Model 1917 Ammunition
- Thread starter Sand1991
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
I myself have always used Lead Bullets for all my Revolvers and Semi Automatic Pistols.
Lead is indeed a lot kinder to the Bores.
Any .45 ACP or .452-ish diameter Lead Bullet should be just dandy in your m1917 or Commercial .45 ACP N-Frame.
The nice thing about the m1917 and it's kin, any Bullet shape is fine...
If you are not casting your own, "Matts Bullets" has some nice ones to choose from.
45 Handgun : Matts Bullets
Rpg
Member
FMJ ammo was the stuff the GI’s used and the stuff the 1917 was designed around.
I can’t imagine you’re in danger of wearing out the barrel using FMJ ammo.
There seems to be a persistent urban myth about wearing out handgun rifling with jacketed ammo. I’ve never seen evidence that supports the myth.
That said, most shooters prefer lead cast bullets in older revolvers.
I can’t imagine you’re in danger of wearing out the barrel using FMJ ammo.
There seems to be a persistent urban myth about wearing out handgun rifling with jacketed ammo. I’ve never seen evidence that supports the myth.
That said, most shooters prefer lead cast bullets in older revolvers.
bmcgilvray
SWCA Member
I do not believe in the notion that jacketed bullets wear out a bore. Now neglect, corrosive ammunition, improper cleaning, sure. But worn bores from jacketed bullets are for someone else beside me to dither about.
A '17 Colt and '17 Smith & Wesson are kept on hand here and they've been shot a good deal through the years, the Colt in particular. The .45 Auto Rim cases are always loaded with cast lead bullets, but if I'm low on Auto Rim then I may used .45 ACP cast bullet handloads or .45 ACP jacketed indiscriminately.
Lead's for economy here, not out of concerns for bore wear.
A '17 Colt and '17 Smith & Wesson are kept on hand here and they've been shot a good deal through the years, the Colt in particular. The .45 Auto Rim cases are always loaded with cast lead bullets, but if I'm low on Auto Rim then I may used .45 ACP cast bullet handloads or .45 ACP jacketed indiscriminately.
Lead's for economy here, not out of concerns for bore wear.
I fired the same fmj hand loads in my 1917 that I loaded for my full auto MAC 10. After 1000s of rounds in the M10 I noticed no wear. Ditto the 1917 which hasn't seen as many. The 45acp is a sub sonic round causing less trauma to the bore IMHO. No so with the jacketed rounds I put through my 250-3000 Savage 99. I'm sure there are ballistics experts here who can explain better than me.
Last edited:
Texas Star
US Veteran
I think harder lead works better than factory AR soft bullets. Neither my Colt 1917 or S&W 1950 Target shot those well.
Just refer to Keith's, Sixguns. Elmer dealt with the issue decades ago...
He was very clear that FMJ bullets then wore 1917 bores much sooner. Those 1917 barrels were softer than modern steels and probably do wear faster.
Remember, the whole idea of those WW I revolvers was an emergency war measure! In my view, the .45 ACP revolver concept should never have gone further. I realize that others disagree.
Maybe if good .44 Spcl. factory ammo had been loaded and more popular...
I concede that some preferred FMJ bullets if they might have to shoot dangerous large animals.
Just refer to Keith's, Sixguns. Elmer dealt with the issue decades ago...
He was very clear that FMJ bullets then wore 1917 bores much sooner. Those 1917 barrels were softer than modern steels and probably do wear faster.
Remember, the whole idea of those WW I revolvers was an emergency war measure! In my view, the .45 ACP revolver concept should never have gone further. I realize that others disagree.
Maybe if good .44 Spcl. factory ammo had been loaded and more popular...
I concede that some preferred FMJ bullets if they might have to shoot dangerous large animals.
Last edited:
merl67
SWCA Member
Will jacketed bullets wear any barrel more than lead well yes. Is it a factor for most of the shooting public to worry about? Absolutely not, most folks simply do not shoot anywhere near enough to make any measurable difference. That ,and the 1917 revolver was designed to use the same ammo as the 1911 which was jacketed ball ammo..
Last edited:
StrawHat
SWCA Member
I have found my older ACP revolvers (Model 1917s) shoot better with jacketed ammunition. When I was younger, I followed Elmer Keith’s advice and cast significantly harder bullets for the 1917s. Now, I cast a bullet a bit larger in diameter and that works also. A longer bearing surface might help but these revolvers were designed around a 230 grain bullet.
Kevin
Kevin
Pisgah
Member
When the Model 1917 was the latest thing, all they had was jacketed .45 ACP. It was designed specifically for the 230 gr. jacketed standard load and will not be harmed in any way by using it.
Actually if you look at a friction coefficient table lead has a higher coefficient than copper, but that is dry and most lead bullets are lubed.
As stated. They were designed and marketed to the US military for use with jacket bullets and the military is known for its difficult acceptance testing.
I think it would take a lot of either to wear out a barrel. Just the cost of primers to wear one out would far out weight the cost of a barrel and having it installed.
More damage is done by firing dirty ammo, dirt in bore, but mainly over zealous and improper cleaning methods.
I have a lot of respect for Elmer Kieth, but I think sometimes he, like many of us, saw what he wanted to see. I am included in this of course,
As stated. They were designed and marketed to the US military for use with jacket bullets and the military is known for its difficult acceptance testing.
I think it would take a lot of either to wear out a barrel. Just the cost of primers to wear one out would far out weight the cost of a barrel and having it installed.
More damage is done by firing dirty ammo, dirt in bore, but mainly over zealous and improper cleaning methods.
I have a lot of respect for Elmer Kieth, but I think sometimes he, like many of us, saw what he wanted to see. I am included in this of course,
Last edited:
Texas Star
US Veteran
Keith noted that it's easier and cheaper to replace a .45 auto barrel than a revolver bbl. He wore barrels to this point in about 5ooo rounds of the old corrosive Natl. Match ammo, ca. 1925.
BUT he shot a LOT, probably daily.
BUT he shot a LOT, probably daily.
Really changing out a 1917 barrel and fitting it isn't that hard or time consuming with a few of the right tools. But, now days finding a good 1917 barrel is going to be a real problem. But, I do have a long piece of Green mountain .452 barrel if I need it.
My 1917 S&W seems to like either but patterns better with fmj. It was a shooter before I got it and I don't think at my age I will wear it out. I think my eyes and my barrel are probably in cahoots to test me maybe!!
Last edited:
Eddie Southgate
Member
I shoot 5 grains of Red Dot with any good 200 gr LSWC in my .45 AR guns . I have a Colt and a Brazilian Contract and it shoots well in both . Don't know how many thousands of these I have shot but it's a bunch . I don't by choice shoot any FMJ ammo in anything , not scared of damage but see no need for it for my use.
Walter Rego
Member
I shot my Model 1917 in honor of its 100th birthday. Ammo was Winchester white box hardball. Distance was 10 yards. I tend to pull my shots to the left with double action revolvers that have service style stocks. It worked exactly as Douglas Wesson intended using half moon clips.
Attachments
Jack Flash
SWCA Member
Just curious:
Does anyone agonize like this about shooting FMJ .45 ACP through the old M1911s?
Does anyone agonize like this about shooting FMJ .45 ACP through the old M1911s?
Just curious:
Does anyone agonize like this about shooting FMJ .45 ACP through the old M1911s?
No, they don't, even with WW I era M-1911's. I think the jacketed ammo wearing out a barrel thing is a whole lot of nothing.
IF a 1917 barrel was worn plumb slick I'll bet that at self defense distances that a tumbling 230 gr. fmj would make a nasty hole. Larry
Larry
