Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have a few thousand commercially manufactured .45 ACP slugs of this type.

The label reads "HIGH-TECH 190 GR SEMI H & G #68". I bought them locally (Erie, PA) years ago, and used them in my old S&W .45 ACP revolver with no problems. Wheelguns are not picky eaters, so everything was easy. Now, the fun begins...

I am about to start shooting USPSA, in the Single Stack division. I'll use 230 grain hardball for that, as lead is a no-no on that indoor range. I have a Brolin 1911 "Legend", which is pretty much 100 percent reliable with hardball. But I'd like to use up these lead slugs practicing outdoors.

So I Googled "H & G # 68", only to find that these slugs are normally 200 grains. I weighed several of mine... they are 190 grains on the dot.

Hmmm.

Different alloy, maybe... these are pretty hard, I can barely mark them with my thumbnail. The single lube groove is filled with blue wax, .451" diameter, .614" OAL of the slug. The bases are beveled. (I took pics, but can't get them to post).

I'm looking for a load that comes close to 230 grain in recoil and point of impact, if that's possible. But first I need a starting point that has a good chance of cycling reliably. This pistol has a full power recoil spring, and I'm using Wilson 8 round mags.

I have Bullseye and Winchester 231, but will buy whatever powder is needed.

Any tips on an OAL likely to feed well, along with a powder charge weight?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
H&G 68 was THE standard for IPSC for years. Don't worry about the weight... lead bullets are always plus or minus a bunch

The common load was 5.0 gr. Bullseye
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,173 Posts
WW231, 5.3 grains with 200 grain H&G 68s, worked 100% in every 1911 I ever tried them in, including some with extra-power recoil springs. According to published data, this is a light or starting load. IIRC, if you want to make Major, 5.7 or 5.8 of 231 is called for. The 5.3 load was also extremely accurate in every gun I ever shot them in.

Dean Speir once posted that the H&G 68s had a reputation for being more reliable than hardball, and after shooting tens of thousands of them, I can't disagree.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
just leave a sliver of lead, maybe 0.005-0.010" above the case mouth. Enough crimp to make sure they chamber easily. I always just field strip and use the barrel as a gauge.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,277 Posts
Snake45 said:
WW231, 5.3 grains with 200 grain H&G 68s, worked 100% in every 1911 I ever tried them in, including some with extra-power recoil springs. According to published data, this is a light or starting load. IIRC, if you want to make Major, 5.7 or 5.8 of 231 is called for. The 5.3 load was also extremely accurate in every gun I ever shot them in.
Which Major PF are we talking about: 175, 170, or the more recent 165?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,173 Posts
Daniel Watters said:
Snake45 said:
WW231, 5.3 grains with 200 grain H&G 68s, worked 100% in every 1911 I ever tried them in, including some with extra-power recoil springs. According to published data, this is a light or starting load. IIRC, if you want to make Major, 5.7 or 5.8 of 231 is called for. The 5.3 load was also extremely accurate in every gun I ever shot them in.
Which Major PF are we talking about: 175, 170, or the more recent 165?
Whatever was in effect back when Bill Wilson wrote his book back in the '80s. That's where I got that data. :wink:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,277 Posts
Snake45 said:
Daniel Watters said:
Which Major PF are we talking about: 175, 170, or the more recent 165?
Whatever was in effect back when Bill Wilson wrote his book back in the '80s. That's where I got that data. :wink:
Major PF was 175 at that time the first book was written.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top