MBC 230 gr RN 45 ACP Softball COL?

[Rule3]

I have been loading MBC bullets for some time. I use a lot of them. For the above bullet I have been using 1.250 COL as it fits (plunks) any 45.

At this length it leaves just a hair of the driving band showing and wondered what others load theirs at. (for this specific bullet)

Guess I was thinking if I should seat them just a fraction more?

Hodgdons uses a 1.200 which I have no idea how the got that. I believe I called them about it but do not recall. All other manuals have a longer COL??

Not having any problems at this length, just wondering?

 

[LiveLife]

Take a look inside the barrel. If the start of rifling is quick (right at the chamber), then shorter OAL/COL like 1.250" will need to be used.

If your barrel has slower start of rifling with longer leade/freebore, then it will accommodate longer OAL/COL.

My Sig 1911 barrel has very quick start of rifling with almost no leade and I need to seat 230 gr RN so the bearing surface/driving band bearly shows above the case mouth to pass the barrel drop "plunk" test.

 

[moxie]

With those exact bullets, 1.250 should be perfect, but I've run them at 1.238 and that was perfect too! Anything in that range is fine. Doesn't really matter much.

 

[rcmodel]

Hodgdons uses a 1.200 which I have no idea how the got that.

Hodgdon's data is for a Hornady 230 FMJ-FP.
That is a flat-point bullet and is shorter.

Its unfortunate they didn't use a traditional FMJ-RN 230 as the 1.200" OAL misleads a whole lot of people loading conventional 230 RN bullets.

rc

 

[Rule3]

Hodgdon's data is for a Hornady 230 FMJ-FP.
That is a flat-point bullet and is shorter.

Its unfortunate they didn't use a traditional FMJ-RN 230 as the 1.200" OAL misleads a whole lot of people loading conventional 230 RN bullets.

rc

Data shows a 230 gr LRN also.

They list the same COL for both bullets as they always have. I have the data printed from before they went to the new and improved web page.

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol

 

[Havok7416]

I load MBC 230s to 1.216. I could probably go a little longer, but if I go too long they catch in the chamber of one of my guns.

 

[jr_roosa]

1.250 for me. Just finished loading my last 500 of them about ten minutes ago.

I can't get them to stop leading at GI velocities so I'm going to start using zero FMJ bullets.

I love the other MBC offerings though.

J.

 

[rcmodel]

Standard mil-spec OAL for .45 ACP 230 grain FMJ- RN is 1.265" to 1.271".
Always was, always will be,
if you use a bullet with the GI FMJ-RN profile.

That's what I do if I want standard Mil-Spec Hardball ammo.

rc

 

[Jim Watson]

Ah, but...
The cast RN of the OP does not have the same profile as the GI FMJ.
As best I can tell, it is truly round, hemispherical in shape while the GI bullet is elliptical.
So the usual bulk cast RN is usually loaded shorter than true hardball.

I have one gun that can tell the difference. It feeds reliably only with the blunter cast bullet.

 

[Rule3]

1.250 for me. Just finished loading my last 500 of them about ten minutes ago.

I can't get them to stop leading at GI velocities so I'm going to start using zero FMJ bullets.

I love the other MBC offerings though.

J.

Although size does make most of the difference in leading or not, the MBC 230 Softball are to hard of an alloy. They are 18 bhn,

You can order them in 12 BHN as a special order if you buy art least 2 boxes. I find those do not lead the barrel as much for target loads.

It never made sense why they are cast with the same alloy as the magnum and other high velocity bullets??

Brad stated that is what folks want "hard cast" so that;s what he makes.

 

[rcmodel]

They make them hard because a typical GI 1911 has very shallow rifling, intended for FMJ bullets only.

Too Soft bullets will strip out of the shallow rifling.

rc