Listed COL for 45ACP 200gr LSWC seems too short

[rockquarry]

Hard to tell from the depictions, but the #452460 is really a short, squatty bullet in comparison with the #452630 which is a rough copy of the longer H&G #68. I seated # 452460 to 1.165". The #68 design and copies will feed well in unmodified .45s. The #452460 will feed reliably in some unmodified guns; however, in many, it won't. It's still a very accurate bullet.

 

[rockquarry]

It's unfortunate this thread has progressed (or maybe digressed) to this point. Proper seating depth is not a complicated procedure, but maybe some of us are doing a poor job of explaining. Perhaps others don't read loading manuals thoroughly. This is all very basic overall length bullet seating. Should we start over?

 

[rhodesengr]

So the Rimrock guys have told me that the LC Oregon trail bullet is the same shape as the RR version so you would think the listed loads would make sense.

Seems that they don't since when I started this thread, I said that the 1.190 COL would put the shoulder below the case mouth.

That said, yesterday I made 100 rounds with a COL of 1.235 which left very little shoulder above the case. Load was 7.9gr of AA#5 which is near the low end of the listed load. The min load is 7.8gr with a test speed of 902fps. These rounds cycled and shot fine in both a CZ 97B and a Sig P220 which is what I have in 45 ACP. In the CZ 97 B I measured 865fps with an std dev of 14fps over 10 rounds. Speed was a little lower in the P220 which is what I see with other loads. The CZ is more efficient. I think I will back off to 1.245 to 1.250 to leave a little more shoulder exposed.

I appreciate all the discussion and we can keep talking if there is more to say.

I will add that while RimRock says their bullet is OAL 0.639, they actually vary a fair amount. Here is a a random sample of ten
.655
.645
.641
.652
.650
.644
.656
.654
.655
.645

for what it's worth...

 

[scattershot]

I load several different brands of 200 grain SWC bullets in the. .45ACP,and they are all loaded to different lengths, from 1.215 to 1.245, and they all cycle well. I purchased a seating die for my Dillon that indexes on the bullet shoulder, and let the overall length take care of itself. I really need to standardize on one bullet, though.

 

[rockquarry]

So the Rimrock guys have told me that the LC Oregon trail bullet is the same shape as the RR version so you would think the listed loads would make sense.

Seems that they don't since when I started this thread, I said that the 1.190 COL would put the shoulder below the case mouth.

That said, yesterday I made 100 rounds with a COL of 1.235 which left very little shoulder above the case. Load was 7.9gr of AA#5 which is near the low end of the listed load. The min load is 7.8gr with a test speed of 902fps. These rounds cycled and shot fine in both a CZ 97B and a Sig P220 which is what I have in 45 ACP. In the CZ 97 B I measured 865fps with an std dev of 14fps over 10 rounds. Speed was a little lower in the P220 which is what I see with other loads. The CZ is more efficient. I think I will back off to 1.245 to 1.250 to leave a little more shoulder exposed.

I appreciate all the discussion and we can keep talking if there is more to say.

I will add that while RimRock says their bullet is OAL 0.639, they actually vary a fair amount. Here is a a random sample of ten
.655
.645
.641
.652
.650
.644
.656
.654
.655
.645

for what it's worth...

I wouldn't be concerned about such variances in bullet length, but there are always exceptions with cast bullets and everything else. Commercial bullets may come from more than one multi-cavity mould, the cavities of which could, but shouldn't, vary slightly from one mould to another. The dynamics of running these bullets through an automatic sizer or even a non-automated sizer will often change the length a bit but not enough to hurt anything. One alloy mix (hardness) will probably produce an average bullet length that is different from another alloy mix. There are probably other changeable factors that can contribute to variance in length.

I don't know if a random sampling of ten bullets is enought to provide any useful information. What few bullets I've measured prove nothing as I've never attached an importance to this. Shoot benchrested twenty-five yard groups with your varied-length bullets after developing a good load. That will tell you if the length variance means anything.

Always consider casting your own bullets if you're not happy with commercial ones. No fast overnight learning here, but you have a lot of control over the process.

 

[Troystat]

The Bullseye.net forum is a wealth of info for loading 185 grain lead wadcutters. These bullets vary in length, I load mine so there is just about a finger nail thickness of the wide part of the bullet showing past the case mouth. I also use a taper crimp of about .464-465. This style of bullet shoots well and is easy to develop loads for. These days I really like coated bullets like the ones Bayou and Brazo's sell.

 

[gwpercle]

Here are the instructions from the 1960's for seating any 200 gr. LSWC .
Seat the bullet so that a "Thumbnail Thickness" of front driving band is exposed above the case mouth . Too much and the bullet might stick in the leade / throat .

The front driving band had to be exposed that much and no dimension was given because most of us had rulers , yard sticks and tape measures (in feet & inches) to measure with ... look at a working man's hands to get an idea of how thick his workhardened finger nails are , computer programmers hands won't work too dainty and soft .

As crude as these instructions are ... they have worked for over 50 years ... and they will continue to work .
Gary

 

[Pisgah]

Don't overthink the "problem". COL is the most variable of all the cartridge measurements. The exact style of bullet, the alloy from which the bullet is cast, the length that will/will not function through your gun -- all these things and more can result in a COL that is different from the one listed in a manual, but still perfectly fine.

 

[rhodesengr]

I purchased a seating die for my Dillon that indexes on the bullet shoulder, and let the overall length take care of itself.

Interested in this as the length variations seem to be mostly the tapered part above the shoulder. Who sells that seater? I wonder if they have one for a SDB rather than a press that uses standard size dies.

FYI. RimRock wrote me back and said pretty much what my common sense (and everyone here is saying): case just below the shoulder. So I guess there is no explanation for the 1.190 number in the load data. No worries. Not everything thing in life has an explanation.

 

[rockquarry]

Interested in this as the length variations seem to be mostly the tapered part above the shoulder. Who sells that seater? I wonder if they have one for a SDB rather than a press that uses standard size dies.

FYI. RimRock wrote me back and said pretty much what my common sense (and everyone here is saying): case just below the shoulder. So I guess there is no explanation for the 1.190 number in the load data. No worries. Not everything thing in life has an explanation.

I can't believe I actually did this; maybe I've been reading the comments of too many obsessive posters and some of the compulsve behavior is rubbing off. However, my curiousity got the best of me after reading your posts on varying bullet length...

I use the SAECO #069, an H&G #68 copy. I had a real #68 and sold it because the SAECO/ Redding version was a hair more accurate. I've used this mould for for more than thirty years. I took ten sized and lubed bullets, and wiped any lube traces off the nose and the base to get good readings. Consider, too, that my slow, one-at-a-time lube/sizing is probably far gentler on the bullets than automated equipment.
.627
.628
.629
.629
.629
.629
.627
.628
.629
.628

I still stand by what I said in an earlier post - makes no difference for any purpose, even with considerably greater variances than what I came up with. I picked up one bullet that had a "high sprue", didn't cut off cleanly for some reason, maybe the angle at which I struck the sprue, etc. There may be some more of these in the batch. Measurements on such bullets would really skew the average length but have no affect on accuracy.

Again, no need for worry about varying bullet lengths. Load development and group shooting are far more important than any of this other stuff in determining a good load.

 

[BillBro]

1.245" here. They chamber fine in my 1911's and even the cz97. 5.5gr A2.

 

[imakmst]

That’s all I shoot, same bullet, very many of them. 1.250. I use the barrels from my 1911 and Shield each time just for habitual verification of kerplunkification..