ask him the following 2 questions, but he wrote the article when he was 80 and died last year.
1. Using a 7.5” vaquero he loaded 6 gr of bullseye under a 255 gr lead bullet and got an average of 906 fps. I liked that cause i have been loading 6 gr BE ( as a total beginner) under a 250 gr lead bullet. And, he loads the same bullet with 5.8 gr of ww 231 for 759 fps. Why wouldn’t he just round it off to 6 gr even? Is it an accuracy thing? Can’t be a case size or power issue. All the other measurements in his published chart are even grains...6 gr power pistol (829fps); 8 gr unique (946); 5 gr trail boss (784fps) etc.
again, new to reloading and asking questions where i can (not like i am hanging around gun shops during the pandemic), so one more question...
2. He shows a BE load of 5.1 gr, same gun, same bullet, propelling the bullet down range at 841 fps. Compared to his 906 fps with 6 gr., it seems to my totally unknowing mind that the difference should be greater and that 5.1 would be a great target load versus the 6.0 gr load. . Can someone explain? Thank you in advance for your help. Z

I can’t speak to 45LC loading, but in general keep in mind the powders have different rates of propagation. Could be 6grs produces a big pressure spike without much gain. Could just be it isn’t accurate. Unless it’s shown to be an unsafe load, you could experiment and find out. It also could be if he was using scoopers or disks, 5.8gr is what measures out of whatever he was using to load.

Bullseye is a really fast powder and 45LC is a BIG case. Plus you’ve got revolver cylinder gap going on. I don’t off the top of my head know what max load of BE is in 45LC, but it’s low pressure in general and shoving a big heavy bullet.

A lot of powders like volume restricted more. So either setting the bullet back more, or once you’ve got sufficient fill, adding just a little more significantly increases velocity gain. So if near minimum, you might only see a 60-80fps gain adding an entire grain of powder in a big pistol cartridge, but the next grain might see 100-150fps gain. Of course you are also likely getting significant increases in pressure in that second grain added.

 

[Pinecone]

Why would you want to round off to an even number of grains?

What does that buy you?

And if the load is near max, that extra couple of tenths may be the difference between a hot load and a damaged pistol.

Actually, I just checked the Hodgdon data and 5.8 grains of 231 with a 250 grain lead bullet is the starting load.

So it makes you happy to load 6.0 grains, for whatever reason, go for it. Max is 7.1 grains.

As always, LOOK UP THE DATA YOURSELF.

 

[PowPow]

As always, LOOK UP THE DATA YOURSELF.

+1

 

[Zorros]

In dec 2019 or thereabouts i thought i wanted to reload 45 colt and visited a small shop on harftford rd outside the beltway. I bought what he had and suggested...bullseye, mag big pistol primers, starline brass and hornady 230 gr lead. I have since bought 250 coated lead. All this sat until a couple of mos ago when i started to load. Lots of info out there and i bought the lyman 50 anniv manual and printed the bullseye/45 colt recipes from alliant...their 7.1 gr seemed really stiff and inbacked that down to 6 gr, and some to 5.5 gr. And i then read some more. And asked questions on some of the sites. The problem is that my manual does not pair up a 250 gr bullet with BE and i experimented based on what others had reported in magazine articles and in loading forums. One good thing about forums, i have found, is if the answer to yoiur question or the advice given is not acceptable to other members, they will add their $.02. In a perfect world, i would go to the 45 colt recipes, go to the store or on line and order matching components, powder, bullet, etc and voila. But as you all know, components are generally not available and if they are its take what is available if they reasonably suit your needs. And determining what is reasonable in terms of suiting needs is subjective and may be require some improvising.

 

[Pale Ryder]

Was the guy a cowboy action shooter? It could be he wanted a low recoil load for competition. <800fps would be good for that.

 

[lazarus]

In dec 2019 or thereabouts i thought i wanted to reload 45 colt and visited a small shop on harftford rd outside the beltway. I bought what he had and suggested...bullseye, mag big pistol primers, starline brass and hornady 230 gr lead. I have since bought 250 coated lead. All this sat until a couple of mos ago when i started to load. Lots of info out there and i bought the lyman 50 anniv manual and printed the bullseye/45 colt recipes from alliant...their 7.1 gr seemed really stiff and inbacked that down to 6 gr, and some to 5.5 gr. And i then read some more. And asked questions on some of the sites. The problem is that my manual does not pair up a 250 gr bullet with BE and i experimented based on what others had reported in magazine articles and in loading forums. One good thing about forums, i have found, is if the answer to yoiur question or the advice given is not acceptable to other members, they will add their $.02. In a perfect world, i would go to the 45 colt recipes, go to the store or on line and order matching components, powder, bullet, etc and voila. But as you all know, components are generally not available and if they are its take what is available if they reasonably suit your needs. And determining what is reasonable in terms of suiting needs is subjective and may be require some improvising.

IMHO buy more guides. Get the Hornady, Lyman, lee and Speer current ones. If you add in the Alliant free one you can order from them, that covers a TON of bases for about $100 of reloading manuals. Maybe the current and last year hogdon reloading magazine too.

 

[Zorros]

Was the guy a cowboy action shooter? It could be he wanted a low recoil load for competition. <800fps would be good for that.

He wrote the article for low powered loads. He shot 3x wk and was 80 with arthritis. Wanted to be able to shoot 100 rd a session and wrote the hi power loads were painful.

 

[Pinecone]

The manuals I keep updated and on hard are:

Lyman
Lyman Cast Bullet
Sierra
Hornady

Hodgdon and Alliant are online.

I used to keep Speer, but don't shoot many Speer bullets.

 

[Pale Ryder]

He wrote the article for low powered loads. He shot 3x wk and was 80 with arthritis. Wanted to be able to shoot 100 rd a session and wrote the hi power loads were painful.

Makes sense. I agree with Lazarus, get more manuals, I’ve used Speer, Lyman, and Hornady with good results. I never found it necessary to push towards max levels.

 

[PowPow]

The manuals I keep updated and on hard are:

Lyman
Lyman Cast Bullet
Sierra
Hornady

Hodgdon and Alliant are online.

I used to keep Speer, but don't shoot many Speer bullets.

I keep the same, and also have the latest Speer and Lee manuals. Speer's latest was a major revamp.

You can also get the Western Powders manual and load data is online in PDF. They have a lot of good load data there. If you use Vihtavuori powders, their manual is available online in PDF.

 

[John from MD]

IMHO buy more guides. Get the Hornady, Lyman, lee and Speer current ones. If you add in the Alliant free one you can order from them, that covers a TON of bases for about $100 of reloading manuals. Maybe the current and last year hogdon reloading magazine too.

This won't help. Many of the reduced loads are not tested by the factory. Some years back, a rep from Winchester explained how they choose their loads to test in a magazine article. From what I recall, if their math said that a given low density load would be inefficient, they they didn't test it.

Reloaders have been operating outside the box for some time but Cowboy Shooting really accelerated the process. Many of us shoot reduced loads that you won't find in any book because they perform acceptably in our guns. I run 6.0 Bullseye and 6.3 Red Dot in several .45 cal revolvers and 4.8 WST in .44 magnum. They make tiny groups, don't lead and don't beat up my arthritic hands.

 

[noylj]

I load for accuracy and have no interest in rouding from the best load. Question doesn’t make sense to me. Zero 200gn L-SWC does best with 4.9gn 231/HP38, and PD 200gn L-SWC does best with 4.8 gn 231/HP38.
My question is why was 148 gn (9.6 g) selected for .38 wadcutter and 147 gn (9.5 g) for 9mm. Again, 147gn makes sense for metric, and I doubt 148gn was more accurate than 147 or even 150gn, so who selected it?
Why 158gn (10.2g) instead of 160gn (10.4g), from a country on the imperial system.
I can see 124gn for 9mm as that is just slightly over 8g, so why 115 instead of 116 gn (7.5 g)
It seems that OCD is not a driving force in shooting.
So, any historians, was this due to actual opmizing or just random?

 

[John from MD]

I load for accuracy and have no interest in rouding from the best load. Question doesn’t make sense to me. Zero 200gn L-SWC does best with 4.9gn 231/HP38, and PD 200gn L-SWC does best with 4.8 gn 231/HP38.
My question is why was 148 gn (9.6 g) selected for .38 wadcutter and 147 gn (9.5 g) for 9mm. Again, 147gn makes sense for metric, and I doubt 148gn was more accurate than 147 or even 150gn, so who selected it?
Why 158gn (10.2g) instead of 160gn (10.4g), from a country on the imperial system.
I can see 124gn for 9mm as that is just slightly over 8g, so why 115 instead of 116 gn (7.5 g)
It seems that OCD is not a driving force in shooting.
So, any historians, was this due to actual opmizing or just random?

The .38 special rifling was set up for a 158 grain round nose lead bullet. When .38s started to be used in Bullseye shooting, the shooters wanted a more accurate bullet that would 1 make it easier to see the bullet holes and 2 have less recoil. The industry went to work and found that the 148 gn bullet would work with low power loads in a barrel with a 1in 18.75 twist.

As for the 147gn bullets, they only came about in the last 30 years that I can recall. They were developed initially to give the required power factor in shooting games. Later, the ammo industry introduced them into personal defense ammunition.

 

[Zorros]

Great info, everyone. Sometimes a bit much for me to digest.
Thanks. John. The 6 gr BE load. Do you shoot a 250 gr coated lead, and if yes, can you say how many fps from a 4.5” and 7.5” single action. I was surprised the gun digest article reported 900 fps from a 7.5” vaquero. Alliant’s on line recipe shows 879 fps with 7 gr!

 

[John from MD]

Great info, everyone. Sometimes a bit much for me to digest.
Thanks. John. The 6 gr BE load. Do you shoot a 250 gr coated lead, and if yes, can you say how many fps from a 4.5” and 7.5” single action. I was surprised the gun digest article reported 900 fps from a 7.5” vaquero. Alliant’s on line recipe shows 879 fps with 7 gr!

I shoot both PC and Xlox lubed 250gn bullets. The PC gives slightly less accuracy in my guns, maybe a 1/4 larger groups. I don't usually use PC in my low velocity pistol loads as it isn't needed. However, until I cut the forcing cone to 11 degrees, my Pieta Californian was spitting some lead and leading at the forcing cone. So I PC'd the bullets until I got a chance to work on the gun. Now I have no need for PC'g them so it saves some work.

I don't know what their speeds are since I have not had a chance to get my Chrony out before winter set in.

 

[PowPow]

Thanks. John.

I am so thankful that John shares his knowledge and wisdom on this forum. I just managed to acquire a copy of Ken Hallock's .45 Auto Handbook on his recommendation. (I've got some 1911 issues that I'm trying to figure out.)

 

[Biggfoot44]

I have no experience with BE in .45 Colt , and obviously defer to John . ( That 5.8gr of 231 is really mild, but of course that depends upon what you are seeking . If you were seeking to duplicate " Standard - NOT Cowboy Action " factory loads , that would be +/- 7.0gr 231 )

I haven't read the article by Nick Sisley ( but give a link , and I would just on general principles ). But undoubtedly Mr Sisley reported the loads that he liked/ recieved good results from , in His guns .

As noted , while there Are Iconic handloads that use a charge ending in .0 or .5 ( here's looking at you 7.5gr Unique ) , there's a reason why there are 10 numbers , and not 2 . You don't get bonus karma points for using round numbers for charges . If better accuracy/ better consistency/ desired velocity range/ desired pressure range/ etc is reached at something point 3 , or something point eight , that's the reason the numbers 3 and 8 exist .

 

[John from MD]

I have no experience with BE in .45 Colt , and obviously defer to John . ( That 5.8gr of 231 is really mild, but of course that depends upon what you are seeking . If you were seeking to duplicate " Standard - NOT Cowboy Action " factory loads , that would be +/- 7.0gr 231 )

I haven't read the article by Nick Sisley ( but give a link , and I would just on general principles ). But undoubtedly Mr Sisley reported the loads that he liked/ recieved good results from , in His guns .

As noted , while there Are Iconic handloads that use a charge ending in .0 or .5 ( here's looking at you 7.5gr Unique ) , there's a reason why there are 10 numbers , and not 2 . You don't get bonus karma points for using round numbers for charges . If better accuracy/ better consistency/ desired velocity range/ desired pressure range/ etc is reached at something point 3 , or something point eight , that's the reason the numbers 3 and 8 exist .

Well said. In pistol calibers, .1 can make a world of difference depending on the powder, case, bullet, etc. In rifle calibers, using medium and slow powders, not so much.
In the '60s and 70's, we used to buy surplus powder for our rifles and machine guns. It cost about $4 for 8 pounds back then. When I got into cast bullet shooting, I wanted to use what I had on hand, one of which was 4831, a particularly slow powder.

One of our brainiacs at the Cast Bullet Association, came up with a duplex load and man did it work well. You put 5 grains of Bullseye in first and then filled the case with 4831 up to the neck. No weighing involved, and no pressure problems either. This gave me around 1600 FPS in both .30 cal and 8mm cartridges and, they were pretty danged accurate.

Just some rambling tidbits from an old fart who didn't sleep well last night.

 

[Bolts Rock]

For cowboy loads I run 6.0 Trailboss under a 200gr LRNFP. If I want stiffer loads for non-cowboy use I buy a box of factory spec.