1911 Commander Reloading Report

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

doc540

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
2,548
Location
Southeast Texas
First .45ACP reloads on my RCBS Rock Chucker w/Lee dies

1998 Colt CCO
4.25"
.45ACP
Bar-Sto match barrel

Bullets:
200gr LSWC
230gr LRN

Powder: Win231

Primers: Federal LMPP

Misc Brass

200gr OAL - 1.240
240gr OAL - 1.249

Temp 70
Humidity 90
Wind 5-10

25 yds

Semi-rested (front frame only)

Benchmark: Winchester White Box 230gr FMJ
Av - V: 794fps

200gr LSWC
avg:
4.6gr - 777fps
5.1gr - 788fps
5.6gr - 873fps *MOST ACCURATE*
5.9gr - 923fps

230gr LRN
avg:
4.6gr - 757fps * MOST ACCURATE*
5.0gr - 814fps
5.5gr - 859fps

38083eef-f164-45e6-a920-cb292656d78e_zps853f482e.jpg

230gr LRN
4.6gr
6de8f271-9383-4dd9-b235-f5ba64294b26_zpsd9848dfe.jpg
 
Last edited:
Always nice to see other loads to sort of "verify" your own. Thanks for that. I've loaded 5.6 grains of 231 under a 230 gr. FMJ for something like 25 years. Works great and it's accurate. Based on what you've found, I may download some a bit and try a slower FPS just for fun.
 
thanks

mebe, the CCO is an alloy frame 1911, so I don't want to beat on it too hard.

I called it a "Commander" just so folks would know it was a 4.25" and not a full size.

But it sure is fun to shoot! :)
 
I thought that by "CCO" you meant a Combat Commander, which is a steel frame. Why I thought that's what you meant, I don't know. I've owned a LW Commander and prefer steel. I have both a Kimber Pro Carry HD and a new Sig Fastback Carry, which are both stainless receivers. I think the recoil is felt a bit less with the steel frames, but I don't know that they last any longer than an aluminum frame. They'd both last my lifetime though, so it really doesn't matter!

Whichever it is, it's a very nice piece, and it looks like you shoot it just fine. :)

A friend of mine just gave me a box of old Sierra "flying ashtrays"... the 200 grain jacketed hollow points with the awesomely huge open cavity. He inherited them in a box of goodies from his father. If nothing else, they look incredibly mean and nasty. They likely don't expand much at ~850 FPS, but I loaded them up to see how they work. It's been about... oh... 25+ years since I've seen any of them. If anyone is interested, I'll post results with some pictures. I don't have a chrono like doc 540 does, but I'll have something or other tp say, I'm sure.

I'd love to see more results from people, especially if anyone has real FPS data to go along with it!
 
nice looking gun none the less. i at times worry about battering the frame on my lightweight model. i wouldnt mind a full sized but i have too many nice rigs for carrying my commander. nice group though.
 
Just fyi, I run Wilson Shok-Buffs in my Commander-length 1911s just like I do in my 5" guns. They do cushion the frame a bit and they've caused no problems for me.
 
A standard shot string is FIVE rds. FYI.

I see you have a three rd. string here, and four rd. in another thread.

Your pictured load appears to have potential. Shoot some 5 rd. groups and see how it works.
It is common for the first, hand cycled rd. to shoot substantially "out of the group" (not always, but common) with an autoloader.
When doing load development I "throw away" the first shot (shoot the first, hand cycled rd. off the target) in order to evaluate the true potential of the load. (I'm testing the load, not the pistol)
If you have a group of 4 rds. reasonably tight, with a single flier-this may be the culprit.
 
I only loaded ten rounds each of 4.1 and 4.4gr, and nine rounds of 4.7.

So, when I shot more than two groups, I only used 3 or 4 rounds.

Hope that s'plains it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top