4.0 Bullseye & Brazos 200 lswc

Like I’ve been saying…….mixed brass will shoot fine!

Finished this 45 several months ago. Customer supplied Ransom Rest target. Brazos 200 lswc, 4.0 Alliant Bullseye, mixed old brass. 10 shots 50 yards.
KKM 1:16 twist barrel. Free advertising for Brazos & KKM
Jon 

I had very similar results with the same Brazos  200gr lswc but only 3.7gr BE, really soft and accurate load. But I'm working on my service pistol EIC so I switched to Zero 185 jacketed.

3.8, 4.0, or 4.2 … your gun may prefer one or the other, but one of this 3 will shoot.

Aww, Jon, do I have to go dumpster diving now just to collect some mixed brass?

Roy, I shared this for a couple reasons. 1) lead will group very good 2) mixed brass will group ( RR proves it ) 3) you don’t have to use a ton of powder to get good groups. This pistol shot 3.8 equally well.
45 is forgiving to reload, 32 is not! 45 you can focus on shooting instead of being a high master reloader like loading for 32  Hi Dave….lol
Jon

Determined 32 reloading folks should be known as High Masochists (HM). Having recently had to resort to the AP-P (the Photoescape Protocol) of individually check weighing every single powder drop on my XL650 to ensure consistency for my 32ACP match long line ammo I can assure you that I am now a reluctant, but confirmed high masochist - it is mind-bendingly tedious to load 32!!!

Jon, your guns and ammo recipes are just an attempt to make this game too easy!!

RoyDean wrote:Determined 32 reloading folks should be known as High Masochists (HM). Having recently had to resort to the AP-P (the Photoescape Protocol) of individually check weighing every single powder drop on my XL650 to ensure consistency for my 32ACP match long line ammo I can assure you that I am now a reluctant, but confirmed high masochist - it is mind-bendingly tedious to load 32!!!

Jon, your guns and ammo recipes are just an attempt to make this game too easy!!

Yay....., - I made into new HM (or HMR) class.  Although, I think, more common definition of what Roy is talking about called OCD.

I'm using another Jon's creation as my wadgun.  I optimized loads for this gun, and it will do the same or better at 50Y as the one from original post.  My load is 3.4 / 3.5 gr of BE under 185gr flat base bullets (Brazos or by my friend, - either one is actually closer to 190gr).  However for the short line I use mostly 190gr #130 bullet.  And here is where OCD comes into play.  I optimized load at 2.94gr +/-0.04 of N310.  I practice indoor most of the time.  Nice range with 25Y and turning targets that can be setup for any time interval I want.  Nicely controlled environment.  And this is where catch comes.  When temperature at the range is 72 degrees, my puff load works fine even when charge is at "minus".  When range is at 64 degrees - occasional FTEs.  Pretty much no issues outdoors.  Additional small detail - I load most of the short line ammo on Star Press, and use protocol, that Roy mentioned, for about 1 in 5 rounds checked.  Long line ammo is loaded on either Dillon XL650 or Super 1050 with about 40 out of 100 rounds checked.

Roy,
I can suggest excellent recipe for making mixed brass without dumpster diving!!  Take a hand full of brass from each carefully sorted by head stamps pile.  Through it in rotary tumbler and spin it for about five minutes, whilst carefully listening for any chimes, that might indicate presence of cracked case!    

Nah.....  OCD once again.  I'm using sorted by head stamps cases, mostly Winchester.  Although it can be also called mixed Winchester brass, as I do not care to track batches of it.  I also do not care about going OCD with brass prep, like depriming prior to cleaning, stainless pins, etc.  Ultrasonic cleaning with added Ultrashine and dish soap, or wallnut media with added NuFinish for small batches of brass is fine with me.

However, getting back to OP.  It is all about GUN!  If shooter has right tool for the job, rest is on the shooter!  And Jon excelled in creating such tools!

AP

PhotoEscape wrote:
AP

185 Brazos?

Brazos call it 180gr SWC / Flat Base - https://www.brazosprecision.com/45-180gr-SWCFlat-BaseGroove-573ct-0099bullet_p_13.html

However when I weighted samples from each bag they were between 184.5 and 186.0 gr.  Very good bullet!

AP

Jon Eulette wrote:Roy, I shared this for a couple reasons. 1) lead will group very good 2) mixed brass will group ( RR proves it ) 3) you don’t have to use a ton of powder to get good groups. This pistol shot 3.8 equally well.
45 is forgiving to reload, 32 is not! 45 you can focus on shooting instead of being a high master reloader like loading for 32  Hi Dave….lol
Jon

 Jon, between 200 gr. and 185 gr. bullets did you have to change the sight settings much?
Stan

Alex, how do you weigh powder to +/- .04gr??? In my admittedly very limited experience, I have not seen a scale that measures lower than .1gr.

Best Regards,
Oleg.

Oleg G wrote:Alex, how do you weigh powder to +/- .04gr??? In my admittedly very limited experience, I have not seen a scale that measures lower than .1gr.

Best Regards,
Oleg.

GEMpro 250 for one.

Weigh 10 drops then divide by 10 to get more accurate readings, it's a way of increasing resolution of your scale as well as getting a better average. If I'm getting close on a load sometimes I'll add a .05gr increment. I've never gone finer than 1/20th of a grain.

Oleg G wrote:Alex, how do you weigh powder to +/- .04gr??? In my admittedly very limited experience, I have not seen a scale that measures lower than .1gr.

Best Regards,
Oleg.

Oleg,
I'm using GemPro 250.  It allows for accuracy of +/-0.02gr.  Posting two pictures for illustration.  There are several higher end digital balances that will allow for even more precise measuring.  I.e. A&D FX-120I



AP

PhotoEscape wrote:

Oleg G wrote:Alex, how do you weigh powder to +/- .04gr??? In my admittedly very limited experience, I have not seen a scale that measures lower than .1gr.

Best Regards,
Oleg.

Oleg,
I'm using GemPro 250.  It allows for accuracy of +/-0.02gr.  Posting two pictures for illustration.  There are several higher end digital balances that will allow for even more precise measuring.  I.e. A&D FX-120I



AP

Not same bullet I hope!!! Lol

I just thought he was filing them down to the "correct" weight. I mean if you're going to be OCD you may as well do it properly.

straybrit wrote:I just thought he was filing them down to the "correct" weight. I mean if you're going to be OCD you may as well do it properly.

Right!!!  I did that too in the past.  Didn't file bullets though, but rather cull them by weight within 0.5gr difference.  After RR testing of handgun ammo loaded with such, stopped doing it.  For rifle ammo not only bullets were culled by weight, but cases too. And of course all other variables were checked too.  And yes, some chiseling was done on cases.

No, not the same bullets, Jim.  Next time I'll use different colors. 

AP

PhotoEscape wrote:Brazos call it 180gr SWC / Flat Base - https://www.brazosprecision.com/45-180gr-SWCFlat-BaseGroove-573ct-0099bullet_p_13.html

However when I weighted samples from each bag they were between 184.5 and 186.0 gr.  Very good bullet!

AP

I am glad to read this. I weighed some Brazos FB 180 LSWC and was getting closer to 185.  Wasn’t sure if it was the scale, the bullet, or me.

This Ransom rest target is representative of two pistols; old school tired wad gun and Colt Series 70 I rebuilt.
All the shots out of the nice little group including the low 6 o’clock 10 are from the old wad gun. The sub 2” cluster is 3.8 BE mixed brass and 200 gr Brazos lswc.
Good pistols with lighter charges “can” win big matches!
Be a HM Shooter not a HM Reloader!
Jon 

It is amazing how accurate a .45acp can be considering it is a 110 plus year old cartridge designed as a service round.  Even Jon's reloads are not that complicated, a 100 plus year old powder and lead bullets giving one X ring accuracy at 50 yards.  Of course a perfectly built pistol helps

Greetings,

I tend to disagree on the ammo quality.

I have had the pleasure of testing other peoples ammo via the barrel tester.

Some groups would not hold the repair center at 50 yards.

A review of the loading technique brought the ammo/groups back into ten ring groups.


If you hold an X and you are shooting 8-ring ammo, it is difficult to call your shots and score well.


Another plus for 22lr ammo. Most of it shoots X-ring and offers good training results. The shot generally goes where the sights are pointed.



However, do not get your shirt-tail wrapped around the reloading axle like me. I work towards a different agenda.



Cheers,


Dave

Hello Dave,
You are by far in my opinion the top level master reloader in the nation. I respect your knowledge and abilities.
I’ve spent countless hours conversing with the late Jerry Keefer about bullseye “shooter” dynamics from the pistols, the ammunition and the shooters. We both strongly believed in excellent pistols, excellent ammunition and knowing what was going to give the shooter the best chances at shooting their best. We liked reduced loaded ammunition. Why? 99% of the shooters out there are not AMU professional shooters. Weekend warriors is more like it. As a result of this, shooting factory warmer ammunition isn’t the best thing for the majority of the shooters. Warmer ammunition increases fatigue and over gripping which leads to poor/poorer trigger control. It also requires a more consistent grip.
We were of the opinion that shooting a reduced load that is sub 2” is good enough to call all the shots and easily hold 10 ring. Again we are thinking about weekend shooters not AMU level competitors.
In my 30 years of competitive shooting experience I witness all to often shooters bragging about their guns accuracy abilities with super duper hot shit ammo that holds an inch at 50 yards. Then they go and shoot sub marksman scores. The best equipment isn’t getting it done. I believe too frequently that more time is spent on reloading the best hot shit ammunition than training and learning how to shoot bullseye. I know how to shoot bullseye, but when I shoot factory loaded warm ammunition I have to work harder to shoot it well. That’s the shooter dynamic I’m talking about. Just because it’s the best doesn’t make it the best for “you”.
I like that you support all of your claims/experiments with hard data. You can always prove your case so to speak. Again, I think you are the best in the nation! What you do is extraordinary and we need people like you out there doing it. But I will continue to train the shooters I coach to use reduced loads and get the most from their limited time they have to shoot/train.
In the last 5 years I have helped several shooters break 2600 for the first time and go distinguished pretty fast. I know the game and what it takes to win and grow as a shooter. 
So 3.8-4.0 loads can get it done on the long line, but admittedly it’s not as tight as the warmer loads. 
I personally want to be known for winning, not having the most accurate load on the line.
Cheers!
Jon

Okay now I have to ask, Dave, in your review and examination of reloads are there some common errors that you see that cause poor ammo (not holding the repair center is frightening) and that you can explain in words how to correct them?

I load on a Hornady LNL AP with an auto powder drop, seat with a Redding micrometer die, and taper crimp separately (Lee FCD). Brazos cast LSWC 200 bevel base and 180 flat base. Mixed brass, older Remington primers… .467-9 crimp.

Testing is a bit difficult without a fixed set up. Are sandbags a reasonable substitute if that’s all you have?

Separately, Jon, what degree of proficiency- if that can be measured or described - do you take on for coaching? You know I’m in Austin, do you know any coaches for beginning BE shooters? I can ask via our local club but figured I’d ask. Hard for a person at my level to judge what makes a good coach for certain levels, if that makes sense?

I think it was Cecil R that commented as to how many posts there are under Equipment vs Fundamentals. Very interesting observation.

Thank you both and all the other experienced shooters for all the contributions and patience you exhibit with new shooters.

Greetings,

@RodJ,

The bullet, in my opinion, is the most important part of the reload. If you buy commercial cast/swaged bullets examine them carefully under a good light. Look for nicks/dings on the bases. If possible, spin the bullet in your thumb/finger and watch the driving band. Does the light change as you rotate it? This is caused by the mould not filling out fully during the pour.

With the 45 ACP, powder is somewhat forgiving. Should you load 4.0 grains, a variation of +/- 0.1 grain is not that critical. We once disassembled some Remington WadCutter that shot 1" groups at 50 yards. The powder charges varied greatly. Sorry, it has been 40 years and I did not write down the specifics.

Regarding powder, refrain from weighing each charge separately. A better test of the powder delivery system is to throw ten charges, with the same cadence you load with, and weigh all ten. If your machine/process throws ten charges +/- 0.1 grain repeatedly, your powder dispensing is excellent. i.e. ten throws = 39.9 - 40.1 grains, statistically the individual charge will average 4.0 +/- 0.02 grains.

Remember, most of the reloading scales are guaranteed accurate +/-0.1 grain.

Primers do not seem to be a major factor as long as they all go bang and are of recent manufacture. I am using up GrandPa's old Remington primers from the 50's and not all go bang.

Some sizing dies over work the brass cases (they size the brass too small.). Many have opted the use of a 45 Colt sizing die to size 45 ACP cases when using 0.452" Lead bullets.

I have a plentiful supply of brass in various calibers. I do sort and load it by headstamp to eliminate one more variable. Yes, you can use mixed cases and get good results. I choose not to.


@Jon,

I do see the value in reduced loads. The 45 was my bane for years, and still is. My observation is that the reduced loads do not always burn fully, lots of unburned powder.

Recently, I have been tinkering with Internal Ballistic Software to predict reloads. This has led me to start testing the faster powders that burn fully with reduced loads. Sadly, such powders have little published data. Think E3, TiteWad, Nitro 100, and the fast burning European powders that are slowly surfacing in the USA. Also, some of these powders are flake shaped and do not meter well. Hence, another variable.

Oh yes, thanks for the GREAT review. The check is in the mail; or, do you prefer PayPal?

@To all that are interested,

I enjoy reloading and playing "what if". This has provided me with many hours of satisfying testing. Fortunately, I have access to a machine shop to manufacture test barrels and tools needed for testing that, ideally, remove the Human/Huwoman/Huperson error.

Thanks for reading, film at 11

Cheers,

Dave

Using reduced loads require quite substantial amount of testing, IMO.  These loads can function well in one set of circumstances, and not when something changes.  Same powder, but from different lots, can produce different results.  Point in case is from my recent experience.  One of my regular short line loads is using 185gr Flat base #68 alike SWC on top of 3.1 gr +/- 0.06 of BE.  I recently opened 1 lb. container of the very old Hercules BE - I had to increase charge by 0.2 of a grain in order to achieve reliable functioning of the same gun and within same environmental conditions. 

Another example is with same load as above using CCI 300 and 350 large primers.  Former will not provide for reliable cycling and would require increasing charge by 0.5gr of the same powder.  Latter works fine and so is WLP.

Also, IMHO, when working with reduced loads (or with loading for calibers like 32 ACP), using statistical averages is not acceptable practice.  Negative extreme deviation (i.e. -0.1gr) would lid to cycling issues in real time / real gun firing.  Not so much in machine fixture testing scenario as there is no actual cycling takes place. 

So, as I see it, there is truth in both Dave's and Jon's sentiments.  Combining both is probably the best approach for a shooter in pursuit of higher scores.  For the sake of disclosure, - Dave tested some of my ammo.  Some of it failed miserably (and it was expected), some did fine.  Most important for me was reference points derived from Dave's testing, and I appreciate it immensely.    

AP