45 colt velocities

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Stinger

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
776
Warning, the following loads may not be safe in your guns.

Strange phenomenon...

I shot several different loads of 2400 through my 4 5/8" Blackhawk, ranging from 16-17.3g. The bullet was Hornady 300g XTP Mag.

The Chrony told me that they were all right at 1000fps. Four different loads, 16g, 16.5g, 17g, and 17.3g. They were literally within 5fps from lightest to heaviest charges.

Comments?

Stinger
 
Four different loads, 16g, 16.5g, 17g, and 17.3g. They were literally within 5fps from lightest to heaviest charges.
Click to expand...

It could just be a fluke. Looking at Speer #13 the published range from 15.8grs to 17.5 grs of 2400 with their 300gr Ruger load .45 Colt is 938 fps to 1048 fps. Not a huge spread in velocity but you'd expect somewhat more than 5 fps difference with the loads you mention.

Was the velocity you where comparing an average from several rounds with the same charge weight? If it was from several rounds the high low, velocity range and the standard deviation will give you some idea on how the results fit together. If the data is from 4 individual samples only it could just be a statical fluke in the measurement because of the way the variables just happed to come together. Slight changes can make a difference from round to round in velocity. Things like being fired from a different chamber in the revolver, was the brass uniform in trim length, brand name and number of reloading, was the barrel allowed to cool between shot the same amount of time for each sample.
 
How heavy of a crimp where you using? Possibly the crimp was light and not giving proper ignition of the heavier charge? (just a SWAG) :)
 
Most likely too light of a crimp. (I did the same thing in my 45 redhawk over new years:fire: ) Where's the "smack my forehead" icon?

If you have any left, shoot the strings again. After every powder charge increase, look down the barrel. If it's crimp, at every increase you'll just see more unburned powder in the barrel.
 
Were you shooting 5 or 10 round strings and looking at SD and ES as well as AVE velocities?

My experimenting with 2400 in sane Colt ammo proved to me that other powders work better in that application. (454 Casull LOVES the 2400 though!)

If your chrono strings were short, you might have the odd results as the ES could easily be 200fps with those loads and the 'luck of the draw' just had them all about the same.
 
I used W296 to get top velocities from a Ruger in .45 Colt. 240 Grainers at well over 1000FPS

This is done at your own risk as you are definitly exceeding .45 Colt chamber pressures. The brass can obviously take it. The gun is the limiting factor.

Never shoot these hot loads in an old gun designed for true .45 Colt pressures.
 
Last edited:
ES and SD were all very low for all strings. I will go out to the garage and take a look at the exact numbers, but it is pretty darn cold out there right now, and I am a sissy.

I only shot at 15 yards, but the accuracy was excellent for each. I, of course, fired them from sandbags since I was using my chrony, and I can tell you that I would rather have been standing. The bench on the handgun line is pretty short and not really conducive to shooting from them.

These were the most powerful handloads that I have ever shot.

Was it fun? :evil: But I am certainly not a recoil junky, and don't foresee myself ever purchasing a more powerful gun (famous last words :))

Twelve shots were fired at each different loading, and the average was within 5fps for all strings. There was some unburned powder, but the crimp was (on a scale of 1-10) about an 8. It was a very firm crimp.

I guess I just attributed it (the unburned powder) to that large case, and didn't really think about giving a tighter crimp. I cannot for the life of me imagine why I would ever need a load hotter than 300g @1000fps, so I figured that I would just stick with the 16g load since it produced almost identical velocity.

However, since you have piqued my interest, and in the name of science, I shall run another experiment when time permits. It will probably be a couple of weeks due to weather and time constraints.

Thanks for the feedback,

Stinger
 
One other thing you may want to do(I'm going to).....

Start over with magnum primers, especially for cold weather applications. I know current manuals say to use standard primers with 2400, but in all other calibers I've tried it in(357, 41, and 44 mag) magnum primers work much better.

I tried it by the book this time, since I was starting with a new gun.......but I'm going back to what has always worked in the past.
 
Last edited:
THE FIRST THING I WOULD HAVE SERIOUSLY CHECKED WAS THE CHRONOGRAPH.

I would have also checked it's placement on the bench. When different loads give all the same numbers there is a good chance something is shutting down the chronograph in the same phase of it's work. That " something ' is muzzle blast.
 
I never would have thought about changing primers. It is something I will consider. I have never used magnum primers for anything, but that is a pretty good amount of powder, hmmm.

As for as the chrony, I was testing different loads from different handguns, and it was giving me what I expected. The only unexpected results came from these particular loads of 45 Colt.
 
Speer #13 flat out states that they get better and more uniform ignition with standard primers than magnum primers with 2400. They have a balistics lab, I don't.

BUT: I and at least one other poster on board are getting better results across the board with magum primers lighting 2400 in magnum pistol rounds.

Just remember to start over on your charge weights when you switch primers. FWIW: I use federal primers as a general rule.

I also do a lot of my shooting in pretty cold weather, conditions thier lab doesn't see I suspect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top