[Cap'n Dex]

I plan to reload my .45 brass, and I would like to ask you fellows' advice on bullets. There's a semi-local shop that casts super hard bullets. They have several offerings in .45. 1 is a 200gr. RN and another is 230gr RN. My use for them would be simple target shooting, general plinking. Which would you guys pick?

 

[Snake45]

Hard to tell you which would be better for you. The 200s will have less recoil, but might shoot to a different POI if your gun is sighted for 230 grain hardball.

I've shot both 200 and 230 grain lead bullets over the same charge, 5.3 grains of WW231 (HP38 is exactly the same powder), and both shot well.

One or the other bullets might function better in your gun, or might be more accurate than the other. The only way to know is to try them both.

 

[stand watie]

Cap'nDex,

IF it was me, i'd stay with the 230grain bullet and/or at least NEAR the standard GI ballistics
AND
i would also see if the reloader has LSWC in 230grain at the same or near price.
(even most completely UNmodified GI 1911A1 will feed SWC)

yours, sw

 

[Cap'n Dex]

I have a Remington 1911 R1. It seems to shoot low with 230gr FMJ ammo. not terribly low, about 1.5" or so. Shoots tight, just low. I was thinkin lower grainage would help with that. The one thing I don't want to do is rezero my gun because that just kind of sucked real hard to do. (No adjustable sights)

230gr. would make sense to go with, that's what I have been shooting in FMJ, so yeah, maybe I'll just stick with that. Thanks.

 

[Charlie Petty]

FWIW: my all day, every day load is a 200 gr. LSWC and 4.0 gr. Titegroup

the guns I shoot most often have adjustable sights but my carry gun shoots it pretty close to the sights which are regulated for 230 JHP

 

[t-star]

my favorite for the 45 acp has been a 200 for years, over 6 grains of 231- it shoots point of aim and that's a standard bowling pin load, so there's no question as to stopping power; your experiences may vary- it works in both my mk4/series 70 and my ww2 issue remington rand,and a pistoleer by the name of john shaw( mid south shooters supply) put me wise to it- he uses an h&g mould, i believe- it's also a lswc bullet

 

[Cap'n Dex]

These guys do sell a LSWC 200 grainer. They make a real hard bullet, and they sell em at a pretty decent price. I'd say they're every bit as good as oregon trail/laser-cast, but just a whole lot cheaper. The cool thing is they aren't real far out of the way for me to go and pick up what I need.
http://www.kingshooters.com/better-...rt=2a&OBNsid=27b64c3c816460ca22ed45f686f7577d

Here's a link if anyone's interested. I don't own, or work for these guys. I just like their bullets. haha.

The 200gr LSWC is the way to go, huh? Do you guys know off hand what kind of velocities you're getting with your respective 200gr loads? Thanks!

 

[Charlie Petty]

"Do you guys know off hand what kind of velocities you're getting with your respective 200gr loads? "

And your care because?

 

[Cap'n Dex]

I sort of remember why I stopped posting here.

 

[pdawg]

The 200gr bullet will shoot LOWER than a 230gr due to barrel time and recoil. The handgun will recoil more while the bullet is in the barrel with the 230gr making it impact higher on the target than the 200gr.

 

[t-star]

The 200gr bullet will shoot LOWER than a 230gr due to barrel time and recoil. The handgun will recoil more while the bullet is in the barrel with the 230gr making it impact higher on the target than the 200gr.

i can DISPROVE that- IT DEPENDS ON THE GUN AND THE LOAD- both my 200 and 230 grain loadings shoot poa - the only difference is one is 6 grains of 231, the other 5,5 and the 200 is a lswc, whereas the 230 is lrn
and that's real world, not THEORY

 

[Steve M1911A1]

Yeah. That's my experience too.
Lead 230-grain RNs and 200-grain H&G #68s, both atop 5.9 grains of (old) WW231, shot to the same point of aim, within the capacity of the pistols and my hands. They still do, but my technique is getting worse.
I suppose that if I used a machine rest, there would be a difference in point of impact. But for practical, self-defense-practice use, there is no difference.

 

[guntotin_fool]

I believe Charlie's comment was based on the idea that a load of 4.0 of titegroup and 200 grains of lead works fine, and that's all that matters. If the gun functions for a target load velocity is less than critical

 

[P. Marlowe]

Not wanting to sound like I am piling on, but back when a 1911 was my shoot-for-everything-I-was-doing-at-the-time gun, I too employed 200gr SWC bullets cast from a multi-cavity Hensley & Gibbs #68 mold. They were made from what seemed like a ton of metal that I had obtained from an in-house linotype operation that closed down in the late 70's (I probably still have some of it sealed up in polymer pails around here somewhere) so by the time I was done with them, they still weighed in at an acceptable level while being hard enough to not gunk up the gun even after shooting a 1000 or more rounds a day at some of the schools I went to in the 80's and 90's.

Out of some of the same liability concerns that others here often express in regard to certain mechanical modifications, because this is a public forum, I must beg your forgiveness over not including the charge over which those projectiles were seated.

But I will tell you that I (and others I knew at the time who used similar-if-not-identical bullets and/or powder charge combinations) saw results that were similar to what is being expressed here by Charlie, "t-star", "Steve M1911A1" and "guntotin_fool". They functioned flawlessly, shot to the same point of aim as the 230gr RN ammo I was familiar with, were very accurate (although that is as much a function of the gun as anything else), allowed me to shoot routinely at 50yards in some programs and matches (as well as out to 100 yards in a few activities), and had more than enough energy to deal with even the heaviest of the reactive metal targets found at the more conventional 7, 10, 15, and 25 yard distances at a few of the places I frequented back then.

While I can't say for sure and the vendor does not identify the mold or pattern they are using, I searched the site to which "Cap'n Dex" provided the link (it took me to an overall bullet page) and found what I think is the bullet he is talking about (http://www.kingshooters.com/45-200gr-swc-p-25575.html?OBNsid=27b64c3c816460ca22ed45f686f7577d) and it appears to be (at least) from the same school of thought than that H&G design so I would assume that if loaded in a like manner (although again for liablity reasons, I am not recommending that or any loading), it would provide him with performance comparable to what others have seen here.

Finally and in regard to the question and comments concerning the velocities of such things, I would tend to agree with the logic expressed by "guntotin_fool", in that if things are "working" fine (and all of your needs and performance criteria are being met), what difference does the velocity make? While it might be interesting to know, unless you have a league that uses it to calculate energy or because in some cases (I would think not this one) that you feel that you are working at a level where knowing the velocity would be helpful to you in keeping things sane, it really isn't the critical ("guntotin_fool's"word) issue for something where accuracy, functionality, and the ability to shoot where you are looking are; especially when you are attempting to replicate something along the lines of the relatively mild 230gr RN/Ball load of the .45ACP.

 

[t-star]

Yeah. That's my experience too.
Lead 230-grain RNs and 200-grain H&G #68s, both atop 5.9 grains of (old) WW231, shot to the same point of aim, within the capacity of the pistols and my hands. They still do, but my technique is getting worse.
I suppose that if I used a machine rest, there would be a difference in point of impact. But for practical, self-defense-practice use, there is no difference.

pls qualify "old" 231- it there a different formulation out there?- i normally go through about 8 pounds in a year and want to know if i need to make "adjustments"

 

[Steve M1911A1]

"Old" just means old.
When I bought the current batch, I was still shooting in IPSC/SWPL, so I got quite a bit of it.
What's left of it is now almost 30 years old.
It still works as advertised.

 

[t-star]

tks- my stuff is far more current than that- i always get paranoid when someone mentions "old" or "new" powder-

 

[Oddbod]

I've loaded & shot a lot of .45ACP with both 200gr LSWC & 230gr LRN using 4.7gr of Red Dot - 230gr RN Berrys too.

They've all functioned just fine & are accurate enough for the use I put them to.