IMR Target powder in the .45 ACP or .38 Special

I did a search and did not find any threads on this powder.  Picked up a can at the gun show today, just to try it out.
Has anyone tried it in the .45 or .38?  IMR is saying it is a substitute for Bullseye but the only load data I found for the .45 ACP starts at around 5.0 grains for a 200 grain cast bullet at 900 fps.  For the .38 Special with a 148 HBWC, it starts at 2.4 grains at 762 fps.
Just wondering if I can reduce it to below 5.0 for the .45 safely.

I did find the latest burn rate chart.  Target is right behind Bullseye.
https://imrpowder.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/burnratecolor.pdf

Odie Hitt has been using this powder.

Ghillieman wrote:Odie Hitt has been using this powder.

I'll ask via Facebook, how it is working for him.

As I understand it, these powders are supposed to be a volume for volume replacement for the Alliant counterparts. If your measure is throwing your normal charge of Bullseye you should be getting the same velocity?  Maybe? But extrapolating IMR data seems to indicate That a 4.2 grain charge should give something like 800 fps.  So start there and work up and down.

Wobbley wrote:As I understand it, these powders are supposed to be a volume for volume replacement for the Alliant counterparts. If your measure is throwing your normal charge of Bullseye you should be getting the same velocity?  Maybe? But extrapolating IMR data seems to indicate That a 4.2 grain charge should give something like 800 fps.  So start there and work up and down.

I got a response from Odie.  He's been using 3.8 of the Target powder but felt he could go to 3.6.  He seems to think it is mildly hotter than Bullseye.
Will try working up some loads tomorrow and see how it goes.

I just took a look at a past issue of Handoader magazine where they featured IMR Target.  The concur with Odie that it is slightly hotter than Bullseye.  The listed 38 148 WC load was hotter than Bullseye, so they said.  But the 45 load was 5.9 gr for 985 fps.   Even that may be too hot.

My Star 3.5 BE powder slide throws 3.55 grains of Target.  I loaded up some 185 Zero lead HP's and some Bullet Works 200 grain lead SWC's.  Should have some time to hit the range tomorrow and try them out in the afternoon.

I looked at the data before for .38 Special, and concluded that the volume would be too low. The starting load with a 148 hbwc is 2.4gr, which is 0.23cc in volume. My Lee measure starts at 0.30cc. That load is said to give 760fps, which is a bit fast, so I'd likely want 0.20cc. By comparison, WST requires 0.32-0.34cc.

I took the loads out the range this afternoon.  It was around 57 degrees and slightly windy.  The 3.55 grain Target load with the 185 and 200 grain lead bullets performed almost exactly like the 3.5 BE load in my Range Officer (slide mounted dot) and my Clark Heavy Slide.  I really could not tell the difference between the two powders.  So, now I have a substitute for Bullseye when needed.

I would imagine there might be a slight difference in felt recoil between the heavier loads as you get near the 5.0 range, but with this light a load it was a wash.

I don't plan on doing any test loads for my Clark .38.  2.7 BE works just fine and there is no point messing with it.