Low Recoil loads for 45LC cowboy action shooting


PDA






Mitchmarkl
May 11, 2011, 02:12 PM
I have been trying to come up with a low recoil load for cowboy action shooting. I started using 4.6 grns of Clays with a 200 grn rnfp bullet. That's the starting load. I actually tried less powder, and did achieve a little less recoil, but the loads don't burn completely and I get a lot of soot on one side of the brass which probably means that there isn't enough pressure to seal the chamber. I'm using mixed brass, but mostly Starline. I'm thinking about using Trailboss. It seems to be bulkier, and probably will fill the case better. They claim that it is designed for reduced recoil loads.
The big question is; should I try to buy 180 grain or 160 grain bullets which will have a heavier charge, or a heavier bullet that uses a lighter charge. I'm assuming that the heavier the bullet the more felt recoil. I'm trying to figure out by looking at the reloading specs how bullet speed and chamber pressure affect felt recoil.
Wow, what a mouth full.
Anyway, I'm hoping someone out there has already done some work on this and can give me a little guidance.
Any takers?

If you enjoyed reading about "Low Recoil loads for 45LC cowboy action shooting" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jerkface11
May 11, 2011, 02:18 PM
I'd use trailboss and the 200gr bullets.

rcmodel
May 11, 2011, 02:20 PM
Most all fixed sight .45 Colts will only shoot to the sights with one bullet weight.
That is generally a 250-255 grain bullet.

Very light bullets will not recoil enough to kick the gun up where the sights are looking, so be aware of that.

Were it me, I would probably try a 230 grain bullet with 5.5 to 6.0 grains of Bullseye and see where it shoots.
If you are going to shoot a .45 Colt in CAS, you will need to learn to deal with at least a little recoil.

Sides that, no self respecting cowboy or outlaw would be caught dead with mouse-fart .45 Colts loads in his gun.
Wait, maybe he would be caught dead with them!!!

rc

ReloaderFred
May 11, 2011, 02:49 PM
In SASS, one of the considerations in using light loads is the fact that steel targets are being shot at relatively short ranges, and splatter and ricochet are big factors. It's much better to have a bullet hit the target and end up on the ground below it, that have it zinging back or at odd angles. Light loads are also much easier on expensive steel targets, making replacement necessary at longer intervals.

Hodgdon has quite a few loads listed under Cowboy Action Data in both their printed and on-line resources. I suggest you go to their website, if you don't have their manual. They list loads for Universal, HP-38, Titegroup, Clays and Trail Boss with that bullet.

You're also going to get some sooting of the case with any of the lighter loads. The case walls are relatively thick on the .45 Colt case and it takes quite a bit of pressure to get a good seal. More pressure results in more recoil, so my suggestion is to not worry about the sooting. I don't with mine.

Also, the 200 gr. RNFP is one of the most commonly used in .45 Colt for SASS, with the 180 gr. RNFP probably next in line. The 200 gr. bullet will give good accuracy in both the revolvers and rifles, along with reliable feeding through the lever action rifles.

Hope this helps.

Fred

USSR
May 11, 2011, 03:42 PM
The big question is; should I try to buy 180 grain or 160 grain bullets which will have a heavier charge, or a heavier bullet that uses a lighter charge. I'm assuming that the heavier the bullet the more felt recoil.

I would definately go with a heavier bullet. I'm using 265gr cast bullets, and with 6.0gr of d@mn near any fast powder (BE, Red Dot, etc. - I'm using Solo 1000), recoil will be light and easily manageable. The Starline brass is tough, so you may get more sooted cases with them than with other makes of brass.

Don

Lost Sheep
May 11, 2011, 10:23 PM
You might try a light charge of Bullseye, held against the primer with some filler. It should run the pressure up high enough to seal the chamber, burn completely and then be clean otherwise.

Lost Sheep.

kingmt
May 12, 2011, 07:38 PM
I don't normaly chime in on these because to takes some work to get it right & some knowing what your doing. Also I haven't loaded that cartridge. I will give you a little info to base your test off from though. The faster the burn the less recoil but pressure climes much faster & in most straight walled cases by the time you see pressure signs you are way past over pressure. Also the heaver the bullet(more barring surface) the faster the pressure rises & less recoil. The tough one is the less volume in the case the faster the pressure rises & less recoil.

The kick doesn't come from the bullet leaving the gun but the pressure being released behind it. If the pressure is relieved before the bullet gets out of the barrel there is no recoil.

Cherokee
May 14, 2011, 11:14 AM
My SASS load for 10 years for 45 Colt rifle and pistol is 5.3 WST and 230 gr RFN. WST has more bulk than most fast powders but not like TB. I tried TB but did not like it as well.

helotaxi
May 14, 2011, 02:21 PM
The kick doesn't come from the bullet leaving the gun but the pressure being released behind it. If the pressure is relieved before the bullet gets out of the barrel there is no recoil.

So Newton was wrong? Please share since this sounds like Nobel prize stuff.

rcmodel
May 14, 2011, 02:28 PM
He must be talking about a military 75mm/90mm/105mm or 106mm Recoilless Rifle.

The back blast balances the recoil from accelerating the projectile out of the barrel.

If the gas were released sideways, or any other directing beside straight back, the fierce recoil of the projectile accelerating down the barrel would tear the Recoilless Rifle off it's somewhat flimsy mount!

Unfortunately, there is no way to make a sporting caliber Recoiless Rifle without blowing your head off with the back blast the first shot.

rc

kingmt
May 14, 2011, 05:41 PM
So Newton was wrong? Please share since this sounds like Nobel prize stuff.
If you don't want to accept it fine. If you want to test it great but I'm not taking the time to argue with you.

This is getting old.

ljnowell
May 14, 2011, 07:37 PM
If you don't want to accept it fine. If you want to test it great but I'm not taking the time to argue with you.

This is getting old.


How is it getting old? You only posted about it once, and then were asked for an explanation. Please educate those of us who disagree dont just take your ball and go home.

kingmt
May 14, 2011, 08:27 PM
How is it getting old? You only posted about it once, and then were asked for an explanation. Please educate those of us who disagree dont just take your ball and go home.
I would be glad to answer questions but helotaxi & rc aren't asking questions instead they just try to discredit what I'm saying without offering anything useful in return.

This is also the part I'm getting tired of. Not this thread but many threads on this form. I try to give useful info where I know but if I don't know something I don't care to admit it. I know a lot but I can't know everything.

Anyhow back to your question. Which part doesn't make since to you?

john bh
May 14, 2011, 08:39 PM
I have a Ruger 45LC Vaquero Bisley. I'm using Unique 6.4. Whats good about the Unique fills the casing pretty good. I started w/ 6.0 and played around with diffrent loads. I felt the recoil pretty soft, and really fun to shoot.

redneck2
May 14, 2011, 08:40 PM
I suspect recoil is due to the pressure (push) of the gasses in the chamber/barrel against the face of the breech. A heavier bullet (i.e., larger diameter and/or simply weight) produces more recoil because the gasses have longer time to work against the breech face. If you have a larger caliber, there is added area for the gasses to affect.

Also, there is the action-reaction thing going on. Sit in a chair with caster wheels and throw a golf ball. Little or no rearward movement. Now throw a basketball. You'll roll backward in reaction to the added mass.

Even if there were zero pressure at the muzzle, you'd still get reaction to the movement of the projectile.

In any event, less mass (weight) and less speed = less recoil. As noted, a pistol's sight picture is calibrated to a given amount of recoil to compensate for muzzle rise. I'd look in something like the Lyman manual for advice. Since Trailboss was specifically formulated for CAS shooters, that's where I'd start.

I use mid range loads of Universal Clays with 255's in my Ruger Bisley. They seem pretty tame to me, but I'm not a CAS guy.

john bh
May 14, 2011, 08:45 PM
I'm using Miss. 250, take what I say with a grain of salt I,m still new to
reloading. The people on this sight are just great people,always willing to help.

kingmt
May 14, 2011, 09:54 PM
"I suspect recoil is due to the pressure (push) of the gasses in the chamber/barrel against the face of the breech."

Think about this. If you use a fast burn powder the pressure can & will go higher then the slow powder but yet there is less recoil. If you stick a bullet(excluding autos) there is no recoil but you still have pressure on the breach.

"less speed = less recoil" Yes because there is less pressure.

" A heavier bullet (i.e., larger diameter" This is true refer back to you golf ball vs basket ball example. This is also why what rc said is ridicules.

"or simply weight) produces more recoil because the gasses have longer time to work against the breech face" A lot of people believe this but it just isn't true. However if you was trying to make the heaver bullet travel at the same speed It would require much more pressure & should deliver more recoil.
" Also the heaver the bullet(more barring surface) the faster the pressure rises & less recoil." As I said here A heaver bullet offers more resistance so the pressure builds faster. Powder needs to reach a cretin pressure to burn right so lighter bullets need more of the same powder to burn right. This is also what makes some powders spiky. The more pressure the faster the burn. That's starting to get on another subject though.

"As noted, a pistol's sight picture is calibrated to a given amount of recoil to compensate for muzzle rise." I have no idea what the truth is here but I can't see recoil affecting bullet path since it has already left the barrel. I would think it would relate more to energy transfer between bullet & resistance to air. The heaver bullet should lose less momentum "a object in motion tends to stays in motion & a object at rest tends to stay at rest".

Red Neck

I'm not trying to call you on what your saying. It was just that it was so well written that it help me explain what I was saying. I can work with logical statements.

murf
May 14, 2011, 10:58 PM
felt recoil equals the muzzle velocity of your weapon. which is equal to the bullet mass times the bullet velocity divided by the weapon mass.

murf

helotaxi
May 14, 2011, 10:58 PM
There is a component of the recoil that is attributable to the jetting of the burnt propellant (ejecta; based on on charge weight and its exit velocity, usually assumed to be about 4000fps, the free expansion speed of most smokeless propellant) but it isn't the primary component and to argue that it's absence would totally eliminate any recoil is absurd. If that were the case then a bow or slingshot would have no recoil. Both most certainly do.

Running some simple numbers with a recoil calculator will demonstrate the point. Just some basic numbers: 250gn bullet running 800fps from a 2 pound revolver using an 8gn charge has 6.5ft-lbs of free recoil energy. Reducing the theoretical charge weight to 0.001gn (essentially zero ejecta) reduces recoil a whole 0.2ft-lbs. Far from eliminating it entirely. The reduction is a whole 3%.

Recoil also certainly affects the aiming of a low velocity round. The muzzle starts to climb before the bullet exits the muzzle. It isn't usually much, but it is far from negligible. Shoot a light bullet and a heavy bullet at the same muzzle energy (the lighter bullet will be moving faster and will shoot flatter) and you will notice at closer ranges that the heavier bullet will impact higher because the recoil affects the aim.

If you're going to take issue with people questioning you when you post information that is clearly false, you're going to have a tough time of things.

redneck2
May 15, 2011, 09:00 AM
I'm not trying to call you on what your saying. It was just that it was so well written that it help me explain what I was saying. I can work with logical statements.Gee, you mean those four years in Purdue Engineering weren't a waste???:D

Easy way to think of it. Anything going out the front is going to cause reaction (recoil) in the back. The heavier the firearm, the less felt recoil (stationary object tends to stay stationary).

Mass of the fire arm, mass of the projectile, and mass of the powder all have an effect.
As noted, a pistol's sight picture is calibrated to a given amount of recoil to compensate for muzzle rise." I have no idea what the truth is here but I can't see recoil affecting bullet path since it has already left the barrelRecoil begins before the bullet leaves the barrel, which affects the point of impact. True of both rifles and pistols. Changing loads can change point of impact. The higher the bore is above the line of sight, the more this is typically seen. Single action revolvers with a bore high above the grip may require sight recalibration if loads are changed significantly.

This is also why what rc said is ridicules.(sic)I wouldn't go there. He's absolutely correct. A Recoiless Rifle, bazooka, etc have low felt recoil because the mass of the propellant moving rearward offsets the mass of the projectile. If you don't believe that, cap off the open back end of the tube and try to hang on.

If you hang around here for a while, you'll figure out who tries to blow smoke and who doesn't.

Walkalong
May 15, 2011, 10:24 AM
Powder weight calculates into felt recoil just like bullet weight and velocity. The larger charge expends more energy. It does so more slowly, but the energy is felt none the less. That is why you can get less recoil with a fast powder for the same bullet weight and velocity as with more of a slower powder, although sometimes it can feel snappier.

Unfortunately Handloads.com is down, or I would link to their recoil calculator.

helotaxi
May 15, 2011, 11:23 AM
Powder weight calculates into felt recoil just like bullet weight and velocity. The larger charge expends more energy. It does so more slowly, but the energy is felt none the less. That is why you can get less recoil with a fast powder for the same bullet weight and velocity as with more of a slower powder, although sometimes it can feel snappier.

Unfortunately Handloads.com is down, or I would link to their recoil calculator.
It figures in the same way that bullet weight does: its a product of the mass of the charge and the velocity. Just like the bullet portion of the equation, it relies on Newton's Third Law.

http://kwk.us/recoil.html That's a link to a recoil calculator.

Freely expanding burning smokeless propellant expands at roughly 4000fps regardless of the relative burn rate. The burn rate simply explains how quickly the pressure builds (how quickly the solid mass of the powder converts to the gaseous mass of the combustion products; same mass different form) when that expansion is contained. If the pressure builds quickly (fast burning powder) the initial bullet acceleration is higher and F=MA tells us that higher acceleration means higher force. We already explained the source of the higher force, higher pressure, but Newton's Third Law tells us that the force works in both directions, both pushing the bullet down the bore and pushing the firearm back into the shooter. The higher weight of the firearm means that it's acceleration is much slower given an equal force.

Where the difference between a fast and slow powder comes into play is when you start looking at the plot of pressure over time and figuring the area under the curve. If we could contain unlimited pressure, the fastest powder would be all that we would ever need. You would simply fill the case with fast powder and let'r rip. The pressure would run very high and the large amount of powder would provide a large volume of gas to maintain the pressure at a higher level as the bullet accelerated down the bore providing a larger pressure vessel.

The problem is that there is a limit on the amount of pressure that the firearm and cartridge can safely contain. This is where slower powders come into play. With a slower powder, the gas volume is somewhat regulated and pressure is kept in check. By having the powder burn more slowly, the total amount of combustion product can be increased but the slower rate of conversion allows the bullet to begin down the bore and the chamber volume to expand keeping the pressure in check. A by product of this is that the pressure curve is more gradual and remains at a higher pressure longer. The result is that when compared to a faster burning powder, for the same peak pressure, the area under the pressure curve is greater. The area under the curve represents the total force imparted on the bullet. Higher total force means higher total acceleration and higher resultant velocity.

The more gradual ramping up of the pressure with slower powders also explains the differing characterization of the recoil between two cartridges with the exact same bullet and velocity, one using a fast powder and the other a slower powder. The fast powder has a high initial pressure and a greater initial acceleration resulting in a more "snappy" recoil. The slower powder creates more of a "push" than a "snap" because the initial acceleration is slower.

In general the round with the slower powder will have a larger charge weight. That means an increase in free recoil, but the difference is usually quite small. Perceived recoil is a different story and the more sustained push of the slower powder can make the recoil difference seem like more than it really is. Because we're talking perception, this differs for each person. Firearm design can play a large part in this as well.

ReloaderFred
May 15, 2011, 12:26 PM
Or, you could all do like I do and load up some different loads, with varying bullet and powder weights, and go to the range.......... When I find the one that feels the best, and prints the best on target, I've got my load.

This saves all that arguing over fur vs. feathers stuff.......

Hope this helps.

Fred

kingmt
May 15, 2011, 03:53 PM
I typed this before church so more post have been added since then:

"If that were the case then a bow or slingshot would have no recoil. Both most certainly do."

A bow & a sling shot both kick forward which sounds like it would help prove my point but if you think about it it doesn't because it really doesn't. The kick from the bow is the energy of the string being stopped by the frame of the bow. Newer bows have rubber bumpers to smash & absorb some of that energy before it gets to the frame much like the soft metal in a car smashing to reduce the shock to you. Same thing with a sling shoot.

As for the calculator I know nothing about it & have other thing to do so I probably won't be studying it any time soon.

"If you're going to take issue with people questioning you when you post information that is clearly false, you're going to have a tough time of things."
You didn't question me & it certainly isn't false. Just because you don't understand doesn't make it wrong.

Red Neck
"Quote:
This is also why what rc said is ridicules.(sic)
I wouldn't go there. He's absolutely correct. A Recoiless Rifle, bazooka, etc have low felt recoil because the mass of the propellant moving rearward offsets the mass of the projectile. If you don't believe that, cap off the open back end of the tube and try to hang on.

If you hang around here for a while, you'll figure out who tries to blow smoke and who doesn't."

I'm not saying he is wrong in that manner. I think highly of RCs' post. He is a great contributor to this form & has given me good advice. I stated why his example didn't relate to what I was talking about but it is still correct information.

I don't know if I want to get into recoiling up because it is a little different subject even tho it is the same transfer of energy. It's not easy to explain them at the same time. Once one is understood the other is easier to explain.

Think like this:ignition all of the energy is transferred to the bullet minus the very small amount absorbed by chamber flex because the breach wont move. Until the bullet leaves the barrel no force can be applied to the firearm. once the bullet leaves the pressure is still shoving on the bullet & now the firearm is free to be shoved back. It is the force after the bullet has left the barrel. Use the bow example the string is pulled back to the frame driving the arrow forward when the string gets to the end of its travel the arrow keeps traveling but there is no resistance left in the arrow to drive the bow back. That's why it jumps forward.

As for post #22 I'll have to read it when I get time.

Walkalong
May 15, 2011, 07:07 PM
Or, you could all do like I do and load up some different loads, with varying bullet and powder weights, and go to the range.......... When I find the one that feels the best, and prints the best on target, I've got my load.

This saves all that arguing over fur vs. feathers stuff.......

Hope this helps.That's what I do too Fred. Low tech all the way. I'll leave all the math calculations to the smart folks. :)

Red Cent
May 15, 2011, 08:32 PM
Depends on your approach to SASS. SASS is a game that emulates gunfights. The game is to hit steel as fast as you can and transitions of firearms. SASS does not have a macho required power factor because the intent of the game was not to establish a winner that was decided on the depth of the crater on the target. That would inhibit/prohibit/discourage the fairer sex, young folk acquiring theirshooting skills, much less the danger of lead splatter and target damage.
The season of the gamer came and went recently, chased out of town amid jeers and rules. The loudest of them was safety. Nothing like a double squib to get your attention.
I have posted on this subject numerous times and I ask the same question. If your competitive juices flow, smile, load a 165gr lrnfp over 4.2 of Red Dot or American Select and enjoy a mild shooting load that will satisfy the most deaf of spotters. The round will work in most Marlins and most 1873s. I used the load in my early years until the powerful lure of competition made me switch to Ruger 3 screws. I shoot a 105gr semiwadcutter over 3.2 of American Select in both the revolver and rifle and it offers the same amenities as the aforementioned load in 45 Colt.
There is an important point to bring up. I shoot Traditional style (two hands). If you shoot duelist or gunfighter, you may want the recoil.
Be aware a NCer that shoots double duelist (JM Brown aka Fred Stough) shoots Ruger Bisleys in 45 Colt. He uses the Schofield case and a mild load light bullet. He has won the National title a couple of times and he has won the World title a couple of times. A wall full of plaques and a few gold buckles makes me smile when I hear remarks alluding to the mf loads.:evil:

helotaxi
May 15, 2011, 11:13 PM
"If that were the case then a bow or slingshot would have no recoil. Both most certainly do."

A bow & a sling shot both kick forward which sounds like it would help prove my point but if you think about it it doesn't because it really doesn't. The kick from the bow is the energy of the string being stopped by the frame of the bow. Newer bows have rubber bumpers to smash & absorb some of that energy before it gets to the frame much like the soft metal in a car smashing to reduce the shock to you. Same thing with a sling shoot.The initial recoil of a bow or slingshot is to the rear, you just don't notice it because you're pulling against the frame already. If you were on a frictionless surface, you would move to the rear when you released the arrow or sling bullet. Your reward velocity would be slowed slightly by the rebound but the bulk of the recoil is to the rear.

"If you're going to take issue with people questioning you when you post information that is clearly false, you're going to have a tough time of things."
You didn't question me & it certainly isn't false. Just because you don't understand doesn't make it wrong.Actually, I understand completely.

I don't know if I want to get into recoiling up because it is a little different subject even tho it is the same transfer of energy. It's not easy to explain them at the same time. Once one is understood the other is easier to explain.

Think like this:ignition all of the energy is transferred to the bullet minus the very small amount absorbed by chamber flex because the breach wont move. Until the bullet leaves the barrel no force can be applied to the firearm. once the bullet leaves the pressure is still shoving on the bullet & now the firearm is free to be shoved back. It is the force after the bullet has left the barrel. Use the bow example the string is pulled back to the frame driving the arrow forward when the string gets to the end of its travel the arrow keeps traveling but there is no resistance left in the arrow to drive the bow back. That's why it jumps forward.You really have no comprehension of what's going on. You really need to read a physics book and study Newton's laws of motion. If you're having trouble with the recoil effect on the POI read up on mechanics and moment arms.

kingmt
May 15, 2011, 11:35 PM
Sorry but I had to come back & edit this because I said some things I shouldn't have.

I understand for every action there is a equal & opposite reaction. This is a law & can not be changed. There is other variables that keep you from having the full equation. I am not going to turn this into a math problem. I was trying to give the OP a picture to figure out for himself what to do. Since you are still being rude I'm leaving it at this.

If you look in my signature it has been there every since I became a member & I have used it in my signature for over 7 years. I even have it on my arrows. I mean it a little different then he did but I still know the laws.

Anyhow I hope I'm done with this thread.

Red Cent
May 16, 2011, 05:25 PM
Well, if y'all are through fixing his watch............

In SASS, you can load without fear of violating the power factor rule. 400. Soft, huh?

Then for the soft recoil that is sought by those with acute arthritis, younguns, ladies that are repelled by recoil, and others, load a light bullet with a light charge. I used to argue with an old feller by the handle of Strawberry Lars about shotgun loads. Medium factory 12 gauge loads use a nominal 16 grains of XXX powder to achieve velocity. I loaded 12 gr American Select under a 7/8 oz of #8 shot. Sounded a little woosey but it would take down any knockdown and very little recoil. He railed about the load data book and swore that I would take out some who were standing with me.
In IDPA, shooters must meet a power factor (velocityXbullet weight/1000.
165 for 45cp. The 45acp shooters load 230s or bigger using a slow powder for a soft puch recoil. This is arguable, but I shoot with a 5 gun Grandmaster and this is his take on the masses and he practices the same.
We SASS members shoot more in a year than most will in a lifetime. There is no need to shake up that Colt, USFA, or other revolver you have had tricked out for the game.
My load can be fired with both hands, held tight, and I can get a 6" group at 21 feet shooting as fast as I can hit the hammer. Big and close I sliphammer.
Put on your thick skin and load that sucker soft.

OK guys, you can continue on the dissertation of Sir Newton and other factors of what CAUSES recoil.

RugerBob
May 16, 2011, 05:56 PM
If your using these for cas I figure its for revolver and rifle. So you don't want them so light they won't make it out of the rifle barrel. You will get blow back and therefore dirty brass with some powders. Ya gotta clean it anyways, I hope. In my 45s- 5 1/2" revolvers and 24" rifle I find 6.8 Unique a nice low recoil load with a 200gr RNFP. I tried a little lower, but found rifle brass extremely dirty. I think trailboss may be something you should try. I tried it, but felt more recoil with revolvers then with Unique. I'll take the dirty brass with Unique for my loads.
I do load trail boss for 38s for my wife tho, and its ok for her.
It depends on if your a gamer or just out for fun and trying to beat your previous scores.

Red Cent
May 16, 2011, 09:25 PM
Rugerbob, the sooty cartridges is the result of light crimp. I strongly crimp my dainty load and very little blowback shows.
Besides, the manly 45 Colt load I used clocked about 650fps. Made it out of the barrel fine. Every time, every Saturday and Sunday for over two years.

The spritely loaded 38s clock at about 795fps. Probably 850 in the rifle. So light. So fast recovery. Barrel doesn't rise:D. AWESOME!

With your load the little lady would take a couple seconds to recover from the muzzle rise:cool:. That is a pretty stiff load.

I have shot with a couple of ladies who have won the SASS World Championship multiple times. No 250 gr bullet and no 45s. The latest, Holy Terror, shoots a 125gr lrnfp 38 in the Evil Roy (grandfather) Specials(Uberti). I would guess about 750 fps. Little more muzzle flip than mine but not much.

Island Girl shoots 38s and uses somewhat the same load as Holy Terror. Maybe a little tamer. If you check around there is a pair of Great Westerns named after Lahnie. Five time world ladys champion.

Lahnie is in the middle. Thats Kill 'Em All Kate on the left. She has a beat a bunch of gals and guys on the east coast. Bunch of plaques and buckles. 38s, Ruger (real) flattops. Uses my load. 3 Cut (yeah, long, deep, and wide) is behind us. Now that character in the red shirt is a gamer. I'm trying to remem...................

http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee189/redcent69/Fluffy/CowgirlKillemallKateIslandgirlme.jpg

helotaxi
May 16, 2011, 09:55 PM
I understand for every action there is a equal & opposite reaction. This is a law & can not be changed. There is other variables that keep you from having the full equation. I am not going to turn this into a math problem. I was trying to give the OP a picture to figure out for himself what to do. Since you are still being rude I'm leaving it at this.

I'm plainly stating that what you are claiming is patently WRONG and if that is your definition of "rude" then so be it. If you cannot handle being wrong about something, that's on you. I can't just leave clearly incorrect information out there, uncorrected.

To this point your explanation has been completely outside the realm of the laws of physics. Now you claim that "other variables" keep ME from "having the full equation." Please enlighten me. As it stands right now your responses have been nothing more than "don't question me because I clearly know more than you!" despite demonstrating to the contrary. Smug arrogance is all I'm getting from you, well that and blissful ignorance.

That last comment you could possibly consider rude.

kingmt
May 17, 2011, 05:01 PM
I have explained everything so much that it has made it much more complex then it really is. I think the only thing you can't understand is why the heavier bullet can be loaded for less recoil. I said it the simplest in my first post. A heaver bullet reaches pressure faster. This means less powder is needed for the burn. Less powder can give you less kick. I never tried to tell him how to get them going at the same speed. just how to get less powder to burn right for less recoil.

I'm so sorry you are unable to understand that or how you are being rude.

If you are quoting me here then your also a lair because I never said this:"As it stands right now your responses have been nothing more than "don't question me because I clearly know more than you!" despite demonstrating to the contrary. Smug arrogance is all I'm getting from you, well that and blissful ignorance."

I have no idea how much you know but I do know what I know. As far as questioning me I don't remember you asking me a question. I only remember you trying to prove me wrong. The Laws you refer to are laws & you use truth but they are also the same Laws that prove what I'm trying to teach you. I think it is the 2nd Law. If all things were equal except powder charge weight(bullet weight, bullet mass, OAL, & burn rate) no one would argue it would have less recoil but when you change the bullet weight & bullet mass then now there is 3 obvious variables instead of 1 but there is still an unobvious factor. When you use the heaver bullet you also change the burn rate of the powder because of the higher pressure. This is also going to happen with less powder in the same weights of bullets. I'm not able to wright this out in a equation without way to much work which I don't know if you would understand then. I will just restate it back to the simple explanation that a heaver bullet with less mass needs less powder to reach correct pressure to burn right & less powder can cause less kick.

ljnowell
May 17, 2011, 08:48 PM
Kingmt, I have an idea. Its basically you arguing with everyone else saying you are right. Why don't you doa quick google search and find a few articles to back up your argument. An argument without support is very weak. I am sure a few of the other guys can do the same. We could settle this in this thread.

kingmt
May 17, 2011, 10:18 PM
At this point I fell like I did at post 11
"
Quote:
Originally Posted by helotaxi http://www.thehighroad.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=7309139#post7309139)
So Newton was wrong? Please share since this sounds like Nobel prize stuff.

If you don't want to accept it fine. If you want to test it great but I'm not taking the time to argue with you.

This is getting old."

I've already said everything that is needed to know. Prove it for your self. It's not hard to load up a few testers but I'm not going to do all the work. I've already done my own test & it was easy to come to an conclusion when I tried to get 105gr bullets to work in a 30-06. I will never try that again with Varget. Bullseye wasn't bad.

Seeing is believing. Try it & see what you find. If you need any help please PM me.

ljnowell
May 17, 2011, 10:34 PM
I certainly don't need help at all. When you argue the laws of physics and time proven facts then insist EVERYONE else is wrong and you are solely correct then the burden of proof is on you. Post something to support your statements, or don't pollute threads wit misinformation.

helotaxi
May 17, 2011, 11:42 PM
I have explained everything so much that it has made it much more complex then it really is. I think the only thing you can't understand is why the heavier bullet can be loaded for less recoil. I said it the simplest in my first post. A heaver bullet reaches pressure faster. This means less powder is needed for the burn. Less powder can give you less kick. I never tried to tell him how to get them going at the same speed. just how to get less powder to burn right for less recoil.

No one is debating that you can load a heavy bullet to a lower velocity and get a lighter recoil. But you can likewise load a light bullet to a lower velocity and get even less recoil than the lightest heavy bullet load. In handgun rounds, especially, the powder charge weight creates an almost negligible amount of recoil until you get into the heavy magnums that use a lot of slow powder. Even with those loads, because of the bullet weight and the massive acceleration that must be imparted to get that heavy bullet up to magnum velocities in a short barrel, the powder jetting is still a very small part of the total recoil.

I will just restate it back to the simple explanation that a heaver bullet with less mass needs less powder to reach correct pressure to burn right & less powder can cause less kick.
How do you have a heavier bullet with less mass?

What I think that you're trying to say is that a light load with a heavy bullet can have less recoil, but less than what? A light load with a light bullet will still recoil less. If you compare loads of the same energy with different bullet weights, the load with the lighter bullet will have less recoil. Sure, you can build a load with a light bullet that has a ton of recoil and a load with a heavy bullet that is relatively light shooting, but you can always make a load that recoils less than that heavy bullet load by switching to a lighter bullet. If the load is for SASS, there is no power factor to worry about, only a muzzle velocity. Loading to the min velocity with a light bullet will have much less recoil than that same velocity with a heavier bullet. The powder used is irrelevant to this.

Playing with a recoil calculator can provide some very interesting insight to the relationships between charge weight, bullet weight, muzzle energy and recoil. Comparing 2 loads of equal recoil one using a 200gn bullet and one using a 255gn bullet using weights of Unique from Hornady #8 to give the appropriate velocities (1000 and 800fps and 8.0 and 6.3gns of powder, respectively) the 200gn load yields an extra 22.6% increase in muzzle energy. Setting muzzle energy equal (800 vs. 900fps and 6.3 vs 6.9gns of Unique) yields a 10% lower recoil momentum for the 200gn bullet.

The contribution of the specific powder to the recoil impulse is nothing more than a result of the velocity of the bullet (the most significant portion of the recoil) and the weight of the powder charge. If it were possible to create two loads where the only difference was the powder burn rate, the only difference would be in the characterization of the recoil, not in its actual amount.

Regardless of any of the above, that's not what had issue with. The issue is your statement regarding there being no recoil until the bullet leaves the muzzle. That is patently false. Recoil begins the instant the bullet begins to move. The force exerted by the powder is external to both the bullet and the gun, satisfying Newton's 1st law. This force is omni-directional but contained by the chamber leaving the bullet to give. It accelerates according to Newton's 2nd law. To satisfy Newton's 3rd law, the action of the bullet accelerating is offset by the same force acting in the opposite direction creating the recoil acceleration of the gun. Picture this: replace the powder with a weightless spring (no rebound or ejecta to consider). There is now no powder burn effect. When does recoil begin? Alternately consider an infinitely long barrel. Would it actually have no recoil? Really?

"Recoil upward" is nothing more than muzzle climb caused by the recoil vector being above the pivot point created by the shooter's wrist. If there was no shooter and the gun was allowed to recoil completely freely, the muzzle would move in relation to the gun's center of mass. If that center were below the bore line, the muzzle would climb. Since recoil begins the instant the bullet begins to move, some muzzle climb occurs while the bullet is still in the bore. The slower the bullet the more the muzzle moves before the bullet clears the barrel. Additionally, the stronger the recoil, the more the muzzle moves. The fixed sights on revolvers are regulated to a certain weight bullet at a certain velocity at a given range (usually either 15 or 25yds). If the bullet is moving faster than the sights are relegated for, the impact point is actually lower than the aim point because the muzzle doesn't climb as far as the sights are regulated for before the bullet leaves the muzzle. Similarly a faster than "ideal" load will impact lower. It sounds counter intuitive but it makes sense when you consider the very short distances we are concerned with and the negligible bullet drop over that very short range.

geo57
May 18, 2011, 12:49 PM
This is one of those " To each their own " sort of deals to me. Though I respect other's thinking on the matter, I do side with rcmodel's way of thinking though on the accepted power level thing . What really turned me off fast to the organized cowboy shooting organizations here was that while they demanded that clothing & related items be of strict originality to the 1800's, they would allow ( almost encourage ) the use of the most ridiculously light loads even in the big bores, loads that were no where near the original levels. For me, the inconsistent thinking and bias was a deal killer. IMO, it makes more sense and is more important to have my loads, which closely equate original .44-40 & .45 Colt, than making sure the hat I have on, the belt, sash, or vest I'm wearing, or the boots I chose to don are of perfect originality.

Sam1911
May 18, 2011, 01:23 PM
Looks like helotaxi's last post pretty much sums up the physics of the matter.

Let's close this rather than tossing any more mud in the water.

If you enjoyed reading about "Low Recoil loads for 45LC cowboy action shooting" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!