your best 45 colt loads

[Old Savage]

Indeed - where is the practical limit for a modern Colt or clone even if you wish to know not to go there but to avoid going there. I would like to know but I am not sure the info is reliably out there. I prefer to shoot pistol loads in the 15,000 and down range so it is not of practical use to me but still I would like to know.

[Don McDowell]

OS I still have some 2400 in the little square metal cans, I have some left from the big round cardboard cans, and I have some from the tall plastic cans they use now. There is absolutley no difference of any merit in any of those powders. Certainly nothing more than what you would find in lot to lot variations.Same thing with unique.

Temperature, humidity , the amount of sizing and crimp done on a case will throw velocity and pressure further, than the variations from the different generations of powder of the same name. Chamber demensions from one gun to the next even of the same manufacture can change pressure drastically.

Last time I clocked the 18 grs of 2400 with the 250 gr hornady's from the winchester trapper they were around 1150, the 225 speer flyin ashtrays were at 1200 fps. Subtract around 175 fps from a 7.5 inch handgun.
Using velocity to try and determine pressure is pure folly. Take a look at Hogdons web data for Trailboss and the 45-70. The pressure runs right on the saami max, yet yields only 75% of the velocity of 2f blackpowder charges, not to mention the data from the other smokeless powders they list.

[Griff]

OS,

Yes, I believe that formulations of some powders we discuss has materially changed over the years. I don't recall the specific powder, but ISTR that one of the manufacturers did re-issue a powder with a warning not to use the old data. I also know that AA5744 has changed over the 20+ years I've been using it. The 5744 of today is slightly more potent than what I used in the late '80s.

jager3,

Aye, I also am very careful of the ammo I have specifically for my Rossi 1892 vs that for my toggle links. While, yes, the steels of today, even in the Italian clones is probably much better than even those of the early 20th century, I still don't think the pressure envelope should be raised too high. As I said before, the occasional high pressure load is probably not going to create a catastrophic failure... but, repeated use will. But, not being an engineer or metalurgist, I'll err on the side of caution.

[Old Savage]

Don, have you chronographed your 18.0 loads in any single action revolvers?

[JohndeFresno]

Thank you, Griff and Old Savage. I threw in a hint above in hopes of eliciting this response from folks who have been reloading a lot longer than me - that powders have changed over the years. It is not just the one factor of companies getting more conservative to save them from lawsuits; that is only part of it, I believe.

For instance, at the M.D. Smith reloading site -
http://www.reloadammo.com/ -

The author says:
"These loads are all out of manufacturer's manuals (over 16 years) or tested with less than maximum loads. Some older 1995 manuals show higher amounts of powder than the new 2011 load manuals. That is because powder companies have changed ownership, manufacturer and sometimes formulation and the NEW powders are generally faster."

I revere the few old manuals that I have, like my 1995 Hodgdon Manual No. 26. Many here have much older publications than that. But that data is always checked against the latest info, like Hornady 8th Edition, my beloved QuickLoad program, and/or other sources before I start up a new load.

[J Miller]

I have the impression from reloading my 45-70 that 2400 is faster than it once was. 25 gr of 2400 with a 400 gr Speer 1475 fps. That load was at one time listed as a Cowboy load at 1250.

Old data for the 45 Colt and 2400:
Lyman 46th - from a 7 1/2" barrel - 15.2 grains for 696 fps - 17.5 grains for 814 fps.

Now:
Alliant now shows 15 grains producing 826 fps from a 5 1/2" barrel.

THAT LOOKS LIKE A CHANGE IN THE PROPELLANT TO ME.

So - what Elmer once used - good enough for Elmer good enough for me no longer holds water. Just to mean that the pressures his loads produced then are likely not to produce the same pressures now if we compare the data available at different time. I don't think it being from different guns could produce the differences here. Partly as they favor the older loads not the newer ones.

So - now if someone will chronograph 18 or 18.5 grs of 2400 with a 250 grain jacketed bullet ????? We can know what that produces and compare with pressures necessary to produce that velocity.


I, as usual, am with Griff.

Apples and oranges .........
Comparing Lyman data with Alliant data is bogus.
Lyman uses real firearms to get their velocity data ( or used to ).
Alliant uses special specked out SAAMI test barrels that have no bearing on real life guns.

Alliant has always, even way back into the 70s when they were still Hercules shown very conservative loads for the .45 Colt.
Lyman has shown much more useful loads, and even they have been on the conservative side.

Joe

[Old Savage]

JohnD - that site shows 18.0 as giving 1180 fps with a 260 gr jacketed bullet. Doesn't seem to say what they tested it in but they are addressing pistols in their admonitions.

OK then with

Old data for the 45 Colt and 2400:
Lyman 46th - from a 7 1/2" Ruger barrel - 15.2 grains for 696 fps - 17.5 grains for 814 fps.

Now:
Alliant now shows 15 grains producing 826 fps from a 5 1/2" barrel.

Speer #12 shows 15.4 grs of 2400 yielding 972 fps from the 6" barrel of a S&W 25-5.

Speer #11 shows 18.0 grs producing approx. 1110 fps in a 7 1/2" Ruger.

Now those are not pressure barrels so I think we must conclude that there are widely varying pressures occurring in these firearms.

[JohndeFresno]

JohnD - that site shows 18.0 as giving 1180 fps with a 260 gr jacketed bullet. Doesn't seem to say what they tested it in but they are addressing pistols in their admonitions...

Yes, this site and others apparently use a variety of sources and/or platforms, so the information is at times a bit muddled. I probably should have used a better example; but the wording was relevant.

[Old Savage]

JdF see my updated previous post.

[JohndeFresno]

JohnD - that site shows 18.0 as giving 1180 fps with a 260 gr jacketed bullet...

Old Savage, I'm not quick witted enough to juggle all of the differences represented here, so I am not sure what you are trying to say.

I looked up some of the stuff with what I have, but didn't check LoadData or other sites - just my books. Let's just take what you posted above:
The JD Smith Site:
18.0 gr. 2400 for 1180 fps with a 260 gr jacketed bullet.
Yes - and the section is marked Ruger, T/C only; don't know which he used.

Lyman 46th
15.2 gr. 2400 for 696 fps; 17.5 gr. for 814 fps (with 260 gr jacketed bullet?)
I don't know. I have Lyman 48th and 49th. Neither shows a 260 gr. jacketed bullet.
We can't mix cast with jacketed and use different weights to compare, can we?
The start pressure is different, bullet lengths differ creating different pressures, etc.

Alliant
15 gr. 2400 for 972 fps (5.5 in bbl) (260 gr. jacketed bullet?)
I have found no such load in my Alliant data, either online (Alliant)
or in my 2004 and 2005 books.

Speer
Speer #12 - 15.4 grs 2400 for 972 fps (6" barrel, S&W 25-5)
Speer #11 - 18.0 grs 2400 for 1110 fps i(7 1/2" Ruger)
I don't have these, but Speer #13 pg. 586, Ruger Blackhawk loads, shows:
Start: 16 gr., 1045 fps; Max 18.0 gr. for 1180, 70 fps faster than in Speer #11
(7.5" Blackhawk), which tends to prove my point about later powders being faster. Note that this is the same load quoted by J.D. Smith; so this (Speer manual) is most likely his source in this particular load.

Since the above loads don't appear to be for the same bullet in each case, I can't make heads or tails of what you are saying, unfortunately. Headin' off to bed, partner.

[Don McDowell]

Don, have you chronographed your 18.0 loads in any single action revolvers?

Yes I have that's how I was able to say that the 7.5 inch handgun runs about 175fps slower. My nearly wore out Ruger Blackhawk has always turned in a bit more velocity with some powders than the manuals say, and less with others.

[AJMD429]

I've always thought it was strange how much the load data for 2400 has changed over the past thirty years - even that from 'manufacturers'.

Formulation change, fear of litigation, or changes in how PSI/CUP is measured, maybe all three, but it is a big change!

[Old Savage]

JdF - here is the Alliant link http://www.alliantpowder.com/reloaders/ ... ulletid=70

What I am saying is that it would appear from the data comparisons that 2400 has gotten faster - that is apparently contrary to Don's experience but it falls in with mine with the 45-70, a Marlin which produces about what you would expect with other loads.

But this is more question than answer on my part and the 45-70 can be very consistent with some loads and vary a lot with others and so is not a dependable comparison but just data. Don seems to have much more experience chronographing loads for this powder. The smallest 45-70 group I ever got was with 2400 and a 400 gr Speer which lead me to initially think it was consistent other times with another rifle not so much. Could be it was with the one Marlin with Micro and not the other with Ballard. And the 45 Colt which is what this is about is another subject. Investigation here not pronouncement.

But - the Keith used it so it has to be good and good enough for me approach is of course an attitude anyone is free to take but that really lacks relevance with all the variables. Sounds more like religion than reloading.

[shooter]

But - the Keith used it so it has to be good and good enough for me approach is of course an attitude anyone is free to take but that really lacks relevance with all the variables. Sounds more like religion than reloading.

Since I've seen you mention this a couple times now: let me clear something up. I wasn't saying that things couldn't change, such as formulas and other things that can affect velocity and pressures. I didn't say that doing everything exactly the way Elmer did them is the only way to go, but he did give us pretty good guidelines for the high pressure limits of particular firearms. Yes, the exact same weight of 2400 might be hotter today than back then, but we can still use the pressure and velocity guidelines set forth by Elmer to help determine what is effective and safe. He had an affinity for pushing a gun to its limit. An affinity I don't share. I don't even begin to touch Elmer's loads most of the time, but would sure take into account his experiences if I wanted to.

[Old Savage]

That was then and this is now - I doubt anyone will blow up anything new with 18.0 gr of 2400 but where the line is who knows. It certainly is not coming out. Only one I know of is Paco's story but that was with a Freedom Arms class load. Paco has published some guide lines for the 45 Colt but for the 92 rifles. One of the loads we see published (not Paco's) for the 45 Colt pistols reaches 1180 fps - is that what a clone can take as a standard load. Or, any of the older guns - where is the line there. Elmer had in my opinion guide lines for the modern situation that cover the present. How could he - too much has changed. He blew up a few. How much was too much and if you blow it up you are way beyond where you should be. He is great for historical interest and of course much of that still works but ???? .... It certainly isn't current science.

There are a few possible views on these things and I am presenting one. What I do hear is that lawyers are the only reason for the changing standards - really? At the same time look what Hodgdon has published on the 45-70 and 4198. They have upped the velocity in the Marlins.

[Don McDowell]

Once again do not fall for the velocity equals pressure trap... Velocity is no indication of pressure. Look at the current Alliant bludot data for the 45 colt. It runs a 250 gr bullet at 1000fps yet is still within the saami specs.
If you go back thru old load manuals you find very little difference in 2400 or Unique data, certainly not enough to suggest any new formula. If a powder in fact was reformulated to be slower or faster it would and does recieve a different name...
Alliants web data constantly changes, just a couple of years ago they listed bludot for the 38-40, now they don't. Web data changes rather quickly, where printed data stays around until the paper wears out.
With any data gathered from anyplace it's best to work up to the maximum. The old standard 22 grs of 2400 with the 429421 won't work in all 44 magnums, and 20 grs will chronograph close enough to the 22 grs , to not have to worry about cases sticking..

[Old Savage]

Don, I am well aware of the fast/slow differences in pressure curves, spikes, and area under the curve as relates to velocity but it is not as if pressure is not a factor. It is not irrelevant and 2400 is not the slowest with the greatest advantage to safety. How much 2400 would blow a clone?

From a practical stand point, whatever heavy uses like hunting I think I have read about using the 45 Colt are with heavier built revolvers - Rugers and the like or more. Clones and Colts are very largely used for Cowboy shooting and other targets. Those guys are lightening it up. So who is using heavy loads in Colts and clones - don't know? Any examples? Lots of better choices it would seem. Probably a lot more a mental exercise than actual practice. Guess I'll have to load a few as we have discussed here and chronograph them. That won't be soon I think.

[Old Savage]

I see Ken Waters listed a 255 gr cast bullet at 1052 fps from a 4 3/4" and 1007 fps with Hornady JHC. SO ... there you go - I am on board, fine load. With of course, Don's info that the 2400 is all the same.

[Don McDowell]

Looking into the 45 colt data in the 5th edition of Cartridges of the World 17.5 grs of 2400 with a 255 gr bullet was listed at 1050 fps.

[JohndeFresno]

JdF - here is the Alliant link http://www.alliantpowder.com/reloaders/ ... ulletid=70

What I am saying is...

OS - since we are talking about pressure, I'm one for splitting hairs. No offense intended, but your link above is for a 250 grain Gold Dot, not a 260 grainer. Your other data related to a 260 grain jacketed bullet - 10 grains difference. I want to be careful not to mislead anybody, since upper limit loads can get really dicey. Me, I don't mess with them; I stay in the safe "Max" load arena or even a bit slower, for the most part.

But I am reluctant to use or quote data for bullets that are a mix of lead and jacketed, or of different weights, and lump the information together. As you know, pressure spikes, burn rates, and barrel lengths can all be factors with unexpected results at certain load amounts unless you keep all other variables the same.

Outside of this issue, I can agree with the your general summation.

[Old Savage]

I get you John on this and don't at all disagree. We can split all the hairs you like - fun. In engineering they carry the calculations out to thousands of a lb and then multiply the whole number by three or so for a safety factor. That is the standard now - not so much when Elmer was roaming around Idaho in the early days before HE got on to the whole 44 Mag thing. If you blow something up you GROSSLY screwed up. This is not a matter of creeping across a line. Shouldn't have been anywhere near the actual max. I don't think a lot of shooters understand that. For my loading you can lump together all the 250, 255s and 260s because I am not near the max. I have Rugers and a Freedom Arms for that and frankly if I want that much power I will use a 444 or 45-70. In what I was putting out it was just comparative information that points to 2400 being somewhat faster now. I am not saying it is for sure true, I am saying that the not truly comparable loading data I have found points that way and so does some of my own reloading however limited there. I am looking for the answers and what I will say is that the reloading data that I found does not point to - there is no difference. But, maybe there isn't. I will go about loading some of what I have and chronograph it.

These are for heavy 45 Colts.



How is 1350 fps with a 360 out of the rifle?

Another point - if you want more handgun power than a 44 Mag can provide - which is the easy way to get it, are you going to use a Colt Model P to shoot it? Where is the scratch you head smiley?

[JohndeFresno]

...These are for heavy 45 Colts.



How is 1350 fps with a 360 out of the rifle?...

Love that combo - real purty!

[Old Savage]

I like the matching plainness of the wood. Seems workaday gunish.

[JohndeFresno]

Looking into the 45 colt data in the 5th edition of Cartridges of the World 17.5 grs of 2400 with a 255 gr bullet was listed at 1050 fps.

Don, FYI -

I have the 10th Edition. I was warned about load data in Cartridges of the World - on this forum, as a matter of fact. It is a great historical reference and fun to read, but if you cross check each load, you will discover that some of them are not correct; perhaps not even safe.

For what it's worth, there's another validation of the golden rule of handloading - Thou shalt double check thy load data. I have learned to triple check mine, since a lot of times what you get on one site or in one book is a rehash of the same flawed data from the source you are reading!

[Don McDowell]

John I've seen alot of stuff said about the COW books, most of it hasn't prooved out in my experience, but everybody has to make their own determinations.
They used to have a hizzy and pee down both legs and call the intelligence of folks into focus just for mentioning 10 grs of unique in the 45 colt as reported by the Lyman manuals and others from the 30's,40's and 50's and more recent in the pre Speer#9 manuals. Fast forward to now and look at Alliants data for the 45 colt and unique...... You don't see any of those that sent blistering insults hurling at folks, retracting their statements.
Yes you can absolutely learn alot from the forums, and as you said there's alot of bad info that just keeps getting regurgitated mostly in concern of building post counts and sounding important, and not so much in the interest of passing on first hand knowledge....

[JohndeFresno]

John I've seen alot of stuff said about the COW books, most of it hasn't prooved out in my experience, but everybody has to make their own determinations....

I get what you're saying.

I refer specifically to a couple of loads that I verified - via other reloading info - that was just plain wrong - such-and-such grains of a particular propellant gives a certain velocity. As I recall, one was an old, obsolescent round, and one was a foreign round; one of those 9-something millimeters that we don't generally shoot in the States.

For starters, look into your revision of the book, in the back where it lists cartridge dimensions of all of the calibers. See what the author lists as the C.O.A.L. of the .45 ACP. If it is shorter than what you find in the other reloading manuals (and SAAMI specs), then this, indeed, could be problematic or even dangerous to the handloader and bystanders, due to seating the bullet more deeply than it should be placed with hotter loads.

The .45 ACP COAL max is 1.275"; my Cartridges of the World, 10th Edition (2003) shows the COAL as 1.17", the same COAL as several similar .45 caliber rounds on the page. That's page 517 of the 10th Edition. It is no doubt a misprint; but as I recall this misprint was in earlier books, too - never corrected.

If I find any notes on other discrepancies from my earlier survey, I'll attempt to find this thread again and post them. I'm sorry that I don't have that data on hand.

[Paul Jenkins]

Gentlemen?
You have misdirected the original question about Italian '73s and 1873s to argumentts about what a Ruger Blackhawk will handle I agree the Blackhawk may or will handle over 21 grs. 2400. I only wished to say 18.5 grs. 2400, 265 gr. bullet was pushing any Uberti '73. I would guess the first generaion colts designed for BP to be weaker than a second or third generation colt. The Italian guns are in a lower class of them all. I do have a blackhawk & load it hot. I don't think any leval headed person would exspect the same performance from a clone.

[J Miller]

I think you better do some real research on the "Italian guns". Don't lump them all together as "The Italian guns are in a lower class of them all." I don't believe that for nano second. Modern steel, modern manufacturing processes. The modern Italian guns are just as strong as any of the others 'cept the full size Ruger BHs.

Joe

[Don McDowell]

Gentlemen?
The Italian guns are in a lower class of them all. .

That's just flat wrong.
The Italian government proof tests every gun before it can be shipped. Their proof house pressures run a good bit higher than the Saami specs that are used here.
There's a real difference with some Italian guns fit,finish and overall quality, but there's nothing low class about the pressure's they are tested at.

[getitdone1]

I know it's been mentioned here before but the all-time favorite load for the Colt 45 is 9 grains of Unique with 250-255 gr bullet. Just mentioned this for a few in this group who don't know.

Not saying this is the best load but Unique goes back a lot of years and was especially favored years ago.

I WOULD NOT WANT TO USE THIS LOAD IN THE OLDER COLT SA GUNS.

However, believe I did read that the old black powder load was or could be pretty hot. Anyone have the specs on this?

Don

[JohndeFresno]

I know it's been mentioned here before but the all-time favorite load for the Colt 45 is 9 grains of Unique with 250-255 gr bullet....Anyone have the specs on this?

Don

I use 35,000 psi as Blackhawk Max, "Standard" .45 Colt SAAMI is 14,000 psi
If I recall correctly, many folks quote 40,000 psi for Blackhawk Max; I stay with 35k

Per QuickLoad, for a 6.0" Ruger Blackhawk; 9.0 gr. Unique:
Lyman LSWC #454424, 255 gr. .452 diameter
COAL 1.580", 55.7% fill
17,718 psi, 1020 fps predicted
(usually a mite slower than predicted in a wheelgun)
99.99% Propellant burnt 589 ft. lbs. ME predicted

[Don McDowell]

I know it's been mentioned here before but the all-time favorite load for the Colt 45 is 9 grains of Unique with 250-255 gr bullet. Just mentioned this for a few in this group who don't know.

Not saying this is the best load but Unique goes back a lot of years and was especially favored years ago.

I WOULD NOT WANT TO USE THIS LOAD IN THE OLDER COLT SA GUNS.

However, believe I did read that the old black powder load was or could be pretty hot. Anyone have the specs on this?

Don

9 grs of unique with 250-260 gr cast bullets runs the same velocity as 37 grs of goex 3f out of my handguns and rifle. Right at 900-950 depending on barrel length of the handgun and 1050-1100 or so out of the 16" trapper.

[JohndeFresno]

Thanks, Don. That clicks with the predictive software.

For some reason - cylinder gap? - QuickLoad is at the most about 8% above the actual chronograph for my revolver loads at around the 800 to 1200 fps range. I haven't really run many comparisons beyond that. But that would put a more accurate prediction at 938.4 fps if one extrapolates with my software - right around your figures.

[Don McDowell]

John the "cylinder gap" really shows up when you start getting into powders slower than unique. By the time you hit h110 etc the difference gets to be around 300 fps. Barrel length on the handgun will make up to about 50 fps.
But oddly enough as a side note, in my 41 blackhawk with the 4 5/8 inch barrel I have to run the slow powders right at maximum to get the fps needed with 210-215 gr bullets to actually meet Wyomings requirement of 500 ftlbs at 100 yds. Matter of fact I can't get it there with lilgun, but can with 2400 and H110, but it becomes such a snarly lil bugger at that level, it's really not much fun to shoot.

[JohndeFresno]

Don,

Interestingly enough, I was just reviewing John Linebaugh's site, where he peddles some very high pressure loads. As a disclaimer, I wish the gentleman well, but like many others, have some grave reservations about his stance concerning extreme pressures for a handgun. Of course, he's still alive, in one piece, and prospering, and I wish him well.

Having safely distanced myself from his overall philosophy, I find that he has some interesting, reasonably sane but powerful loads listed for the sturdier .44's and .45's - using H-110. Here is the link:
http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/h ... ullets.htm

[Don McDowell]

John I gave up on 110 along time ago, dang stuff you have to crimp so hard, and it seems to recoil alot more than other powders.
I decided to pretty much stick with 2400 for the "hipower" stuff.
Bludot does a good job in between 2400 and unique.
I found out once upon a time that if a 255 gr bullet from a 45 colt hopping out the end of the barrel around 900 fps won't take care of it, should a brought a rifle in the first place.

[JohndeFresno]

I'm in your court.

The heaviest .45 Colt load that I intend to test or ever use is an RCBS 45-270-SAA (BHN 11) cast bullet of 280 grains over 8.5 gr. Unique (COAL 1.650", Fed 150 Lg Pistol primer). I have 351 loaded, awaiting a fun day at the range. Its muzzle velocity is expected to be around 950 fps from my 4 5/8" Blackhawk. So many things to do, so little time...

Handloader Mag #246 (back in 2007) and other sources shows it to be within the 20,000 psi * range, yet it reportedly makes for extreme penetration on hogs. Its heavy bullet and driving band configuration reportably lends itself to acceptable accuracy at handgun ranges upwards of 100 yards - more than I would likely worry about with an open sight 4 5/8" sixgun.

* A proviso for the uninitiated: 14,000 is SAAMI standard max for "traditional" .45 Colt loads; but 20k is only moderate pressure for the Ruger Blackhawk and other beefy handguns in good working order.

[Griff]

Let's put it this way, a .45 Colt case stuffed full of FFFg and a 250 gr RFN is ONLY surpassed by a .44Mag or greater loading. Better performance than a .356 Mag, IMO.

[J Miller]

.45 Colt = 14,000 PSI
.45 ACP = 21,000 PSI

EVERY style of revolver made since the .45 ACP was introduced has had either an auxiliary cylinder available, or a sister model chambered for the .45 ACP.

If these guns can stand the pressures of the .45 ACP, there is NO reason to think a 20,000 PSI .45 COLT load will damage them.

There isn't enough dimensional difference in the chambers to be worthy of note.

Just for the record, I consider a load to be in the Ruger - T/C class when the pressure exceeds 21,000 PSI. Anything less than 21,000 PSI is still within the capability of modern smokeless non-Ruger revolvers in good condition.
AND ... Quick Load shows 18.5grs of 2400 with a 265gr Keith SWC as producing 1040 FPS @ 19,899 PSI when using the dimensions of my Uberti Cattleman. This data courtesy of JdF.
As far as I'm concerned this load should be reserved for very limited use in MODERN Colts or copies, but I have no fear of it KABOOMing the guns.

I really wish this forum had a "beating the dead horse" icon. Because we've gone round and round on this exact subject many times.

Joe

[DixieBoy]

I've watched this thread with interest, hoping for a load I'd never heard of, for my beloved .45 Colt.

John mentioned Linebaugh and also the great RCBS-270-SAA bullet. Don't overlook a truly great load that I lifted straight from Linebaugh's fine article "Dissolving the Myths..." all about loading for the .45 Colt.

In this article Linebaugh states that one of his favorite loads is actually a mid-range load. Using either a good Keith type cast bullet, or the RCBS-270-SAA bullet, I love HS-6 powder. Between 12 and 13 grains (depending on the bullet weight) for either of these two bullets gives me right between 950 - 1050 fps. The differences between bullet weights determine exactly what my powder charge will be. I'm not set up to cast my own, and I've seen these bullets range from 260 grains, all the way up to 280+ grains.

Out of my Blackhawk I've gotten some really fine accuracy using this powder, and the load is pleasant enough that if you shoot a hundred of them during an afternoon you don't feel like you've been wrestling grizzly bears, like you might with some of the hotter "Ruger Only" loads.

I hope this thread keeps going. Maybe someone will let slip a load I've never come across. - DixieBoy

P.S. Don, you mentioned Blue Dot. I haven't tried the powder yet. Do you have a sweetheart load for the bullets we've been talking about, in the same velocity ballpark ?

[Griff]

Factory loads for the .45Colt are predicated on BP era guns and the early steels they were made with. NEW guns are a different animal entirely. BUT... having done it myself, and knowing of others that have, the issue is the battering the recoil shield is subjected to over time leading to frame stretch. Constant, repetitive hammering causes steel to move. Add heat and it reduces the number of blows required. Especilally so with heavy for caliber bullets such as 300s or 325s.

I figure, I don't know what another fellar's guns are, how they've been used, gonna be used nor how MUCH. Ergo, loading book recommendations only. I consider the "Ruger/Contender Only" loads as .45Colt "+P" loads. Fine as frog's hair in those guns or my 1892 Rossi... But for a Colt SAA sized gun or a toggle-link levergun? Nope, no-way Jose! Heck, those .45Colt +P loads are really nothing but .44Mag data in a .45Colt case. In fact of those loads is quite enlightening for most .44 Mag owners. In a .45 Colt with a 240 JHP, the "+P" load uses 28 grains of H110 to yeild 1532fps @ 30,000CUP, while it takes 24grains of H110 to get the same weight JHP 1522 fps 36,200CUP! Ok, I'll concede that the .44Mag is more efficient in terms of powder used... but the sure seems as the .45 Colt+P is the better cartridge in terms of velocity received from pressure generated. (There, that oughta still the proverbial pot)!

It seems to me that a .45ACP in a .45 Colt chamber has a drop in pressure as the bullet exits the case and enters that big ol' chamber. I'd suspect that a 21,000psi load in a 1911 would have a fairly large drop in pressure when fired off in a .45 Colt chamber. It'd be interesting to use some Cowboy 45 Special brass, load to ACP levels and have a powder company do some pressure tests in a .45 Colt test chamber.

But, all the chest thumpin' aside, my favorite load is still 6.5 grains of RedDot behind anything from 160gr to 225gr pills.

[JohndeFresno]

...It seems to me that a .45ACP in a .45 Colt chamber has a drop in pressure as the bullet exits the case and enters that big ol' chamber. I'd suspect that a 21,000psi load in a 1911 would have a fairly large drop in pressure when fired off in a .45 Colt chamber...

Hmmm...

[Old Savage]

There are dimensional differences in the 45 Auto Cylinders. One is they have to be cut relatively tight and the case is smaller in it's specs to begin with. The 45 Colt being opposite in that the dimensions for that chamber tends to be over and the specs are larger. There is not much metal between those chambers - clearly enough however. Both of these factors stack to the 45 Auto cylinder having more metal. In addition the case is shorter so the impulse of the pressure let's off quicker and likely drops rapidly while it is in the long throat, again favoring the strength of the 45 Auto cylinder.

Proof is in the pudding as they say - here is a 45 Auto cartridge in a 45 Colt cylinder. The FMJ 230 actually protruded out the other end of the cylinder. Different things are different.

[Griff]

Yea, OS... I was thinkin' C45S when I typed 45ACP. Way TOO long a day!

[Griff]

I had a question asked yesterday, and thought I'd share the info I found with any who've been following this topic. With Old Savage's permission:

I suppose that is one reason why I like the 44 Spl. A little more metal all around and less case capacity that you will not really use in a Colt or clone. I also like 2400 because you can't dbl charge it with most loads. But I think most of what I have loaded is green or red dot in the 45 Colt and the 44 spl. I guess I look at he bullet weights and consider them about equivalent but still I have a few guns for each. Wonder what the Italians proof the 45s at?

From Wikipedia: (which we know can't be wholly trusted, but I confirmed this elsewhere also... but since I'd already cut 'n pasted the Wiki info...)

The Commission Internationale Permanente pour l'Epreuve des Armes à Feu Portatives (Permanent International Commission for Firearms Testing - commonly abbreviated as C.I.P. or CIP) is an international organi(z)ation whose members are 14 states, mainly European.

The C.I.P. safeguards that every civil firearm and all ammunition sold in C.I.P. member states are safe for the users.

To achieve this, the firearms are all professionally proofed at C.I.P. accredited Proof Houses before they can be sold to consumers. The same applies for cartridges, at regular interval, cartridges are tested at the C.I.P. accredited Proof Houses.

Proof process
The standard proof of firearms consist of firing two overloaded cartridges producing 25% more chamber pressure than the C.I.P maximum pressure limit for the same cartridge in its commercial version. For pistol, revolver and rimfire cartridges the standard proof is performed with overloaded cartridges that produce 30% more chamber pressure than the C.I.P maximum pressure limit for the same cartridge in its commercial version. Voluntarily testing beyond the C.I.P. maximum pressure limit is also possible for consumers who intend to use their firearms under extreme conditions (hot climates, long strings of shots, etc.). A proof mark is stamped in every successfully tested firearm. The C.I.P. does not test any further aspects regarding the correct functioning of the tested firearm. For example aspects like the correct cycling of cartridges etc. are not part of the proofing process.

Primarily orientated towards the proof houses and manufacturers, the C.I.P. independently assesses, approves and publicizes manufacturer's data such as ammunition and chamber dimension specifications, maximum allowed chamber pressures, caliber nomenclature, etc. All this C.I.P. established data can be accessed by everyone.

Technical procedures describing how to perform proofing are also established by the C.I.P. and updates to the various test methods are issued in the form of "decisions". These decisions can also easily be obtained by everyone involved.

The C.I.P. formally distributes established data and decisions to the member states through diplomatic channels for publishing in their official journals. After official publication C.I.P. established data and decisions obtain(s) undisputable legal status in all C.I.P. member states.

Governmental organizations, like military and police forces and other firearms bearing public power agencies, from the C.I.P. member states are legally exempted from having to comply with C.I.P. rulings. This does not automatically imply that all firearms and ammunitions used by governmental organizations in C.I.P. member states are not C.I.P. compliant, since those organizations often choose to self-impose the relevant C.I.P. standards for their service firearms and ammunition.

Emphasis added.

The pressures in the table below are rounded up to the nearest ksi, ie.1000 psi. Cartridges are arranged, approximately, in order of bullet diameter and then by case volume. Use the copper crusher numbers with the Powley Computer.
..................... piezo ................. crusher
.................. SAAMI . CIP ....... SAAMI . CIP . other
.45 Colt .............14 .. 16 ............. 14
That'd be your answer.

However, that leads me to wonder... if an Italian SAA clone (for an example) is able to survive TWO firings of 16,000psi, what is the definition of "survives"? And does that in turn, mean that you should be able to continue a steady diet of loads in that range? The 1st question I don't have an answer to... the second; well... I think caution would be my by-word.

That was the extent of my answer to OS. But, for those that somehow feel the Italian clones aren't as strong as American guns... look again at their testing. Their testing proves that, at a minimum, their guns should live long happy lives if held to no more than SAAMI loads. Where I will say that the Italians have some improving to do, is in their SPRINGS. And, for at the SAA clones, that includes the BOLT. One of the contant complaints I hear is about broken springs in the clones. I do believe that they've gotten better at the spring steel process. Some of that comes from the high-ups of Uberti/Beretta becoming personally involved in CAS. As Nate as stated on many occasions, CAS is extreme use of a Single Action Army styled revolver. Without tuning, it's better described as ABUSE! Even with light loads, the speeds at which the guns are fired is nothing short of phenomenal! Look for the CAS World Records on YouTube, and then calculate the speed at which the cylinder is rotating for a five shot string. While each 5 shot string is only 5/6ths of a rotation, that includes 5 separate starts and stops of the cylinder. The bolt ears slide over the bolt cam on the hammer, the bolt slides up thru the frame notch engaging and disengaging the cylinder, the hand rises and falls. And while some of these speed demons slip-hammer, I believe more of them are pulling the trigger for each shot. That's an awful lot of activity in 2 seconds. Think any of the original users of a Colt's SAA ever fired one that rapidly?

[Old Savage]

The three numbers given are for SAAMI piezo pressure = 14,000, CIP piezo pressure = 16,000 and SAAMI crusher pressure = 14,000. There apparently is no CIP crusher standard. Those numbers are rounded up to the near 1,000 psi.

The CIP pressure overload would then seem to be in the neighborhood of 20,500 psi. So they are warranting that the gun did not blow up with 2 shots at that pressure.

Here is a link with some of that info. http://kwk.us/pressures.html

[getitdone1]

Here's my thinking about the popular 45 Colt load. 9 grains of Unique with 250 gr bullet is pleasant to shoot, not very loud and if shot accurately will perform better than a lot of people think it can. And, it's nice to know this comes close to the old-time black powder load. For the older Colt SAA guns I'd think 8-8.5 grains of Unique would be wise--and not even that until you have the gun inspected by a good gunsmith.

Of course the Rugers with hot loads give you a lot more power but also a lot more kick and noise.

Once my cannister of Unique is used-up I'm done with Unique. Really tired of the black residue left in gun and on cartridge case.

In terms of "traditional" the old black powder load or Unique are best.

Don

[JohndeFresno]

John the "cylinder gap" really shows up when you start getting into powders slower than unique. By the time you hit h110 etc the difference gets to be around 300 fps. Barrel length on the handgun will make up to about 50 fps.
But oddly enough as a side note, in my 41 blackhawk with the 4 5/8 inch barrel I have to run the slow powders right at maximum to get the fps needed with 210-215 gr bullets to actually meet Wyomings requirement of 500 ftlbs at 100 yds. Matter of fact I can't get it there with lilgun, but can with 2400 and H110, but it becomes such a snarly lil bugger at that level, it's really not much fun to shoot.

Don,
I missed this the first time around - thanks. I have some H-110 and Win 296, but I'm not a big fan of either because:
1) They both usually require magnum pistol primers; somewhat of a bother to stock;
2) They both have narrow operating windows ("Do not go below such-and-such"); and
3) They are both used most effectively as max load powders for my .44's, .45's, and .357.
I personally don't like to max out my guns.

However, I do have a few load recipes using these powders; so I'll definitely save this post (Cylinder Gap Differences QuickLoad ).

[.45colt]

Hold on Guys, I got to get some wood for the stove.....and popcorn..... .

[Griff]

Hold on Guys, I got to get some wood for the stove.....and popcorn..... .

I do believe that you already missed the fireworks!