Changing load data for new primer and bullet .45 acp

[Big-bore-bob]

Hi all, quick question. Rmr was out of 45 acp bullets so I ordered Zero's 230gr fmj. I ran out of cci and remington lpp and I'm starting to load with win lpp. My current loads are 5gr bullseye or 5.5gr hp38 at 1.260-1.265. Should I back my charge weights down a bit because of component changes? Or does this look OK for .45 acp. I believe win lpp are a bit hotter than rem or cci. Thanks!

 

[nettlle]

I don't back down loads due to a primer brand change.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Hi all, quick question. Rmr was out of 45 acp bullets so I ordered Zero's 230gr fmj. I ran out of cci and remington lpp and I'm starting to load with win lpp. My current loads are 5gr bullseye or 5.5gr hp38 at 1.260-1.265. Should I back my charge weights down a bit because of component changes? Or does this look OK for .45 acp. I believe win lpp are a bit hotter than rem or cci. Thanks!

I generally follow a quick rebuild process after a major component change. It’s less about “safety” and more about finding a better load/the best load for the new components. Sometimes I end up right where I started and sometimes I don’t.
Drop back to the last known minimum that works for your guns and work up in small batches using 1/4gr steps until you find the best load.
Works for me - YMMV.

 

[CQB45ACP]

I start over when changing a component because I heard some old timers suggest it. Probably including @GeoDudeFlorida. Lee’s second edition might also say it.

And at worst it’s like chicken soup, can’t hurt.

 

[lightman]

I don't back down loads due to a primer brand change.

In theory you should back off a little on your charge weights and work back up to where you want to be. In the real world I have found this not to be necessary. Like GeoDude said, changing components may effect your best load more than it does safety. At the end of the day you have to decide if you are comfortable with not backing off. FWIW, I don't unless I'm loading on the very ragged edge of max. And I seldom load that hot.

 

[Big-bore-bob]

Well I have 2700 45 cases primed and ready to load, so I could back off the charge weight a few tenths and test with my two powders before I start loading that many rounds. These are just bulk target practice loads so I'm not to worried about absolute accuracy. Thanks for the advice!

 

[Blue68f100]

With Win LPP being for Mag or Std, so they may be a little hotter than normal. So backing of a little and retest is a good idea.

 

[Palladan44]

Backing off by a tenth or 2 would be the most prudent thing to do.

Just don't bother trying to "read" the primers if they look any different than the others after firing, that likely won't be any indication of a pressure change, but rather softer cup material or what have you.

I once thought one primer caused significant overpressure over another, but that notion was quickly debunked.

 

[nettlle]

I used to be a 100% CCI primer fan. With the way things have been the last several years I have used interchangeably, in rifle and pistol, Win, Tula, Ginex, Rem, and Federal (so far) and goodness knows what may be next. I have had no ill effects from changing primer brands. The prudent choice is to reduce loads with any switch in reloading components which is wise advice. I have tried enough different primer brands to take the risk of not reducing powder charges when changing to a different brand. Not a recommendation. Just my experience.

 

[LV Gun]

Hi all, quick question. Rmr was out of 45 acp bullets so I ordered Zero's 230gr fmj. I ran out of cci and remington lpp and I'm starting to load with win lpp. My current loads are 5gr bullseye or 5.5gr hp38 at 1.260-1.265. Should I back my charge weights down a bit because of component changes? Or does this look OK for .45 acp. I believe win lpp are a bit hotter than rem or cci. Thanks!

I load a lot of 45acp have used many different brands of primers over many years, I do not change my powder charges when using a different primer but I use the same two bullets all the time either a 185 gr LSWC or a 200 grain LSWC , have never had a problem. I load at starting load or just a little over so it has never been an issue with high pressure.

Edited Note- I have also been using a lot of small primer 45acp for the last 2 years due to not being able to get LP primers . I have finally been able to get my hands on 5000 Unis Ginex LP primers so I shot 100 of each primer in 45 acp at the range I did not notice any real difference between the two, but the one thing I did notice was my accuracy was slightly better with the small pistol primer, both loads were loaded with 4.9 grains of Alliant American Select Powder and 200 grain LSWC.

 

[Big-bore-bob]

Thanks for all the replies... I'll use my chronograph to cross check the velocities against my notes from previous load workups to see if there's any changes switching to these components. It'll be nice to have more data in the logbook anyway.

 

[Jim Watson]

In 9mm with HP38 I found NO difference in velocity with 6 out of 7 primers tried. Remington was a little faster.

 

[Slamfire]

I would not worry about dangerous pressures as your loads are middle of the road. Yes, something will be different.

Rounds fired from 1911 pistols, same bullet weights from same pistols:

200 LSWC 4.0 grs Bullseye Mixed cases CCI300
11-Sep-05 T = 88 °F

Ave Vel = 738.9
Std Dev = 10.34
ES = 37.98
High = = 755.8
Low = 717.8
Number rounds = 32

200 LSWC 4.0 grs Bullseye Mixed cases WLP
21-Jun-06 T = 97 °F

Ave Vel = 748.2
Std Dev = 10.86
ES = 41.52
High = = 763.2
Low = 721.7
N = 22

230 LFN Bull-X 5.5 grs W231 Mixed brass CCI300 primers
30-Dec-04 T = 60 °F

Ave Vel = 797.8
Std Dev = 32.2
ES = 154.2
High = = 858.2
Low = 703.9
N = 32

230 LRN Valiant 5.5 grs W231 Mixed brass WLP OAL 1.245" taper crimp 0.469"
27-Feb-10 T = 48 °F

Ave Vel = 832.4
Std Dev = 25.07
ES = 106.1
High = = 859.6
Low = 753.4
N = 16


It is hard to know if the slight velocity differences are just due to variances in averages, given the extreme spreads and standard deviations are not that different. Or due to differences in bullets, powder lot, instrumentation, etc. There are just not enough information on the sub variables to tell if primers are the cause, or something else. These things have to be tested, and the next primer lot will be different from the last. So also will be the next powder lot.

 

[Charlie98]

I would not worry about dangerous pressures as your loads are middle of the road. Yes, something will be different.

These are just bulk target practice loads so I'm not to worried about absolute accuracy.

The correct answer is... it depends.

I would be more inclined to continue with an established load that incorporates a different component(s) with, for example, Unique, even at max load... which I do. I've been loading the same 6.5grn Unique under any 230grn bullet, with any primer, for 30+ years. I would not be so inclined to do that with a max charge of something like TiteGroup... because of how it works, and how fast it is. A change in primer or bullet... heaven forbid both... could create an overpressure issue very quickly. I think you are likely safe with your choices of powder... that is, Bullseye and HP-38... where you are at, but caution dictates... 5.5grn HP-38 is actually OVER current published data (Hodgdon,) but you are loading them long. If you are loading in volume, like I do, I would back off that charge, say starting at 5.2grn, and work up a short ladder, using your chronograph to validate the velocity.... then go to work. There is nothing worse than loading up a big lot of cartridges, only to find they aren't right.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

The correct answer is... it depends.

I would be more inclined to continue with an established load that incorporates a different component(s) with, for example, Unique, even at max load... which I do. I've been loading the same 6.5grn Unique under any 230grn bullet, with any primer, for 30+ years. I would not be so inclined to do that with a max charge of something like TiteGroup... because of how it works, and how fast it is. A change in primer or bullet... heaven forbid both... could create an overpressure issue very quickly. I think you are likely safe with your choices of powder... that is, Bullseye and HP-38... where you are at, but caution dictates... 5.5grn HP-38 is actually OVER current published data (Hodgdon,) but you are loading them long. If you are loading in volume, like I do, I would back off that charge, say starting at 5.2grn, and work up a short ladder, using your chronograph to validate the velocity.... then go to work. There is nothing worse than loading up a big lot of cartridges, only to find they aren't right.

WST is one of those powders where I’m glad I dropped back to start (3.8gr) and worked back up (4.7gr) when I switched from Federal standard to Federal Match. With the old primers 4.7gr was perfect but with the GMM’s 4.5gr WST was more betterer. It’s only a .2gr difference and I really can’t shoot the difference anymore but why use more powder when less gives a better target* and less recoil?
But really if I had not done a rework I probably wouldn’t have noticed any difference.
* on those rare occasions when I can see both sights and the target all at the same time.

 

[Charlie98]

But really if I had not done a rework I probably wouldn’t have noticed any difference.

Well... and we are talking two different issues... accuracy, and safety.

Like the OP, there are a number of rounds where the accuracy doesn't really matter... 'combat accuracy' is my goal with my bulk loadings. Safety is entirely another issue.

 

[Necessary_Nutrient]

I can't see an issue with making 5 of them and comparing velocities. That's your major pressure sign since case condition and primer appearance can be unreliable. Of course, you'll need a chronograph, without which you'd just be guessing.

 

[gwpercle]

With the low pressure loading of the 45 acp and with the standard 5.0 grain of Bullseye load ,
a change in bullet and/or primer brand will not create a dangerous situation .
You may want to check accuracy ... in 50 years of reloading the 45 acp a change in primer or bullet make never caused any problems . Why I have always loved loading the 45 acp !
Gary

 

[LiveLife]

230gr fmj ... 5gr bullseye or 5.5gr hp38 at 1.260-1.265. Should I back my charge weights down a bit because of component changes?

"Holes on target speak volumes"

If you want to squeeze out optimal accuracy, let the holes on target be the guide.

Since you already have "Working OAL", shoot some incremental powder charge groups and whichever Bullseye/HP-38 charges produce smallest groups consistently, that's the "load" I would use. If I am not at max charge, I would also incrementally decrease OAL by .005" to see if group size decrease. If so, I use shorter OAL. If not, I use longer OAL.

FWIW, with different 230 gr FMJ/plated RN bullets at comparable OAL to what you are using (I actually use slightly shorter OALs depending on brand/nose profile/ogive of bullet), 5.2 gr of W231/HP-38 starts to improve efficiency of powder burn to eliminate unburnt granules to face and 5.3 gr starts to produce greater accuracy trend.

So you could do powder "work down" and compare 5.5, 5.4, 5.3 gr of HP-38 to test.

IME, Zero FMJ/RN profile tends to be rounder/shorter and could be seated to shorter OAL. So say 5.4 gr produces smaller groups consistently, you could try incrementally seating the Zero bullet deeper by .005" to see if group size decreases.

FYI, while Hodgdon load data uses shorter 1.200" OAL for 230 gr bullets and lists max charge at 5.3 gr for deeper seated bullets, Speer load data better reflect your working OAL at 1.260" so you may want to test 5.6 gr to see how accuracy trends at longer OAL - https://reloadingdata.speer.com/downloads/speer/reloading-pdfs/handgun/45_Automatic_230_TMJ_RN.pdf

• 45ACP 230 gr TMJ RN W231 COL 1.260" Start 5.6 gr (833 fps) - Max 6.2 gr (903 fps)

 

[vaalpens]

Hi all, quick question. Rmr was out of 45 acp bullets so I ordered Zero's 230gr fmj. I ran out of cci and remington lpp and I'm starting to load with win lpp. My current loads are 5gr bullseye or 5.5gr hp38 at 1.260-1.265. Should I back my charge weights down a bit because of component changes? Or does this look OK for .45 acp. I believe win lpp are a bit hotter than rem or cci. Thanks!

What is the difference in length between the RMR and Zero bullet? I have my RMR 230gr FMJ RN documented as .6635" (not RMR manufactured)

I think I would not worry much about "safety" with these changes, but I would do a mini workup just to get the same recoil feel if that is how you picked the original load, or same accuracy if you picked the original load based on accuracy. The mini workup will then also take care of the "safety" concern.

 

[lordpaxman]

I‘ve tested the difference with my .45 loads with CCI and Win primers, so if it was just the primer change, I’d load a few test rounds and chrono them. However, with a bullet change, that’s a difference that I would re-work the load. It’s possible RMR’s .45s are Zero’s, but probably not and I haven’t seen them announce they’re in house .45 or .40s yet.

 

[Big-bore-bob]

Since you already have "Working OAL", shoot some incremental powder charge groups and whichever Bullseye/HP-38 charges produce smallest groups consistently, that's the "load" I would use. If I am not at max charge, I would also incrementally decrease OAL by .005" to see if group size decrease. If so, I use shorter OAL. If not, I use longer OAL.

This sounds like a good idea to me, as well as a mini work up, and the coal changes to see if I can get good accuracy from them as well (why not right?). The zero on the left is .6490 in length, RMR on the right .6605. So mabye reducing coal to 1.25 to off set the length variance? Then work up from 5.2 hp38, and 4.6 bullseye for accuracies sake.

 

[LiveLife]

... zero on the left is .6490 in length, RMR on the right .6605. So mabye reducing coal to 1.25 to off set the length variance? Then work up from 5.2 hp38, and 4.6 bullseye

Sounds reasonable for "shortened" work up.

For more comprehensive work up, I would start with longest working OAL for initial powder work up. And once more accurate powder charge is identified, incrementally decrease the OAL by .005" to see if group size gets smaller, since you are working with lighter powder charges.

And using longer 1.250"-1.260" and 5.2 gr of W231/HP-38 for initial powder work up, we are essentially below published start charge of 5.6 gr so you are looking to identify lighter charge target/bullseye load that will reliably cycle the slide and extract/eject spent cases.

 

[Big-bore-bob]

And using longer 1.250"-1.260" and 5.2 gr of W231/HP-38 for initial powder work up, we are essentially below published start charge of 5.6 gr so you are looking to identify lighter charge target/bullseye load that will reliably cycle the slide and extract/eject spent cases.

I may be a bit confused and/or incorrect with my assumptions. I'm not necessarily looking for a bullseye load. For my purposes reducing to 1.25 will just keep internal volume the same using the new bullet vs the old one. I kinda want a full power load with reasonable accuracy. Working up from 5.2 I know they will cycle as I've gone as low as 5gr before. Hornady lists 5gr for starting load, 5.7 max @ 1.25. I'm really just trying to be safe and obtain the same level of accuracy as my old component combination. Am I approaching this right?

 

[vaalpens]

I may be a bit confused and/or incorrect with my assumptions. I'm not necessarily looking for a bullseye load. For my purposes reducing to 1.25 will just keep internal volume the same using the new bullet vs the old one. I kinda want a full power load with reasonable accuracy. Working up from 5.2 I know they will cycle as I've gone as low as 5gr before. Hornady lists 5gr for starting load, 5.7 max @ 1.25. I'm really just trying to be safe and obtain the same level of accuracy as my old component combination. Am I approaching this right?

You are already using a longer COL (1.260" vs 1.250"), but that is what you are loading, and you have decided on 1.260" for a specific reason. I load all my 230gr FMJ-RN with a 1.250" COL, but I work up all my loads. Everybody mist decide what they want to do to make them comfortable with the decision.

If it was me I would have:

• Loaded a dummy round with the new bullet to the same COL that I have been shooting, or change it to 1.250" if that is what you want to do.
• Do a plunk test for fit
• Do a setback test to make sure there is no setback
• If your COL is 1.26" or 1.25", either way there should not be an increase in pressure (assuming neck tension is the same, diameter, etc) purely based on the bullet length variable, maybe just a tad bit of less pressure if you stay with 1.260"
• Since you want to be safe, I would retest bullseye 4.8,4.9,5.0,5.1gr and HP38 5.3,5.4,5.5,5.6gr
• If it was me, then I would test bullseye 4.9,5.0,5.1,5.2gr because I want to bracket 5.0gr and 5.1gr, since that is where I find accuracy.

Decide what you want to accomplish, how much testing you want to do, and be safe.