1911Forum banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So what would you guys rather do, have the lesser recoil of the 230gr. bullet or the nice holes of the 200gr.SWC?

(almost like the 9mm vs 40s&w vs 45)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
688 Posts
I'd use the 230 gr round nose, because it is inherently more reliable.

------------------
johnnyb
A slow hit beats a fast miss
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
257 Posts
I ususally use......whatever I have on hand at the moment


The 230grs do have less muzzle flip, and can be loaded with less powder. I perfer them at the moment to shoot in my single stack. But the 200gr LSWC(make sure it's similar to an H&G 68) can be easier to find and cheaper to boot. I've been meaning to get some 255 LFPs to try, but can't find any small quanities. Any of them, with the correct crimp and OAL, will run in my gun(and most 1911s)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
366 Posts
I have competed with both. The 200gr SWC and its larger, sharper hole gave be perhaps a single one-zone-better shot per 100 rounds. My gunsmith and I experimented with and adjusted my Kimber for about 6 months, because I would get about 1 or 2 failures to feed per 150 rounds of SWC. Most of the time it was probably because I jarred the top round in a fully-loaded magazine during a reload.
I finally threw up my hands and admitted that "God & J. Moses Browning" had made the gun for 230gr round nose bullets. 4,000 rounds later the ONLY failure to feed I had was due to a bent top feed lip (follower) on a Chip McCormick 10 round magazine from impacting the concrete during indoor matches.
For the past several weeks I have been considering using factory 230gr FMJ round nose for the bedside gun and the carry gun instead of the 230 gr. Federal Hydra shoks in them now. They are so expensive I haven't fired more than 60 rounds of them; hardly an amount to thoroughly test reliability or to gain confidence.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
7,848 Posts
I don’t like the 200. Give me a 185 or a 230. The 185 recoil is sharp and flat while the 230 is soft and slow.

When shooting steel, I want that shot to break and the steel to be gone or going ASAP. 230's take too long to get there.

I shot 220's for a season in my 40 and ditched them for this reason also.

Good luck to you.

Tom
AF Shooting Team
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
220 Posts
Well, I agree with Tom (us M's gotta stick together), if you are a fairly experienced shooter. So, I think the bullet you use could be dependent on your skill level. If you are a new shooter, or perhaps smaller framed, the 230's or even 250-255's could prove beneficial for a while. My daughter started out with 200's in a single stack SA years ago, and they were a handful for her. We switched to the 255's, and the gun recovered much quicker, so she was able to shoot much faster with them. As Tom said, the bigger bullets DO take longer to get downrange, but that really shouldn't come into play until you are experienced enough to notice it. Concentration on sight picture, grip, stance, etc., while not having that increased muzzle flip, could prove beneficial. If that stuff isn't right, the bullet weight doesn't matter anyway........ Also, with more experience, you will be able to call your shots without having to look at the target to see the holes...........

PK, I have some 255's I will give you next time I see you, OK? What do you need, a 100 or so to play with?

Rich
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
257 Posts
Rich, thanks. 100 should be enough to play with. Are you using Clays with those?

BTW, ya'll planing on shooting Area 8?

Kyle
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
550 Posts
According to Bill Wilson and a lot of other gunsmiths, as well as my own experience, the H&G 200 grain lead semi-wadcutter feeds more reliably than a 230 grain round nose bullet, jacketed or not.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top