45ACP loads, what are you shooting?

[El Chapo]

20 hours ago, Boggus Deal said:

I believe WST is a softer recoiling powder than Clays. And Clays seems harder to get at the moment.

Clays will probably never be produced again.

I have thought about trying WST for a long time but I don't have any.  I saw it at the store this week for ~$50 a pound.  My experience has generally been that the powder that uses the lowest charge weight will produce the least recoil.  WST is slower burning than Clays, and so at the same PF, I would expect it to have more recoil, but not by much, as the load is only slightly greater in weight.

If I can get a hold of a significant quantity of Ramshot Competition, I may try that in 45 ACP.  I use it for CAS now and it's a good fit for this.  I'm saving what I have for my cowboy ammo.

Clays has been my favorite .45 powder for a long time.

I have also used Solo 1000, AA #5, Power Pistol, and probably some others I'm forgetting.

N310 is the fastest burning powder on the burn rate chart that I know has data for 45 ACP, perhaps if I see that, I'll try it.

[marshal stone]

23 hours ago, El Chapo said:

Loaded my WB ammo last night.  3.6-3.7 of Clays with a 230.  Thought about trying some new powders but Clays and 45 ACP go together like love and marriage.

 

22 hours ago, Boggus Deal said:

I believe WST is a softer recoiling powder than Clays. And Clays seems harder to get at the moment.

Multiple National and World Championships have been won with that Clays load.

Unfortunately, Clays is really hard to come by. I'm told Clay Dot works with basically the same charge.

I've shot WST loads and can't tell the difference between the two. But YMMV.

Marshal Stone

[JJ]

Fully realizing that this is an older thread, over the last couple of days have been experimenting with new loads for the 45acp.

For years my go to powder was Bullseye. I loaded, thousands upon thousands of 45acp, 200gn RNHB BearCreek Bullets with 4.5gns of Bullseye. Of course Bullseye is now impossible to find. Some years ago I acquired 10lbs of WST when it wasn't too expensive. After the Bullseye ran out started using the WST. With the WST quickly found out my main match 45acp shot with a softer recoil (and recovery for shooting the reset) with the 230gn RN vs the 200gn RNHB. The load I used for WST was 230gn RN and 4.7gns of the WST. I like that load. Around here it gives me a PF of 158.

Sadly WST, around here, has gone to over $60 a pound. While I still have way over 9 pounds of WST left, I wondered just how high can it go?

Again, over many years, I have been using Titegroup for my 9mm. So I thought I might try the Titegroup on my 45acp. Around here Titegroup is going for around the $42 mark. $42 vs $60. Big Difference for the long haul. 

Yesterday I loaded some Titegroup rounds for my 45acp with 3.9gns and 4.0gns. This morning I went out and used the brand new Competition Electronics Prochrono DLX Chronograph I won as a door prize at the AZ Cowboys Shooters Assn two day match at Ben Avery in early February. That chrono is REALLY nice. Again thank you ACSA!!

Here are the results: 

3.9gns Titegroup, 230gn RN BearCreek Bullet, 75 degrees and 4,800 elevation. 751, 787, 718, 727 and 758 fps. Average 748fps. PF = 172.

4.0gns Titegroup, 230gn RN BearCreek Bullet, 75 degrees and 4,800 elevation. 736, 733, 721, 725 and 739fps. Average 726fps. PF = 166.

With what little I know about this reloading stuff (am constantly being accused of thinking outside of the box) and experimenting with different powders, I was surprised at the consistency of the 4.0 vs 3.9 load for the 45acp. I did paper another 5 shots of both loads. Offhand, at 30' was able to place 5 rounds of the 4.0 load in a 4" round black dot. The 3.9 load was 2 in the dot, 1 on the edge and the other 2 rounds - 1 high by 2" and 1 right 1.5". The 3.9 load was shot first. 

What does this prove? Absolutely nothing in the long run other than I found another type of powder, without the goofy prices of others (yet), that is fairly easy to find (locally) and patterns well for me.  

Now if someone could just point me to a shotgun powder that can be easily found, I am open for suggestions. My Titewad supply is down to the last 4 pounds or so (the box thing here) and need others thoughts. 

Respectfully - J.J. 

 

 

[Garrison Joe]

28 minutes ago, JJ said:

point me to a shotgun powder that can be easily found

Same as your new pistol powder - TiteGroup.  It will make nice 7/8 ounce loads at about 1000 FPS that work well for Wild Bunch. Also, remember that if you find bottles of High Gun, it is EXACTLY the same powder as TG.  (it's just a renaming thing from Hodgdon).

Good luck, GJ

[Eyesa]

6 hours ago, JJ said:

Here are the results: 

3.9gns Titegroup, 230gn RN BearCreek Bullet, 75 degrees and 4,800 elevation. 751, 787, 718, 727 and 758 fps. Average 748fps. PF = 172.

4.0gns Titegroup, 230gn RN BearCreek Bullet, 75 degrees and 4,800 elevation. 736, 733, 721, 725 and 739fps. Average 726fps. PF = 166.

Another not clear on question.

Why would a .1 gr. Increase in powder charge, cause a 22fps decrease in velocity?

[Garrison Joe]

Look at the velocity variance of the 3.9 grain loads.   Velocity range ran both lower and higher than for the 4.0 grain load.   Sounds like that 3.9 grain load just was not a consistent performer.  There should in general only be a slight increase in muzzle velocity going to 4.0 grains, but trying to compare one load that had velocities wandering all over to another more consistent load, it becomes to hard to draw much meaning in the differences.  It's not a true decrease in velocity going with 4.0 grains, and if 25 rounds of each load were chronographed, the statistics would likely show a more realistic velocity average difference.  "5 shot" velocity groups are suspect here.  GJ

[JJ]

Mr. GJ and Mr. Eyesa

JG - thank you for your quick response. Used Titewad quite a bit when first starting shooting Cowboy in 2003. Back in those day shot 45lc. Used Titewad until joining the Juneau Gun and Trap Club. Was there that I discovered called 'Clays'. Clays, from the Gun and Trap Club, cost $69 for a 8lb container back then. I never looked back. With what little I/we could afford back then, as much as afforded was spent on powder, primers and shot. Now that I am reverting to a powder that was used earlier, I did look to see if there was a shotgun load for Titegroup. Looking in Hodgdon's Loading Center (and other places) found the Titegroup settings for the 7/8oz load. However, could not find anything for a 3/4oz load. Any suggestions??

Also - thank you for the note that High Gun is the same as Titewad. Did not know that. Folks learn many good things on the SASS WB Forum. 

Eyesa - Why was there such a difference between the 3.9 and 4.0 grains of Titegroup? I pondered that while looking at the numbers displayed on my iPhones app for the chronograph and quickly came to the conclusion that had absolutely no idea why the difference. My reloading machines are Dillon 750s. I set the powder slide for the loads, weighed them on my RCBS Balance Beam Scale that was acquired in 1976 and reloaded 14 rounds of each load using the same weighing procedure. Still no real idea why the difference. Did decide to use the 4.0 load for my future 45acp loads when using Titegroup. 

Appreciate both of you responding here and a large thank you goes to both of you and anyone else reading this thread.

J.J.

[Garrison Joe]

Quote

found the Titegroup settings for the 7/8oz load. However, could not find anything for a 3/4oz load. Any suggestions??

General recommendation for making cowboy/WB shot loads, which are almost always loaded lighter than the minimum starting load normally published by Hodgdon or Alliant or VitaVouri,  is to start with a 3/4 ounce wad and the powder weight from a 7/8 ounce load.  Although there is a trend recently in conventional shotshell loading (trap, skeet, sporting clays) to load lighter payloads, they usually drop the shot weight to 3/4 ounce and add a little more powder to a published 7/8 or 1 ounce load and accept a higher velocity (like 1250 or 1300 FPS). 

That type of load does not make friends on the Cowboy range and has more recoil than you want when shooting fast.

So, loads for Cowboy shells are almost never found in a published manual!  They do not have a lot of "conventional" use.  You have to either try stepping down powder a little at a time from what you do find published until you find a load that you like, or you get another pard who has a load built the same way who shares data with you.   There's not a lot of SAFETY risk with decreasing powder weight in a load (and thus chamber pressure and velocity), but you do HAVE TO BE AWARE OF GOING SO LOW ON POWDER AS TO MAKE AN INCONSISTENT performing shell.  The big danger - squibby shells that leave a wad stuck in the barrel which could bulge a barrel on the next shot, or even worse.  You also have to be concerned that you have enough stack height (powder plus wad plus shot) that you can make a solid enough crimp to avoid shot leaking out! 

Next concern - TiteGroup is a fairly dense powder.  The Clays or Red Dot you have been shooting are fluffy (low density) powders - only Trail Boss is significantly more fluffy.  This leads to lower stack heights and poor sunken crimps that don't "seal" the petals at the center.  So, fixing that?   Use a tall wad....the pink Winchester-clone wad CB0175 from ClayBuster is often chosen, as it is one of the "taller" wads in any maker's 12 gauge wad line.

Second suggestion - load in one of the smaller volume hulls.  Any of the Remington target type hulls (STS, Nitro27, Gun Club, American Clay and Field).  Or, the new Federal High Overall hull (which is just a maroon colored STS hull).  Or, a Winchester AA-HS hull.   Don't run yourself through the ringer and try to load very light loads in the econo Federal Top Gun, or any of the European hulls (Rio,  Challenger, Nobel, Cheddite etc).  Too much volume to have to fill to get the crimp to work well.

Third (reluctant) suggestion - a little filler or an over-shot card or plastic disc over the shot.   A Cheerio or similar cereal piece has been used by many light-load shooters.   I avoid that, since I load on a progressive loader and don't like to slow down the process to stick something into hull after the shot drop.   

Fourth (even more reluctant) suggestion - trim hulls enough to make a good folded crimp, or even put a roll crimp on the light loads.   I never would, ,though, and have never needed to.

I find a light 7/8 ounce shot load in a Remington hull with a 7/8 ounce wad, with only enough powder to give me 1000 FPS, suits me just fine.  Never have a knockdown fail to tip over, never have to worry with a flying clay bird, or a 20 yard KD target.  Make a few slow 7/8 ounce loads - you may find you like them!

The main "safety concern" that the powder makers who publish shotshell loads have is folks trying to load "too heavy" thinking that will kill more birds or varmints.  So, they are quite concerned if you ask for anything outside of their pre-set range of chamber pressures that they consider best for conventional shooting (targets, upland game, rabbit and squirrel).   But, they also want to be sure their published loads will cycle most of the semi-auto shotguns on the market.  They get tired of answering mail (texts today I guess) saying - "Your starting load won't cycle my 3" chambered auto-go-boomer!   They really don't worry too much about you modifying a recipe to go lighter, as long as you know how to stay away from squibby loads.

If all you are willing to load is a published-minimum-load from Hodgdon, you are right, you won't find one light enough for pleasant Cowboy shooting.   good luck, GJ

 

Edited yesterday at 04:03 PM by Garrison Joe

[Eyesa]

11 minutes ago, Garrison Joe said:

find a light 7/8 ounce shot load in a Remington hull with a 7/8 ounce wad, with only enough powder to give me 1000 FPS, 

That's exactly where I'm at with my cowboy SG loads. Works like a charm!

Ellie was having issues with a broken shoulder, so I came up with an ultra lite load for her and it has performed flawless as well. 11gr of Red Dot, CB0175 wad, & 3/4oz of #8. IIRC, They chronoed around 650. If she does her part, the targets fall and the fliers turn to dust!

 

 

[Sedalia Dave]

 

9 hours ago, JJ said:

Why was there such a difference between the 3.9 and 4.0 grains of Titegroup? I pondered that while looking at the numbers displayed on my iPhones app for the chronograph and quickly came to the conclusion that had absolutely no idea why the difference. My reloading machines are Dillon 750s. I set the powder slide for the loads, weighed them on my RCBS Balance Beam Scale that was acquired in 1976 and reloaded 14 rounds of each load using the same weighing procedure. Still no real idea why the difference. Did decide to use the 4.0 load for my future 45acp loads when using Titegroup. 

 

3.9 grains of TightGroup was not building sufficient pressure to accomplish the proper burning of the powder.  This caused erratic ignition and associated variations in velocity. 

With 4.0 grains the powder is generating enough pressure to ensure better ignition of the powder charge.

Would be interesting to see the SD and ES of a 4.1 grains of TightGroup