Low Recoil loads for 45LC cowboy action shooting

[Red Cent]

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.

 

[helotaxi]

"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]

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]

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]

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]

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. AWESOME!

With your load the little lady would take a couple seconds to recover from the muzzle rise. 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...................

 

[helotaxi]

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]

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]

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]

At this point I fell like I did at post 11
"
Quote:
Originally Posted by helotaxi
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]

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]

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]

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]

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.