I bought 500 new brass casings for 45 ACP (small primer) and as I have always loaded once fired brass I started thinking. Is there anything different that I need to do when loading with new brass as opposed to once fired? Also this will be my first time loading 45 ACP as I have always loaded 9MM. Is there anything I need to know about loading 45 ACP that differs from loading 9MM?
New 45 ACP Brass
- Thread starter TroyUT
- Start date
- Status
moxie
Member
Others will offer different opinions, but here's mine.
With new brass, size it. Then a light chamfer and deburr. Just as with used brass, inspect. Make sure the primer pocket and the flash hole are true and clear.
.45acp reloading is the same as 9mm.
With new brass, size it. Then a light chamfer and deburr. Just as with used brass, inspect. Make sure the primer pocket and the flash hole are true and clear.
.45acp reloading is the same as 9mm.
howlnmad
Member
The 45 is no different than the 9mm as far as the loading proccess.
jeffreybehr
Member
I've used new Starline and new R-P +P .45ACP nickled cases. I resize normally and neck-expand to suit the bullet. Both of my pistols function perfectly without chamfering either of these new cases.
ArchAngelCD
Member.
If you are successful loading for the 9mm you will have no problems with the 45 Auto.
Don't forget the range report!
Don't forget the range report!
gamestalker
member
I run new brass through the size die, give them a quick light chamfer, and inspect flash holes / pockets.
As for anything different from 9mm, other than the fact 9mm is a high pressure cartridge, just watch out for squibs and double charges. It's a lot easier to miss a double or squib with those giant 45 acp cases if you don't look them over with a good light source prior to seating bullets.
GS
As for anything different from 9mm, other than the fact 9mm is a high pressure cartridge, just watch out for squibs and double charges. It's a lot easier to miss a double or squib with those giant 45 acp cases if you don't look them over with a good light source prior to seating bullets.
GS
Where do you find "virgin" small primer .45 cases, who makes it, and why did you specifically buy it?
Personally, not having to switch primer system would make small primer brass somewhat attractive, as that is the only large primer cartridge I load regularly, though I still have "need" for the occasional 10mm Auto, .45 Colt, .45 Win Mag, and .44 Mag round.
.45 Auto is the easiest round to load. It doesn't suffer from a severely tapered case, like 9x19, so it goes through the dies easier. Being a short squat case, it is easy to inspect the powder charge in the case. It just doesn't get any easier than .45 Auto in terms of loading. Gamestalker: did you really mean that a .45 Auto case is harder to inspect than a 9x19?
The main thing about virgin cases is that they have no soot to "lubricate" bullet seating and can be hard to extract from the expander die. Beyond that, what, exactly, do you think could be different?
Yes, new cases need to be sized. They may not be round and they may not be at the proper ID for bullet seating.
All cases need to be chamfered at least once (and after every trimming, for bottleneck cases). In fact, a properly chamfered and expanded case will not require case mouth flare for seating jacketed bullets.
Aside: I hate the use of "casing" for cases as much as I hate OAL for COL (cartridge overall length, which by its name is specific to the loaded cartridge). However, reading my Dillon manual, I note that they use OAL all the time (though OAL can refer to anything being measured and is not a specific term like COL), so I imagine that casing will start being used also. As far as I as concerned, casings are used for sausage making and around windows, But the use of specific terminology seems to be losing ground even within the industry where it should be required.
It is like the use of "pill" or "bullet head" for bullet or, even worse, the use of "bullet" to refer to a loaded round. It is also like the use of "clip" for magazine, where the two terms refer to two very different things, but even the military is getting into the "clip" thing--and they should KNOW the difference.
Personally, not having to switch primer system would make small primer brass somewhat attractive, as that is the only large primer cartridge I load regularly, though I still have "need" for the occasional 10mm Auto, .45 Colt, .45 Win Mag, and .44 Mag round.
.45 Auto is the easiest round to load. It doesn't suffer from a severely tapered case, like 9x19, so it goes through the dies easier. Being a short squat case, it is easy to inspect the powder charge in the case. It just doesn't get any easier than .45 Auto in terms of loading. Gamestalker: did you really mean that a .45 Auto case is harder to inspect than a 9x19?
The main thing about virgin cases is that they have no soot to "lubricate" bullet seating and can be hard to extract from the expander die. Beyond that, what, exactly, do you think could be different?
Yes, new cases need to be sized. They may not be round and they may not be at the proper ID for bullet seating.
All cases need to be chamfered at least once (and after every trimming, for bottleneck cases). In fact, a properly chamfered and expanded case will not require case mouth flare for seating jacketed bullets.
Aside: I hate the use of "casing" for cases as much as I hate OAL for COL (cartridge overall length, which by its name is specific to the loaded cartridge). However, reading my Dillon manual, I note that they use OAL all the time (though OAL can refer to anything being measured and is not a specific term like COL), so I imagine that casing will start being used also. As far as I as concerned, casings are used for sausage making and around windows, But the use of specific terminology seems to be losing ground even within the industry where it should be required.
It is like the use of "pill" or "bullet head" for bullet or, even worse, the use of "bullet" to refer to a loaded round. It is also like the use of "clip" for magazine, where the two terms refer to two very different things, but even the military is getting into the "clip" thing--and they should KNOW the difference.
moxie
Member
I think gamestalker is saying that it's harder to notice a double charge in the .45 case. I agree.
Regarding small vs. large primers, I just toss them in separate buckets, then reload when I get enough. No problem. Same data.
I, for one, prefer OAL to COL. What should something as simple and ubiquitous as a measurement have a firearms-specific term and acronym?
Although I personally don't use the terms, casing and clip don't bother me. The industry is riddled with people who use the terms. And, I might point out, better men than I use those terms as well. I have a buddy who as a young Marine M-60 gunner had to use his .45 when he ran out of ammo. More than once. He uses "clips." I don't correct him.
I might add that nearly 100% of my WWII and Korean War vet friends use "clip." Many of my Vietnam war friends use "clip." Some use magazine. The whole "clip" vs. "magazine" thing seems to have started in the '70s. Very few called a 1911 a 1911 back in the '60s and early '70s in the military. We called a 1911 a ".45" or a "Colt" even if it was made by Ithaca or whoever. So putting a "clip" in a "Colt" (perhaps made by Remington Rand) was pretty common.
Regarding small vs. large primers, I just toss them in separate buckets, then reload when I get enough. No problem. Same data.
I, for one, prefer OAL to COL. What should something as simple and ubiquitous as a measurement have a firearms-specific term and acronym?
Although I personally don't use the terms, casing and clip don't bother me. The industry is riddled with people who use the terms. And, I might point out, better men than I use those terms as well. I have a buddy who as a young Marine M-60 gunner had to use his .45 when he ran out of ammo. More than once. He uses "clips." I don't correct him.
I might add that nearly 100% of my WWII and Korean War vet friends use "clip." Many of my Vietnam war friends use "clip." Some use magazine. The whole "clip" vs. "magazine" thing seems to have started in the '70s. Very few called a 1911 a 1911 back in the '60s and early '70s in the military. We called a 1911 a ".45" or a "Colt" even if it was made by Ithaca or whoever. So putting a "clip" in a "Colt" (perhaps made by Remington Rand) was pretty common.
Last edited:
Please, as I said, EVERYTHING that has a length has an OAL. Only a cartridge has a COL. It is clear. It is unambiguous. It clarifies discussion. Terms and words should mean something.
Since a clip in no way looks or performs the same job as a magazine, the use of the right term could be important.
Remember Clinton "ambiguating" about the meaning of the word "is?"
Better men than me may use the wrong terms, but that doesn't make the terms correct, it doesn't make it right. Personally, I want to be corrected if I use a term incorrectly.
I want to be understood clearly. As a chemist and engineer, clear communication is not an option. I'm not a lawyer.
Since a clip in no way looks or performs the same job as a magazine, the use of the right term could be important.
Remember Clinton "ambiguating" about the meaning of the word "is?"
Better men than me may use the wrong terms, but that doesn't make the terms correct, it doesn't make it right. Personally, I want to be corrected if I use a term incorrectly.
I want to be understood clearly. As a chemist and engineer, clear communication is not an option. I'm not a lawyer.
moxie
Member
Sorry, but you don't own the language and you don't get to be the final arbiter of correct usage.
By the way, speaking of usage, "Better men than me" is incorrect. (You said you want to be corrected.)
By the way, speaking of usage, "Better men than me" is incorrect. (You said you want to be corrected.)
Yes, I accept that. Thank you.
That's right, no body owns the language, so any one is free to use any "grammar" they want. That will improve things so much. We should, following that "logic," get rid of schools, since nobody is the final arbiter about anything so any thing must be acceptable.
What a great argument. Talk about a "straw man."
You haven't said that I am wrong--I just don't have the right to have an opinion and voice it.
Well, this dead horse has been beaten to death...
That's right, no body owns the language, so any one is free to use any "grammar" they want. That will improve things so much. We should, following that "logic," get rid of schools, since nobody is the final arbiter about anything so any thing must be acceptable.
What a great argument. Talk about a "straw man."
You haven't said that I am wrong--I just don't have the right to have an opinion and voice it.
Well, this dead horse has been beaten to death...
gamestalker
member
Noylj, ya, what I meant is that due to the extremely large case, it is much easier for a double charge, and even triple charge to fit into a 45 acp case. Inspection is no different, in fact they are easier to see into, it's just that they are more prone to double charges primarily.
As for squibs, a faster burning less bulky powder might not be easily visible if it sits below the half or so mark. It's just a big case, so a light target charge wouldn't be real visible.
GS
As for squibs, a faster burning less bulky powder might not be easily visible if it sits below the half or so mark. It's just a big case, so a light target charge wouldn't be real visible.
GS
dickttx
Member
"It's a lot easier to miss a double or squib with those giant 45 acp cases"
I thought the 45 ACP was the normal case and the 9mm was the little bitty one!
I thought the 45 ACP was the normal case and the 9mm was the little bitty one!
RainDodger
Member
I've never had a need to size new cases. I just never thought about it and never did it... and never had a problem. That's me though.
Like ArchAngelCD said, if you're loading 9mm now, .45 will be no problem.
Like ArchAngelCD said, if you're loading 9mm now, .45 will be no problem.
Well" Boolits" to you!
For the OP, no not really it's all the same as to procedure. You may or may not size the brass some do some do not. Chamfering and de burring is also optional, should not have to unless you feel burrs or just want to.
For the OP, no not really it's all the same as to procedure. You may or may not size the brass some do some do not. Chamfering and de burring is also optional, should not have to unless you feel burrs or just want to.
- Status
Similar threads
