Loads for Pardini GT 45

My GT45 has been dead reliable with inexpensive cast #68 LSWC's. For long line I've been using 4.0 grains of WST (same load as my 1911) but for short line it runs perfectly with less than 2.7 grains of WST. I have a frame mounted optic.

I've never had an alibi with the GT45 related to feeding, just a mis-adjusted trigger once.

Here's how I seat & crimp. - Ben.

The 160 Quality Cast 160 has been very popular in Northern Ohio for a long time. We used it with 4.2 grains of BE, slide mounted Aimpoint Comps or equivalent, extended ejectors, and 10 to 12 lbs recoil springs. Nice soft load can be shot all day w/o wearing a shooter out.

Ron Habegger

Bking,
Maybe I'm doing something wrong in the loading process? It seems to me that everyone seats LSWC bullets the same, e.g., the bullet's shoulder is exposed just above the rim. Maybe I'm crimping them too much?

An issue I've had with most LSWCs is feeding: when I release the slide, the bullet nose gets jammed on the junction between the trigger housing and the barrel ramp; consequently, I look for a bullet with a beveled or rounded nose that are more likely to feed.

I would appreciate more information about your reloading, e.g., OAL, crimp, as well as load data. Thanks, dipnet

Dipnet wrote:Maybe I'm doing something wrong in the loading process? It seems to me that everyone seats LSWC bullets the same, e.g., the bullet's shoulder is exposed just above the rim. Maybe I'm crimping them too much?

I meant to post a photo of one of my bullets in my last post- sorry I obviously messed that up & didn't notice. I'll try again here.

I had already been shooting a 1911 that Roddy Toyota built for me for a couple of years before I got a GT45. I just shot it with what I already had loaded & it ran fine. (4.0 grains of WST behind a #68 LSWC.) This photo is the sample load he gave me, I load to match the seating & crimp of that. Roddy suggested a crimp of .460" - .462"

I haven't tested geometries of loads beyond that on the GT45 because I've never had trouble with it. I need to accuracy-test loads someday, but I'm not shooting outdoors much the last couple of years so it hasn't been a huge priority.

As I said, I have played with powder charges to see what would reliably cycle, its been reliable but smoky below 2.5 grains of WST. I shot a match a couple of weeks ago shooting 2.9 grains WST at short line & had no alibis.

I'm not familiar w/ the GT 45 but, is the "junction" you mention a smooth interface? If not it should be taken care of by an experienced BE 'smith.

Ron Habegger

Im not sure the Quality Cast guy is still in business.  I heard from Bob Crow that the new guy is toss'n in the towel.  The old 160's that Bob used to make were great.  The newer ones had to be hand sorted and many culled out of a box.  I'd love it if a new batch of real "Quality" Quality cast bullets became available.  I'm pretty sure Valiant Bullets offers the same S 242 bullet.  If they have sharp shoulder and base they should shoot great.  I used 4.4~4.6 bullseye with great results.

Bking,

Sorry for any confusion; I'm shooting a Pardini GT45; not a 1911. It's a different beast with its own load idiosyncrasies that I'm trying to work out. I'd have to have faith in a great gunsmith before I'd trust them with my Pardini. BUT...if the ammo sensitivity problem could be worked out, I'm sure he would have repeat customers. There is a smith in Kansas who really impresses me.
My 1911 (a Rock River Limited Match) will eat anything I feed it. If the Pardini trigger wasn't so darn good, I'd sell it.  dipnet

Dipnet wrote:Bking,

Sorry for any confusion; I'm shooting a Pardini GT45; not a 1911. It's a different beast with its own load idiosyncrasies that I'm trying to work out. I'd have to have faith in a great gunsmith before I'd trust them with my Pardini. BUT...if the ammo sensitivity problem could be worked out, I'm sure he would have repeat customers. There is a smith in Kansas who really impresses me.
My 1911 (a Rock River Limited Match) will eat anything I feed it. If the Pardini trigger wasn't so darn good, I'd sell it.  dipnet

I'm talking about a GT45 as well- I have both. The same bullet seating / crimp that I had been shooting in my 1911 has worked for my GT45 as well. Let me know if you would like photos of my feed ramp/ trigger block transition to compare with yours. Its really a very simple gun compared to the 1911, don't be afraid to pull it apart & explore how the feed is failing. If its a matter of reshaping the back of the trigger block or ramp a bit it wouldn't be that big a deal to do yourself.

This year I've been shooting both in matches (one for CF & one for .45) & I definitely score better with the GT45. That said I'm no great shooter yet.

Good luck getting LSWC's feeding in the Pardini, I know some people have trouble with them but its worth trying to match my load. I've never had trouble with my Pardini feeding these bullets.

wow!!!! Roddy suggested a crimp of .460" - .462", that's one heck of a crimp on a lead .452 bullet,

Bking,
I love the design of that gun. I am one of those nuts who needs to dissemble a new gun on the way home from the gun store to see how it works (where that spring go...). I am flustered that you can get standard LSWC to function in your gun. Let's compare guns.

I have the six in model and am currently using the weakest of the three springs. I have a Matchdot II sight mounted to the gun using the sledge (see picture in avatar). How is yours set up? Thanks, dipnet

DavidR wrote:wow!!!! Roddy suggested a crimp of .460" - .462", that's one heck of a crimp on a lead .452 bullet,

It's really a Giles thing.

Article:


From In My Experience - Dec 1992 American Rifleman


More On Taper Crimp


Editor: In my gunsmithing days (‘51-’83) I specialized in target pistols, primarily .45s. Early on I would get customer complaints where the gun failed to go completely into battery, i.e. the slide did not go all the way forward. Nearly always the cause was a reload with a short case.


[size=13]The case had been flared to receive the bullet and the standard roll crimp did not quite remove the flare. Or alternatively, the customer believed the case should not be crimped at all and the roll crimp failed to straighten the flare, which would hang up in the taper of the .45 chamber. The answer, of course, was to sort the cases carefully, eliminating the short ones. As usual, not everyone wanted to bother.[/size]


Another disadvantage of the roll crimp was that the degree of crimp varied directly with the length of the case. Long case, hard crimp – short case, no crimp. This caused not only malfunction but inaccuracy as well. Since I test fired every gun at least 100 rounds and guaranteed a specific level of accuracy. I looked for a way to avoid trimming all cases to a standard length. But I could not afford to discard the short ones.


My previous toolmaking and inventing experience led me to the tapered crimp. It requires a separate operation, of course, but has several advantages over the roll crimp.

• One was that a slight difference in case length made little difference in the degree of crimp.
  

• Another was that cases lasted a lot longer before splitting. The taper crimp did not “work” case mouth brass as severely as the roll crimp. Crimp-caused malfunctions were eliminated.
  

• The taper crimp also prevented telescoping, where the bullet slides back in the case when it hits the loading ramp.
  

• Finally I seldom had to discard a case because it was short. So what kind of accuracy are we talking about for these taper crimped reloads?
  

First a bit more history. It soon became apparent that my time would be better spent if I bought reloads even though I had two Star reloaders. Fortunately, I knew a few really capable reloaders. Gene Wilson and Joe Maszk come to mind. Frank Shuster was a top bullet caster also. Joe Mazak loaded sample quantities of those good bullets with powder charges from 3.3 to 4.4 grs. of Bullseye, taper crimped to about .463” at the case mouth gave the best accuracy. Cases were all one kind and loaded on Joe’s Star machine. Seldom did I see factory ammo that would shoot as well, and when I did, the military guys had it.


And the numbers? Well, I made more than 4,000 target .45s over the years and must certainly have fired at least half a million taper crimped .45 reloads. I guaranteed each .45 capable of shooting five shots into 1-3/4 in at 50 yds. and fired an average 1-1/4 in test group. My personal best from a Colt .45 was 5 shots in .39 in. at 50 yds. And I had a fair number of groups at ½ in. Under 1 in. was not uncommon at all. I didn’t always send the best test group with the pistol but I did always include loading data. I designed a taper crimper for the Star machine so there was no extra operation. Ernest Whalen of Heatbath Corp. made and marketed the taper crimper for a number of years, paying a small royalty for use of my design.


My customers had most of the above info. Guess I should have made it available to all handgunners. But I tend to put things off, like trimming cases, for instance.


John E. Giles - Odessa, Fla

Jack H wrote:

DavidR wrote:wow!!!! Roddy suggested a crimp of .460" - .462", that's one heck of a crimp on a lead .452 bullet,

It's really a Giles thing.

Exactly. Roddy gave me a little article by Giles with crimp dimensions for .45 & .38 special. Roddy gave me a dummy loaded on his press to match & that's what I used to set my .45 dies up.

Dipnet, I'll document my GT45 this evening if I'm able to get the time (If not I'll get to it tomorrow). Mine is a 5" with a frame-mounted Aimpoint. The guy I bought it from said he couldn't get it to feed LSWC's, but I've never had trouble with it. I really think it has more to do with how the bullet is loaded than the particular gun.

Bking,
I taper crimp all ammo used in semiautos and roll crimp ammo used in revolvers. I've noted changes in the appearences of GTs over time, e.g., the early 6-inch guns did not have the forward cut outs on the frame. I wonder if there were other changes that were not cosmetic. The data for the Army Marksmanship Unit load (185 grain Zero JHP, 4.5 to 4.7 grs. VV N310, OAL: 1.20, crimp=0.469) works very well in my gun. Round nose or round shoulder bullets work well (in terms of function), but it is very frustrating to have poor performance with lead bullets. The ones that feed well, Precision'S 200 gr RNFP and Hornady's 200 gr LSWC (both have a round nose and feed well). I wish I could get my Zero 185 gr LSWC HP to shoot in this gun or other standard configuration LSWC like the one you pictured.

With the slide locked open and looking downward into the chamber, bullets lacking a round or beveled nose hang up on the step-like junction between the trigger housing (insert, part #26) and the barrel ramp. The fron of the trigger housing is slightly contoured with a bullet feed 'ramp' but this does not perfectly align with the barrel's feed ramp. 

Prior to this issue with the GT, I never paid much attention to crimp as I always used a light crimp (believing a strong crimp could affect bullet performance). Dipnet

there was much talk over that old giles article, many thought it was a misprint, but some that knew him said those bullets were ones he cast and were sized down, its too much crimp for todays lead commercially sold bullets imo, so im sticking with whats been tested and shown to be the most accurate and reliable .467-.469

DavidR wrote:there was much talk over that old giles article, many thought it was a misprint, but some that knew him said those bullets were ones he cast and were sized down, its too much crimp for todays lead commercially sold bullets imo, so im sticking with whats been tested and shown to be the most accurate and reliable .467-.469

Maybe there's a better way to crimp, but the test targets Roddy made with my gun (stock Range Officer barrel) are 1.5", so I'm matching the loads he shot those with.

Gil Hebard over the phone read to me a note from Giles saying .463 crimp.