rockquarry
Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 11,080
- Reaction score
- 14,189
I've yet to try N310. Any comments from those who have used it for .45 ACP cast target loads? How does it compare to Bullseye for accuracy?
N310
- Thread starter rockquarry
- Start date
Toolguy
Member
N310 and N320 are 2 very good 9mm powders. Presumably they would be good in a 45, but I haven't tried that, yet.
trulyapostolic
Member
I've burned POUNDS of N310 over the years under 185 and 200gr lead bullets. I don't think you can find a better powder for loads between 700-800fps.
OP
rockquarry
Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 11,080
- Reaction score
- 14,189
Thank you. I'm also interested in how it compares to Bullseye from an accuracy perspective. Have you also used Bullseye?
trulyapostolic
Member
Shot Bullseye for a couple years before switching to N310. Both meter well but N310 burns cleaner and shot better in my Ransom Rest at 50 yards using lead or JHP loads.
OP
rockquarry
Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 11,080
- Reaction score
- 14,189
USSR
Member
Would be curious to know your N310 charge weight with lead 185 - 200gr SWC's.
venomballistics
Member
Just took my first dive into VV's powders.
It seems they make powder like Subaru builds cars .... common platform.
As long as that base formulation is rock solid, the whole product line benefits from that foundation.
N3 is the double base line, making all the pistol powders. The burn rate is controlled by the porosity of the grains.
N1 is the rifle line. burn rate is determined by the kernel.
N5 is an enhanced rifle line, same treatment as above.
It's a good thing Elmer Keith didn't have these. The automatic compatibility of formulation would have only encouraged his duplex load experiments
It seems they make powder like Subaru builds cars .... common platform.
As long as that base formulation is rock solid, the whole product line benefits from that foundation.
N3 is the double base line, making all the pistol powders. The burn rate is controlled by the porosity of the grains.
N1 is the rifle line. burn rate is determined by the kernel.
N5 is an enhanced rifle line, same treatment as above.
It's a good thing Elmer Keith didn't have these. The automatic compatibility of formulation would have only encouraged his duplex load experiments
trulyapostolic
Member
Below are starting points. My gun likes 3.8 with 200, 4.2 with 185, and 4.4-4.5 with 185 JHP.
3.7 to 3.8 with 200gr lead
3.8 to 4.0 with 185gr lead
4.0 to 4.2 with 185gr JHP (Nosler or Zero)
USSR
Member
Thanks trulyapostolic. I've still got a bunch of Bullseye, so I'm hesitant to open up the canister of N310.
PPCSHOOTER
Member
I'VE BEEN USING VV310 FOR A LONG TIME. I LOAD 3.95 GR WITH 185GR SWHP SWAGED ZERO BULLETS. IT'S MORE ACCURATE AT 50YDS THAN BULLSEYE. ALSO THE GUNS ACCURACY AND RELIABILITY DOESN'T DETERIORATE AS QUICKLY BETWEEN CLEANINGS.
I ALSO LOAD 4.1-4.5GR VV310 WITH THE JACKETED ZERO OR NOSLER 185GR JHP. SHOOTS LIKE A LASER AT 50YDS. 4.5 BEING THE MOST ACCURATE.
I ALSO LOAD 4.1-4.5GR VV310 WITH THE JACKETED ZERO OR NOSLER 185GR JHP. SHOOTS LIKE A LASER AT 50YDS. 4.5 BEING THE MOST ACCURATE.
It’s been almost 50 years since I’ve used bullseye and back then I only had a Colt Gold Cup. I now only use 310, for my 45s, and it’s much cleaner and the 45s I have now are a LOT more accurate than my Gold Cup ever was, even after I sent it to Clark Custom for accurizing
We have used VV-310 for several years now in .32 S&W long for Precision Pistol Competition. I also use it for very light loads in 9mm for revolvers. I have found that it is as accurate as bullseye and burns much cleaner. I have also used Winchester 231 for various loadings including very light, but there is a significant amount of unburnt powder with 231.
I never noticed the unburnt powder in a 1911 as it throws the unburnt powder away with the case. When shooting .45 acp light loads (with moon clips) in a S&W 25-2, I really notice the unburnt, greenish, powder.
I know a guy who uses a light load in a Benelli .32 for precision pistol. I am not recommending this load but he has excellent success with it - VV310 .9 grains (yes, less than ONE grain) with a 100 gr. Lapua bullet. This is for 50 foot indoor bullseye competition. For outdoor, especially for the long line (50 yards) you need to get the bullet going faster to keep the accuracy at 50 yards therefore, more powder.
David
I never noticed the unburnt powder in a 1911 as it throws the unburnt powder away with the case. When shooting .45 acp light loads (with moon clips) in a S&W 25-2, I really notice the unburnt, greenish, powder.
I know a guy who uses a light load in a Benelli .32 for precision pistol. I am not recommending this load but he has excellent success with it - VV310 .9 grains (yes, less than ONE grain) with a 100 gr. Lapua bullet. This is for 50 foot indoor bullseye competition. For outdoor, especially for the long line (50 yards) you need to get the bullet going faster to keep the accuracy at 50 yards therefore, more powder.
David
OP
rockquarry
Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 11,080
- Reaction score
- 14,189
I shoot only conventionally sized and lubed cast bullets in handguns, so dirtiness is part of shooting. Can't tell if it's powder residue, lubricant, or both. As a result, I can't claim Bullseye is any dirtier than any other powder, but everything cleans up easily.
I've not done a side-by-side accuracy comparison but would guess my two Clark-Accurized Gold Cups will shoot about as well as my Les Baer with the 1.5" 50-yard guarantee. One of my Gold Cups has been Clark-accurized twice. About twenty-five years after the first accurizing, it loosened up or I started shooting poorly, maybe both. Anyway, we both seem to be working better after the last accurizing.
I don't know if Clark Custom still does this work.
Last edited:
USSR
Member
I'm with you rockquarry, the last thing I worry about is how dirty my handgun is at the end of the day.
OP
rockquarry
Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 11,080
- Reaction score
- 14,189
Not unusual, depending on the alloy you are using. I have none to weigh at the moment, but, according to my notes, bullets from my #429421 mould weighed 250 grs. cast of wheelweight alloy. For my #429244 mould, they weighed 263 grs. cast of ww alloy (255 grs. cast of linotype alloy, according to the Lyman book). My .45 Colt bullet, #454424 weighs 260 grs. cast from ww alloy. Lyman book shows 255 grs. cast of #2 alloy.
These figures are all surprisingly very consistent with Lyman numbers when you include deviations for the different alloys. Not to mention worn out and replaced mould cherries used to make the moulds. Again, pretty consistent.
Rockquarry,
My 255 gr SWC were the linotypes but I did replenish the furnace partway through the casting session with some lead from Scuba Diving Belt lead weight. Suspect that those weights had less tin possibly and were not quite as hard as Linotype. I kept back a 10 pound bar of Rotometal Hardcast and still have a couple of 7# Diving B eh my weights for a future casting session in Springtime here in Vermont!
Been using n310 with a 200 grain coated bullet for quite awhile. Closet thing to Bullseye I could find.. I use it at an indoor range as a target load. I believe the Army Marksmenship team uses this powder also. My load is 3.8 grains. Well worth the the try.
Marine Corps: https://www.ssusa.org/content/usmc-match-45-load/
I've been happy with the load in Bullseye competition. N310 is a great powder. WST is another good one as a substitute for Bullseye.
I've been happy with the load in Bullseye competition. N310 is a great powder. WST is another good one as a substitute for Bullseye.
