Chrono Results 1911 vs Revolver


PDA






bluetopper
September 11, 2007, 07:13 PM
Purchased a new chrono off ebay and had time to try it out today using my 45acp, 200gr SWC reloads from D&G Reloading (www.qualityammo.com).
Fired 10 shots each from my Dan Wesson Pointman 1911, Taurus 455 revolver w/ 6.5'' compensated barrel. And with my other Taurus 455 snubbie 2" compensated barrel.

The DW 1911 avg. velocity was 968 fps. 35fps deviation hi to low
Taurus 455 Rev. 6.5'' avg. velocity was 1033 fps. 17fps deviation hi to low
Taurus 455 Rev. 2'' avg. velocity was 862 fps. 21fps deviation hi to low

I was quite surprised the 6.5'' rev. averaged a greater velocity than my 1911. The cylinder/barrel gap must not make as much of a difference in velocity as I had feared. And also was happily surprised at only a 100fps drop off in the snubbie avg. velocity vs my 1911.

I highly recommend these reloads from D&G. I knew before hand it was tack driving ammo and proof is in the pudding, it is quite peppy also.

If you enjoyed reading about "Chrono Results 1911 vs Revolver" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
North Bender
September 11, 2007, 07:21 PM
Good work Parasite. Pretty low deviations compared to the East Block ammo I commonly test.

A new chrony will take you to places you don't know about yet.

Fumbler
September 11, 2007, 08:28 PM
was quite surprised the 6.5'' rev. averaged a greater velocity than my 1911.
The rifling in the 6.5" revolver barrel is almost 2.5" longer than the 1911.
Revolver barrels are measured from the forcing cone to the muzzle, the 1911 is measured from the breech face to the muzzle.
Thus, the 1911 length includes the chamber (which is almost 0.9" long) while the revolver measurement does not include the chamber.
With almost 2.5" of effective barrel you can see why the velocities will be higher.

eldon519
September 11, 2007, 08:45 PM
I'd be interested to see some results for some 230gr ball ammo if you ever get a chance to try it.

ranger335v
September 11, 2007, 09:26 PM
Not only is there a difference in the effective barrel lengths, I'd bet there is a significant difference in the powder charges too.

Jimmy Newman
September 11, 2007, 09:48 PM
Why would there be a significant difference in the powder charges? He said he was using the same ammo in all three handguns.

bluetopper
September 11, 2007, 10:08 PM
Yes, all three firearms used the same ammo.

eldon519, I don't anticipate chronoing 230 ball ammo at the present time. I just bought a new turret press and plan on rolling my own for a while with SWC bullets. But if I do get hold of some ball bullets I'll let you know.

Jim K
September 11, 2007, 10:17 PM
That pretty well duplicates other tests, and bears out the old "rule of thumb" that there is about a 50 fps difference for each inch of barrel.

In fact, the barrel-cylinder gap, unless excessive, makes very little difference. In tests with the gap sealed (so the barrel and cylinder were the same, eliminating any variation in barrels) the difference was around 20-30 fps, so small it was in the "noise level" for variations among cartridges from the same box.

Jim

MikePGS
September 11, 2007, 10:57 PM
Very nice. I always like to see chronographs, so thank you for posting your results.

1911Tuner
September 11, 2007, 11:07 PM
The DW 1911 avg. velocity was 968 fps.
Taurus 455 Rev. 6.5'' avg. velocity was 1033 fps.

55 fps difference between the two. The rifled portion of the DW barrel is about 4.2 inches. (5.1 inch barrel nominal with .900 inch of that being chamber) With a 2.5-inch difference the velocity loss per inch woule be...
22 fps per inch. Allowing for the comp would probably adjust that to about 30-35 fps per inch. It appears that the greatest percentage of velocity loss occurs in short barrels...which would suggest that the powder burn rate in that particular ammunition is geared more toward barrels 4 inches and longer.

It would be interesting to duplicate the test with handloads made up with varying powder burn rates to see if this bears out. Unique could be the slow number, with Bullseye or HP-38 as the quick one. Of course, peak pressures would be the wild card. Without a way to adjust for near identical pressures, you'd be comparing apples to oranges. Still might be interesting, though.

bluetopper
September 11, 2007, 11:38 PM
On these particular ones I tested, D&G advertises they load these with Titegroup powder. How much I don't know. I'm sure he'd tell if asked.

Here's a pic of the revolvers used and their compensated barrels. The ammo used in the chrono is not the type pictured of course.
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o182/bendebval/tauruss2.jpg

XLMiguel
September 11, 2007, 11:58 PM
Good input, mucho gracias!

I have two Commanders & a GM, good to know there really isn't much loss in the 3/4" difference in barrel length, though I'd definitely go with a lighter weight (185 or 200 gr) bullet in s 3" OM.

The only .45 I have in revolver is a Vacquero, which is a puppy with cowboy loads, but use both hands with them Grizzly 300 gr. @ 1250 fps!

ranger335v
September 14, 2007, 06:36 PM
"He said he was using the same ammo in all three handguns."

Oops, I missed that. MOST revolver loads seem to have more powder than most pistols but not in this instance. My bad.

I have no answer to why...maybe the vagaries of guns? If so, this illustrates why different loading manuals give different velocities with similar charges.

1911Tuner
September 14, 2007, 06:43 PM
If so, this illustrates why different loading manuals give different velocities with similar charges.

The data given in reloading manuals are representative rather than exact. The velocities shown were obtained with that gun, and with that particular lot of (name your brand) powder, and with that lot of primers, with that bullet...and bullets have lot to lot variations too.

cherryriver
September 14, 2007, 11:33 PM
Just to throw in, a few weekends ago, I had my 88-year old Colt New Service 1917 and my excellent late-model 1991 at the range. I was checking my USPSA major loads, 230gr Rainiers with 4.5gr-5.0gr WST and decided to fill up a few moonclips for the New Service.
Danged but if the old sixgun didn't make about 40-50fps more than the Government Model. And the bore on the old warhorse isn't pretty at all.
And danged but if that doesn't knock out one of my old assumptions.
One more- my 1959 Colt .357 Model four-incher is way faster than my six-inch 1974 Smith M-28 Highway Patrolman, about 50-60fps as I recall, both with .38+P and midrange .357.
The four-inch 1978 Diamonback is another speedball, passing up it's brother Python almost every time.
Sometimes I think I don't know what I know.
Bill

Peter M. Eick
September 15, 2007, 04:38 PM
Try running your revolver over the chrono where you only use the same cylinder each time. I found that cuts the SD dramatically.

Ol` Joe
September 15, 2007, 05:24 PM
Try running your revolver over the chrono where you only use the same cylinder each time. I found that cuts the SD dramatically

Yep, each hole is an new chamber. If one could measure the pressure it would vary from shot to shot also. That`s something I`ve thought of at times when someone claims they fired 2-3 rds of a new load with no signs of trouble then had a primer go or other problem arise. I wonder if the load is near/on the edge and something about that one hole is different enough to cause pressures to rise, kind of like working up and shooting a cartridge in one rifle then useing it in another.

bluetopper
September 15, 2007, 06:53 PM
In the two revolvers I tested the standard deviation was 17 & 21 fps respectively.

Remarkably low......almost unheard of low, in my opinion using all cylinders.

Lower than my match barreled 1911 with no cylinder/barrel gap.

Peter M. Eick
September 16, 2007, 09:20 AM
That is low but not unbelieveable. I have seen some chambers (meaning just useing 1 of 6) due under 10 fps SD's with 20 round strings but they are not common.

My 357 sig (229 sport) will routinely do 7-9 FPS SD's on a 20 round string with AA9 and 147 XTP's.

A quick scan of my master database shows that my detective special runs 5 FPS SD's for a 20 round string of 3.7 grns of AA2imp with a 158 Lasercast swc using all chambers.

My 1950 38/44 OD does 13 fps SD on a 20 rnd string with all chambers with the same load.

My Pre-27 8 3/8" (1954) does 12 fps SD on a 20 rnd string with all chambers for the same load.

2 of my pre-war 38/44 HD's do 13 and 14 respectively for the same 20 rnd string all chambers same load.

Those same 2 38/44 HD's do 14 and 17 FPS SD's for 20 rounds of 3.5 grns of Titegroup with a 158 Lasercast SD.

Now take those same 2 38/44 HD's and put 4.2 grns of Univ clays and the same bullet you get 26 and 33 FPS SD's for a 20 round string using all chambers.


Thus his numbers appear with in the realm of reason to me.

bluetopper
September 16, 2007, 09:14 PM
Low standard deviations in bullet velocity are much more representative of consistent powder loadings in the ammunition than the firearm they are fired out of.

If you enjoyed reading about "Chrono Results 1911 vs Revolver" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!