Loading for the Shield .45

[EdN]

Who is loading for their .45 Shield?

What have you found that it likes?

I have a bunch of 185 Lead semi wad cutters loaded, they operate in 2 other .45, one an M&P full size and the wife's Sig compact 1911, but the Shield doesn't always function (extract and eject) with them....

Functions 100% so far with 230 grain factory FMJ and Magtech 230 gr JHP bonded...

Thanks in advance!

73
Semper Fi,
Ed

 

[Wise_A]

Couple things.

What's your load with the 185-LSWC's? In my experience, compact pistols generally require a bit more oomph to get them to function. The Sig doesn't necessarily fall into that category, depending on its internal particulars. Anything with a variable or dual recoil spring is, frankly, a pain in the neck much of the time.

I've found it's a lot easier to load a full-weight bullet than a 185 or even a 200 (although 200s are a lot easier to work with).

I don't think the LSWC is your problem.

 

[HKSmith]

Target loads that work in my 1911's are not reliable in my .45 Shield. I shoot a lot of 185 grain Nosler JHP's over 4.3 grains of VV N310, but I get stovepipes in the Shield with this load. Upping the charge to 5.0 grains of N310 eliminated the stovepipes and it's still a pleasant load and below max according to VV data.

With 230 grain RN bullets, 4.7 grains of HP-38 functions well in my Shield and is pleasant to shoot. 230 grain bullets over 6.6 grains of Power Pistol feels like a hardball factory duplication load.

I have had some failure to feed problems with my Shield that are independent of the ammo (including factory) and will contact S&W if they continue (about 400 rounds to date).

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I have a bunch of 185 Lead semi wad cutters loaded, they operate in 2 other .45, one an M&P full size and the wife's Sig compact 1911, but the Shield doesn't always function (extract and eject) with them....

Functions 100% so far with 230 grain factory FMJ and Magtech 230 gr JHP bonded...

Thanks in advance!

73
Semper Fi,
Ed

Well, it's probably not the bullet because extract and eject happens after the bullet is no longer in the gun. It's probably the load itself. Like said above, try upping the charge and see if that helps.

What are the numbers on your load?

 

[vulcan73]

I recently acquired a Shield 45 and put 109 rounds through it at my range. I used 230 RN's with relatively fast medium and slow powders:

fast: 700-X (4.9 gr); Reddot (5.0)
medium: Greendot (5.2)
slow: 800-X (7.0); SR4756 (7.0)

These loads are direct from the Hodgdon and Alliant manuals/web sites. The gun cycled all rounds with these loads perfectly. I managed to put all 109 into an 8" circle at 27 feet which is my criteria for accuracy with a short barrel defensive gun.

I have since acquired Speer 230 gr Gold Dot JHP's (#4483) and Sierra 230 gr JHP's (#8805). I've loaded the Speer's with Reddot but have not yet tested this combination. I've tried other bullet weights in my various 45's but have opted to stay with 230 for all range and carry loads.

My Shield 9 cycles both 124 gr and 147 grain XTP's without any issues. I prefer fast burning powders (700-X or HP-38) in my short barrel 9mm guns.

I'm not sure what the advantage is in using 185 grain versus 230 grain bullets in a defensive gun like the Shield 45. In a real scenario, either will do the job so I'd stick with what reliably cycles the gun. The Magtech 45 Bonded JHP's have excellent expansion into ballistics gel as shown by Luckygunner testing. Their testing in 45 ACP was done with a short barreled Kahr CW45 so results for the Shield 45 should be identical. I'd use these for carrying if they cycle your Shield 45 reliably:

http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/#45ACP

Anything with a variable or dual recoil spring is, frankly, a pain in the neck much of the time.

Long barrel guns with long slides have significantly more mass than short barrel slides. This mass is what shoves the round into the chamber. Small slides with smaller mass require more force to shove a round home, thus really stiff springs. Yes indeed, short compact guns can be a challenge to chamber a round.

 

[Wise_A]

Long barrel guns with long slides have significantly more mass than short barrel slides. This mass is what shoves the round into the chamber. Force = mass x velocity so with less mass you need more velocity to get the round into the chamber thus you need really stiff springs to get that smallish mass moving with sufficient velocity to generate the same force. Yes indeed, short compact guns can be a challenge to chamber a round.

Actually, the variable- and dual-power springs, anecdotally, are a pain by themselves. Every now and then a BE shooter will stick one in his match pistol to experiment in the quest for better rapid fire scores. At which point he discovers that the reduced-power 185- and 200-grain LSWC loads favored for the sustained fire strings simply won't cycle the damnedable Screwy Spring he installed.

But yes--nasty little compact guns with very short slide cycles are just the worst.

 

[HKSmith]

I recently acquired a Shield 45 and put 109 rounds through it at my range. I used 230 RN's with relatively fast medium and slow powders:

fast: 700-X (4.9 gr); Reddot (5.0)
medium: Greendot (5.2)
slow: 800-X (7.0); SR4756 (7.0)

These loads are direct from the Hodgdon and Alliant manuals/web sites. The gun cycled all rounds with these loads perfectly. I managed to put all 109 into an 8" circle at 27 feet which is my criteria for accuracy with a short barrel defensive gun.

I have since acquired Speer 230 gr Gold Dot JHP's (#4483) and Sierra 230 gr JHP's (#8805). I've loaded the Speer's with Reddot but have not yet tested this combination. I've tried other bullet weights in my various 45's but have opted to stay with 230 for all range and carry loads.

My Shield 9 cycles both 124 gr and 147 grain XTP's without any issues. I prefer fast burning powders (700-X or HP-38) in my short barrel 9mm guns.

I'm not sure what the advantage is in using 185 grain versus 230 grain bullets in a defensive gun like the Shield 45. In a real scenario, either will do the job so I'd stick with what reliably cycles the gun. The Magtech 45 Bonded JHP's have excellent expansion into ballistics gel as shown by Luckygunner testing. Their testing in 45 ACP was done with a short barreled Kahr CW45 so results for the Shield 45 should be identical. I'd use these for carrying if they cycle your Shield 45 reliably:

http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/#45ACP



Long barrel guns with long slides have significantly more mass than short barrel slides. This mass is what shoves the round into the chamber. Force = mass x velocity so with less mass you need more velocity to get the round into the chamber thus you need really stiff springs to get that smallish mass moving with sufficient velocity to generate the same force. Yes indeed, short compact guns can be a challenge to chamber a round.

Not meant as a criticism, but force does not equal mass x velocity. Force = mass x acceleration (F=ma), which is Newton's Second Law. Mass x velocity is momentum.

Also, it doesn't take high force or slide velocity to chamber a round. Just lock the slide back on a pistol, insert a loaded magazine, pull the slide back and let it go forward slowly and the top round will chamber. High slide velocity is necessary for rapid and positive cycling, not for pushing the round into the chamber.

 

[vulcan73]

Holy ****! I don't believe I made that posting without checking what I really meant to say. Thanks for the slap on the wrist. Anyhow, I edited my statement in more general terms. It is my experience with a bunch of semi-autos that the large slide guns rack easier than the short slide ones due to the spring(s) and spring constant. I standby my statement that slide mass does make a difference in chambering a round.