# There are no stupid questions....Right?



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

So you are getting ready to put up a batch of bullets and you pull out your trusty manual and look up the weight of the bullet to find the right powder data. The question I have is that in some manuals like Speer and even the Lee manual you'll get a specific brand of bullet listed for a load. Can you safely sub in a diffrent brand of bullet for the stated load or vise versa? In the Lee manual they have a very small list of powders listed under the 200 grain HP XTP bullet but under 200 grain bullets with no designation of type other than jacketed there is a much larger selection of powders. I am under the impression that in cases were you are using like type bullets you can cross the data safely. I'm working with the 200 grain HP XTP bullets but using the generic 200 grain jacketed bullet data. Is this wrong?


----------



## kenkaiserguns (Mar 21, 2008)

No, Your not wrong. As far as I am concerned, bullets are bullets, jacketed to jacketed, and lead to lead. This is why I start with the powder manufacturer data, instead of the bullet maker data, then cross reference back and forth...Start you loads low and work up form there. I look for manuals that tested their loads win rel guns, not pressure barrels..... I'm old school, Winchester 231, for 9's 38's, 357s,44 spec, 45acp, 2400 for 357mag and 44mags. Load lots and load often and Good Shooting...


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

kenkaiserguns said:


> No, Your not wrong. As far as I am concerned, bullets are bullets, jacketed to jacketed, and lead to lead. This is why I start with the powder manufacturer data, instead of the bullet maker data, then cross reference back and forth...Start you loads low and work up form there. I look for manuals that tested their loads win rel guns, not pressure barrels..... I'm old school, Winchester 231, for 9's 38's, 357s,44 spec, 45acp, 2400 for 357mag and 44mags. Load lots and load often and Good Shooting...


 That is just what I was thinking but just because I though it was right doesn't mean it is. I didn't want to loose a gun or hand for that matter. I've shot a lot of Bullseye for 38 wad cutters and Win. 296 for 357's and both were pretty easy to clean up when I cleaned my S & W 586. Lots of folks like the Win 231 for the 45ACP. I'm just getting started with the 45. I just shot my first batch of 200 grain HP's sitting on top of 5.7 grains of Bullseye with a published volocity of 915fps. Nice load with less felt recoil than WWB 230 grain FMJ target. I could shoot it all day long and go home with a smile.


----------



## Guest (Mar 21, 2008)

I feel generally like style bullet the same weight can be sub'd but there are some exceptions. Ones that come to mind are the CT Coated Partitions and Barnes TSX rifle bullets. You need to start 10% below max and work your way up which is good advice for any loading anyway.


----------



## benzuncle (Aug 29, 2007)

I wondered about this too, and came up with the same conclusion: 230 grain is 230 grain. The one thing I can say in Lee's defense is that they tested one helluva lotta ammo and powder types. I haven't seen that many tests done elsewhere. I'm about to jump from loading 45ACP to my second caliber: .380. I've been looking at just that situation. 95grain Rainier round nose. It isn't listed but other types of 95gr are. I also used that Lee list to determine which powder I would choose. Well, that and what was available in a local store so I didn't have to pay the hazmat shipping thing. I'm using Hodgdon's HP-38. (I also went to the Hogdgon site for powder/grain info.) It works very well for the 45; I'll be using it for the .380 also. I have yet to shoot anything that is as nice to shoot as 45ACP. My reloads work just great which means I can afford to shoot 45. Good luck to you.


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

benzuncle said:


> I wondered about this too, and came up with the same conclusion: 230 grain is 230 grain. The one thing I can say in Lee's defense is that they tested one helluva lotta ammo and powder types. I haven't seen that many tests done elsewhere. I'm about to jump from loading 45ACP to my second caliber: .380. I've been looking at just that situation. 95grain Rainier round nose. It isn't listed but other types of 95gr are. I also used that Lee list to determine which powder I would choose. Well, that and what was available in a local store so I didn't have to pay the hazmat shipping thing. I'm using Hodgdon's HP-38. (I also went to the Hogdgon site for powder/grain info.) It works very well for the 45; I'll be using it for the .380 also. I have yet to shoot anything that is as nice to shoot as 45ACP. My reloads work just great which means I can afford to shoot 45. Good luck to you.


TerryP
Point well taken. I'm just interested in pistol loads but getting into super sonic rifle loads at or near max loads you do need to be carful for sure. Just a diffrent lot of the same brand primers can have a big effect.

benzuncle
I am completely new to the 45 as of December of 07. I ordered up a bunch of boxes of Magtech 230 FMJ because they were cheap and the brass was reported to be nice. They have a darn hard and sharp kick to them and it was effecting my learning curve. I bought a box of WWB 230 FMJ and life got a lot better but lord that stuff is DIRTY! This first trial loads of 200 grain HP's is so sweet. The gun has almost a pleasant push to it that makes it's hard to believe the data of slightly over 900fps. I kinda think it sounds more like a howitzer going off than the usual crack of a pistol. I call it my hand held field artillery piece. I do love my 45. I plan on shooting the barrel out of the sucker :smt033


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

I believe the critical element when dealing with like weight and skin bullets is the powder cavity remaining within the case after bullet insertion. For a given overall length a pointed bullet will use more of the case than a wadcutter style bullet. The pointed bullet would therefore cause a greater initial pressure within the case when powder is ignited because there is less space for the expanding gas. The wadcutter would have greater friction as it moves down the barrel due to greater area in contact.

It is my understanding that peak pressure occurs within the first 1/4 inch, give or take a small amount, of bullet travel making the initial cavity size a very important element.

:smt1099


----------



## Wandering Man (Jul 9, 2006)

benzuncle said:


> I'm about to jump from loading 45ACP to my second caliber: .380.


I started off with .380 then went to .45acp, added 9mm, and now do .38 special, too.

I didn't realize the .380s were a bit more tricky to load on a progressive until after I started loading the other calibers. The small size requires a bit more precision.

Also, my .380's (with Bullseye) seem to give softer recoil in my Keltec than storebought. It really seems to make a difference in handeling and accuracy.

I can shoot 20 to 40 rounds in my Keltec without my hand hurting at the end of the day.

Let us know how they work out.

WM


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

TOF said:


> I believe the critical element when dealing with like weight and skin bullets is the powder cavity remaining within the case after bullet insertion. For a given overall length a pointed bullet will use more of the case than a wadcutter style bullet. The pointed bullet would therefore cause a greater initial pressure within the case when powder is ignited because there is less space for the expanding gas. The wadcutter would have greater friction as it moves down the barrel due to greater area in contact.
> 
> It is my understanding that peak pressure occurs within the first 1/4 inch, give or take a small amount, of bullet travel making the initial cavity size a very important element.
> 
> :smt1099


In the new Lee manual they list a minimum over all legnth with each powder and load. In the case of swapping powder data I am keeping my bullets longer than the listed minimum. I know that compressing the powder can lead to potencially bad things. The trouble I see with the Lee data is it doesn't differentiat between HP's and FMJ's when it comes to bullet legnth. I could mesure the left over shell capacity to make sure I didn't seat the bullet to deep. What do you do in a case like this?


----------



## TOF (Sep 7, 2006)

gmaske said:


> In the new Lee manual they list a minimum over all legnth with each powder and load. In the case of swapping powder data I am keeping my bullets longer than the listed minimum. I know that compressing the powder can lead to potencially bad things. The trouble I see with the Lee data is it doesn't differentiat between HP's and FMJ's when it comes to bullet legnth. I could mesure the left over shell capacity to make sure I didn't seat the bullet to deep. What do you do in a case like this?


I start with a low end charge and chronograph 10 rounds. if things look right I may go up a bit and chrono again till I achieve the velocity I want without any indication of over pressure.

We can't measure actual pressure but sound, feel, velocity and case/primer apearance can indicate aproaching problems.

I load rounds for IPSC and practice so my objective is normaly to achieve the appropriate power factor per IPSC rules. My defense ammo is purchased. therefore I don't normaly need to push the envelope.

When loading for "Walk in the woods" rounds, I use name brand bullets which load data is readily available for. I still start low and work up.

I was the first in my group to purchase a chronograph. Some friends that have been loading for 40+ years had never used one and were astounded how little they knew about their loads. They now call me when a new load is ready for testing. I reccomend every hand loader purchase or obtain access to one.

:smt1099


----------



## SDefender (Mar 12, 2008)

In general I load per stated bullet weight and mix/match as appropriate. However, some bullets are physically longer than others in the same weight and can have more barrel contact area, which means more resistance and more pressure building, which may account for some bullets having less stated powder charge than others of the same weight. Just food for thought. 

Starting 10% below maximum should keep you out of trouble. I inspect every case I shoot while in load development, before moving up to the next step. I usually start 1 grain (usually more than 10% less than max.) Each step for me (pistol) is .2 grains, which gives me 6 steps between starting load and max. published load. And I also use top quality cases that I am the only person who have fired them. And I also watch the chronograph for anything funky developing.


----------



## benzuncle (Aug 29, 2007)

gmaske said:


> a pleasant push... I do love my 45. I plan on shooting the barrel out of the sucker :smt033


You got it. A 45 "shoves"; it doesn't snap. Aside from my .380 which is my pocket piece, I'm having a hard time justifying adding another caliber to my reloading equipment.


----------



## benzuncle (Aug 29, 2007)

Just got my 95gr Rainier .380 bullets from Midway via UPS today. It'll probably be a week before I can get down to the business of setting up the Turret Press and begin adjusting everything for the .380. One thing I learned with the 45 setup: dry load some rounds until the powder charge, seating and crimping are set where you want them. Then knock'em apart with the bullet puller (which I'm now a pro at using), prime and start loading. I must have pulled 30 or 40 45's apart with powder in them before I was satisfied. Live and learn, eh? Stay tuned.


----------



## mactex (Jan 23, 2007)

benzuncle said:


> I wondered about this too, and came up with the same conclusion: 230 grain is 230 grain. The one thing I can say in Lee's defense is that they tested one helluva lotta ammo and powder types. I haven't seen that many tests done elsewhere.


Just so you know, Lee didn't do any testing. They took the information from other companies' books, web sites, etc. and combined it into one book. They acknowledge this someplace in the second edition of the book.

Also, basically bullets of the same weight and jacketing will perform similarly with one caviet. Some are longer than others due to bullet shape (round nose v. flat nose, etc.). This difference will effect seating depth and overall pressure. Be careful with seating depth because of these differences.


----------



## benzuncle (Aug 29, 2007)

Thanks for that clarification Mactex. I really meant that their compilation of information is larger than the other books I've looked at. And I plan on keeping one bullet from each and every manufacturer for just the reason you mentioned.


----------

