Cast Bullets: Weight vs. Metplat vs. Velocity in 45 Colt & 44 Mag

[Scooter1942]

Hi all,

I'm in the process of developing some defensive "woods" loads for both 45 Colt and 44 Mag. The 45 Colt loads will be shot in a S&W 625 Mountain Gun, and the 44 Mag loads will be in a S&W 329PD, S&W M69 2.75", and occasionally in a 5" 629.

Currently, I have 255gr Keith coated bullets in 45 and 240 gr Keith coated in 44, both from Missouri Bullet. Both have a BRN of 18.

My question here isn't about powders or load data, but rather about bullet weight/velocity, construction, metplat for my intended use. I'd like a 45 Colt load that hits around 950-1000fps with a 250-270 gr bullet. And, a 44 Mag load that is moderate to light, with a 240-260 gr bullet traveling around 1050-1100 fps. Both should provide a level of recoil that hits right around my comfort zone with the two firearms in question.

I've clearly gone down the rabbit hole, and now I'm questioning whether the two bullet weights I currently have in stock are really the best choices for my needs. Will they work...? Sure. Are there better options...? That's what I'm trying to find out.

I've read a number of articles, looked at Garrett's page, BB, Underwood. Studied bullets from Missouri Bullet Co, Montana Bullet Works, Rim Rock, Oregon Trail, etc. I've gathered that just about any hard cast 240-270 gr bullet traveling at 950-1100 fps will handle just about anything in the lower 48. I've read that adding velocity above this isn't really necessary in handguns given the close range and increased recoil. I've read that heavy bullets with the widest possible metplat is ideal. I've read that bullets need to be hard enough to not deform relative to the velocity.

I guess my conundrum is, at some point there's a trade-off. Too much weight and the velocity goes down too low. Where's the tipping point? When do you decide that weight trumps velocity, or metplat trumps weight? Or, does lighter weight, higher velocity and widest metplat trump a heavy for caliber bullet? For instance...there's a 250 gr. WFN 45 Colt bullet available with a .375 metplat that I could likely push to 1000 fps. Do I do that, or do I go with a 270 gr bullet with a .333 metplat that I'll likely be able to push to 925-950 fps?

What would your priorities be in this instance? Or, which bullet would you choose for this application?

45 Colt
255 Coated SWC Keith, 18BRN(MBC)
270 SWC Keith, .333 Metplat, 15 BRN (Rimrock)
270 RCBS SAA, .335, metplat, 15 BRN (Montana Bullet Works)
250 LBT WFN-GC, .375, metplat, 22 BRN (Montana Bullet Works)

44 Mag
240 Coated SWC Keith, 18BRN (MBC)
260 LBT WFN-GC, .350, metplat, 22 BRN (Montana Bullet Works)
255 SWC Keith-GC, .305 metplat, 22 BRN (Rimrock)
260 SWC Keith-PB, .324 metplat, 15 BRN (Rimrock)

 

[smithra_66]

When you're in this territory, I wouldn't over-think it. Both will work just fine.

I'm a big fan of the traditional Keith style bullets, which are usually a bit heavy for caliber because they are long. A 255 in the 44 or a 265 in the 45 clipping along at 1050 or 1100 fps out of either will handle any defensive situation you encounter and still be well under "max" pressure for either gun.

These are big bores. Worrying about a few thousands here and there on the "meplat" isn't worth the brain cycles. they are both going to punch a big old hole in whatever you shoot, and it will severely discourage that critter from proceeding toward you, whether it has 2 legs or 4.

If you are into cast bullets, another thing I'd suggest is getting into casting your own. Invariably, if you end up finding a load that works great, it will be out of stock when you want to buy more! Or you may find that you need to adjust the diameter of the bullet slightly, or whatever. You have that control if you cast your own and it's very inexpensive to get into.

 

[stansdds]

First, don't over-think this subject. I would not select a round nose projectile for a woods revolver, but a WFN or SWC will punch a little larger hole through tissue. I'm not a big fan of light weight, high velocity, that combination may not penetrate as well as a slower, heavier bullet. I am a fan of using bullets in the weight range of the original designs of the cartridge. So for 44 Special and 44 Magnum, 240 to 250 grains. I do not have a 45 Colt, but I'd think that a 250-260 grain bullet would be ideal.

 

[lrrifleman]

Scooter, I agree, don't overthink this. Additionally, you don't need to reinvent the wheel, so to speak. Take a close look at the writings of Skeeter Skelton, and look at the numerous Skeeter Loads.

At this point in life, I'm content with the 357, 41,and 44 Skeeter loads. The most definitive answer for your questions would, in my opinion, rest in ballistic gel testing. You can't test for shock effect with a wide metplat, but you sure can test for bullet design/velocity performance in gel!

 

[Nevada Ed]

When in "Boogie land",

I like to carry the biggest, heaviest, bullet, that I can shoot well, out of the gun at hand.

Not a round nose and maybe not a hollow point, as I like a Swc design, if possible,
if they will group well and be close to my POA.

I don't care if they are lead or copper bullets, as long as they are the
best, that work for me.

 

[rockquarry]

If you have to buy cast, I'd try a sample of all the bullets you have listed, maybe a hundred of each, work up some loads and do a lot of group shooting from a benchrest at 25 yards (50 yards if you're shooting skills and eyes are up to it).

That may not be the cheapest way to go, but it's a one time expense and you'll know what works best in your guns. I'd stay with the softest bullets possible to avoid leading, but bullet fit is at least a little more inportant than hardness.

"Hard cast" is mostly more of a fad these days than something useful, but the hard bullets you have listed may do well with perfect fit, especially if you drive them fast (maybe faster than the speeds you're interested in). Otherwise, they'll probably lead the bore.

The suggestion to use bullet weights the cartridge was designed for is sound advice. I would consider using a heavier bullet only if it provided exceptional accuracy.

 

[jem102]

Not sure what the "BRN" means as casters talk in "BHN", Brinell Hardness Number but assume its the same thing. In your velocity range 22 BRN (BHN) is likely too hard and maybe 18 as well to obturate and give best accuracy, velocity and no leading at those pressure levels. 15 BRN (BHN) should work well to 28,000 CUP (30,000 PSI) and no leading. I have never shot a large bear but from what I have read by handgun elk hunters the LBT WFN and LFN bullets are the way to go.

 

[Scooter1942]

Not sure what the "BRN" means as casters talk in "BHN", Brinell Hardness Number but assume its the same thing. In your velocity range 22 BRN (BHN) is likely too hard and maybe 18 as well to obturate and give best accuracy, velocity and no leading at those pressure levels. 15 BRN (BHN) should work well to 28,000 CUP (30,000 PSI) and no leading. I have never shot a large bear but from what I have read by handgun elk hunters the LBT WFN and LFN bullets are the way to go.

Sorry...you are correct with regard to BHN. Not sure what I was thinking, but it's what I meant!

 

[BigMuddy]

My choices for the bullets listed would be:

45 Colt. MBW 270 RCBS
44 Mag. Rimrock 260 PB Keith

Reason is for the velocity you want there should be no need for a GC and 15 BHN is not only sufficient but preferred.

I have used both MBW and Rimrock. IMHO MBW are the best commercial cast bullets available, and Rimrock is not far behind. If MBW has a 44 without a GC in either WFN or Keith style (haven’t looked on their website) I would choose them.

I know you didn’t ask for loads but Hodgdon Longshot is the powder I use for the results you are seeking.

I would use the Missouri Bullets for practice.

Dan

 

[STORMINORMAN]

Without getting too much into the powder/load concept it would seem that CFE-Pistol will easily get either the 240 or the 255gr MBC coated bullets well in excess of 1000fps. With the HiTech coating, leading shouldn't be problematic. Loading up a couple dozen should answer that in a hurry.

Whether these would both "shoot straight through an elk at 20 yards"(?) is something opon which the experienced hunters could opine, but...

The effectiveness of such a round for "defensive 'woods' loads" purposes would hardly seem to be questionable? There are, of course, many other more powerful options but 550+ ft/lbs of energy (the 240gr @ 1300 fps approaches 900!) up close and personal is nothing to sneeze at...

The best advice as given previously is most certainly to not "over-think" the concept, IMHO.

CHEERS!

P.S. Were it me, I would carry one of the 44 Magnums.

 

[SteveA]

I've been using the 270 RCBS in the .45 and 250 Keith in the .44 for years. Killed a multitude of deer, varmints and diseased livestock with both. Generally load the .45 to 900 and the .44 to about 1050-1100. You can cover a lot of ground with either bullet so loaded. I cast my own but wouldn't hesitate to use a 250 keith type in the .45 loaded to 900.

 

[TM44]

In .44 mag I've settled on 9.5 g of Win 244 under a 240 g SWC from either Bayou Bullets or Missouri. 1120 fps and a very low sd below 10. Moderate recoil, low flash and burns very clean.

 

[BLUEDOT37]

45 Colt
255 Coated SWC Keith, 18BRN(MBC)
270 SWC Keith, .333 Metplat, 15 BRN (Rimrock)
270 RCBS SAA, .335, metplat, 15 BRN (Montana Bullet Works)
250 LBT WFN-GC, .375, metplat, 22 BRN (Montana Bullet Works)

44 Mag
240 Coated SWC Keith, 18BRN (MBC)
260 LBT WFN-GC, .350, metplat, 22 BRN (Montana Bullet Works)
255 SWC Keith-GC, .305 metplat, 22 BRN (Rimrock)
260 SWC Keith-PB, .324 metplat, 15 BRN (Rimrock)

I've tried the 270gr Keith R-R bullet in my 45WSM loads & have some of their .44 260gr Keith-PB but haven't tried them yet.

Rim Rock lets you buy certain bullets by the pound to try. While not the cheapest way to buy bullets it beats buying a minimum order of 500 & finding out you or your revolver doesn't like them.

I was disappointed with the coated bullets I got from MBC years ago (but they look pretty). Maybe they've improved their coating process now as other seem to like them?

Generally I go with plated over coated bullets when I can.

.



.
.



.

 

[twodog max]

I shot the authentic Keith bullet style for years in the 44. I cast them myself. I shot them from mild to magnum. Shot enough varmints and beaver with them to know they work. These days I mostly shoot RNFP design by NOE so they will also feed well in my lever rifles in 44 calibers. As my eyes get older I have gravitated to rifles in order to shoot better.
My favorite load for cast 44's is with 231 in a mid range power. Shoots get always makes a divit on the other side.

 

[StrawHat]

Hi all,

I'm in the process of developing some defensive "woods" loads for both 45 Colt and 44 Mag. The 45 Colt loads will be shot in a S&W 625 Mountain Gun, and the 44 Mag loads will be in a S&W 329PD, S&W M69 2.75", and occasionally in a 5" 629….

It helps to know what revolvers you are using.

It would also help to know in what “woods” you will be walking. Loads for Pennsylvania and Ohio woods will be different from Maine loads, Montana loads, etc.

Me, I carry an ACP revolver of some sort with a 240 grain full wadcutter over hardball doses of powder. It makes a good hunting and defensive round.

Kevin

 

[Scooter1942]

Here's a follow up question...if the additional cost is minimal, is there any disadvantage to shooting a gas checked bullet of a high BHN (22) at these lower velocities? I realize lower velocities work better with a BHN of around 15 in terms of chamber/bore/rifling but I'm not sure if the terminal performance is ideal. BB, Underwood and others have BHN of 20+ in all hunting loads. In other words, is there a disadvantage to shooting gas checked if the price is only a few dollars more?

 

[Scooter1942]

It helps to know what revolvers you are using.

It would also help to know in what “woods” you will be walking. Loads for Pennsylvania and Ohio woods will be different from Maine loads, Montana loads, etc.

Me, I carry an ACP revolver of some sort with a 240 grain full wadcutter over hardball doses of powder. It makes a good hunting and defensive round.

Kevin

Kevin,

Well, sadly my woods are more urban from a day-to-day perspective. However, I spend a fair amount of time on my brother-in-law's property where feral hogs are a nuisance. Additionally, I regularly find myself in far west Texas (Big Bend area) where hogs, javalina, some black bear and big cats roam. Additionally, I spend about a month fly fishing and camping in the Rockies. Usually in northern New Mexico or Southern Colorado, but sometimes as far north as Montana and even Canada. Wyoming, Idaho and Utah are also occasionally in the mix.

That said, these aren't my only "woods" guns. I also have a Glock 20 that has been optimized for heavy 10mm loads. That would probably be my "go to" in bear country, but it really is situational. Kinda like picking out which boots and hat I'm going to wear that day!

 

[Alk8944]

You are definitely over-thinking this! Whether large game or two-legged predators, for either caliber I would choose a cast bullet of 12-15 Brinell and weight from 245-255 grains. I would select bullets with the largest meplat available, the closer to 80% the better. I would load the .44 Magnum to 1200 FPS or higher, and the .45 Colt as close to 1100 FPS as I felt could be done safely. When weight, velocity and meplat are concerned, there is no trade-off! Use the largest, heaviest, fastest you can. With these calibers the issue is which you prefer as either if a fully capable large game caliber if only handguns are contemplated!

For bullets I would cast my own, which I have been doing for over 60 years. Accurate Molds has a wide range of bullet designs available, or they will do your design for the same price as any of the cataloged designs. No one else does custom molds for less and the quality is excellent! I have 8 or 10 of my own designs from .30 to .41 caliber that he has done and they cast as well as any of the 40 or so molds I have collected over the years, and better than most!

To answer your follow-up question, no revolver bullet needs to be harder than 15 Brinell. Bullet hardness is not a factor in leading. Likewise there is no benefit using a gas-check design. Gas checks find their practical application in rifle loads, not revolver! They are an added cost and time option that serves no practical purpose!

Prevention of leading is a function of bullet fit to the barrel and proper lubrication. I have used/tried all sorts of bullet lubricants, powder coat, polymer coat, and all sorts of whiz-bang commercial (expensive) lubricants over the years and have settled on Saeco Green for handgun and rifle. The Saeco gives me better performance than any of the others including any of the NRA/Alox lubricants and LBT Blue.

Many years ago I was given the formula for Saeco Green by a former Saeco factory rep. I make my own at about 1/10th the cost of any commercial lube, the only thing is I haven't found a dye to make it the right green!. I prefer red just because. For about $25 I can make the equivalent of about 100 sticks of commercial lube that would cost $500-800 retail.

 

[dave1918a2]

Yeah, what all the responders said.

 

[rays44]

Here's a follow up question...if the additional cost is minimal, is there any disadvantage to shooting a gas checked bullet of a high BHN (22) at these lower velocities? I realize lower velocities work better with a BHN of around 15 in terms of chamber/bore/rifling but I'm not sure if the terminal performance is ideal. BB, Underwood and others have BHN of 20+ in all hunting loads. In other words, is there a disadvantage to shooting gas checked if the price is only a few dollars more?

Scooter, In my experience, 15 BHN will lead the barrel with chamber pressures above 20,000psi. Other considerations such as the bullet diameter matching the cylinder throat are crucial. That said, gas checks are more expensive but way more forgiving. I've shot them in .44 and .45 for 40 years. Also hunted with them. You'll never recover the bullet in a thin skinned animal, even a black bear unless you hit shoulder bone. Hard cast with gas check will give you max penetration without expansion. More than you need in your neck of the woods.
As said by smarter folks than me, You're over thinking this. If you want max application in a woods gun, load a box with jacketed XTP's. Lastly, the front profile of a bullet is called a meplat, not metplat. I made the same mistake for years.