1911Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I shoot light loads for bullseye, and get pretty poor performance out of the powder as a result. With TiteGroup the chamber fouled really badly; with W231 fouling is moderate but a good amount of powder is ejected unburned. I'm just starting a pound of Clays to see what it's like but don't have results yet. I know that the powder is probably the biggest factor, but I did wonder if changing to a magnum primer might create better ignition? The slightly raised pressures shouldn't be a problem, I would think.

Has anyone here ever experimented to see if there's a difference in the amount of fouling or powder ignition with light loads with regular vs. magnum primers? If so, it would save me the effort.

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,366 Posts
Magnum primers are not the answer. i think changing to CLAYS will make a big difference for you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
550 Posts
A tight fit in the case and a tighter crimp are more likely to help. Reducing the diameter of the expander plug will increase case tension on the bullet, and a firm taper crimp will also. Usually, that will give good combustion with very light loads of fast powder.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,005 Posts
I haven't had any problems with light loads in my .45, but then, I have always used Lee's factory crimp die in a separate operation to crimp my loads. I think this little gem from Lee is the best thing since JMB got to thinking.

------------------
If God didn't want us to own guns, why did He make the 1911?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Okay, thanks all. I think I'm okay on the crimp, but the Lee die sounds smart. I admit that I don't have a micrometer to check the crimp, so it will reassure me in that regard, too. And I am looking forward to see how the Clays performs. The only difficulty I see with it so far is that the large flakes seem sensitive in measuring charges under 3.5 grains. Need to do some experimenting there and haven't put a full session through to see how clean it is yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
688 Posts
Originally posted by EdGCNM:
With TiteGroup the chamber fouled really badly; with W231 fouling is moderate but a good amount of powder is ejected unburned. Thanks!
On really light loads, the case mouth doesn't seal well against the chamber upon firing the round. This allows gases and powder residue to blow back into the chamber.

I would try Alliant Bullseye for reduced bullseye loads. The cases will be a bit sooty, but the unburned powder seems to be at a minimum.


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

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,845 Posts
Bullseye has been the standard for light target loads since the beginning of time for a reason.

The "old guys" used to claim an empty .22 LR case would make a perfect dipper for Bullseye loads.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
EdCGNM,

How light are your light loads? Sometimes an extra tenth of a grain or two will raise pressures enough to make the powder burn more cleanly.

If you're loading for bullseye, be aware that you might be pursuing cleanliness at the expense of accuracy. Tight crimps, for instance, can deform the bullet enough to open groups on the long line. I suspect that magnum primers wouldn't help either since I've never heard of any other bullseye shooters using them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
The loads are light enough to cycle the action reliably and not much more. 3.9 grains of W231 and about 3.3 of Clays seem good for my gun to achieve this result firing a 185 gr LSWC. Clays seems to vary in my Uniflow measure too much under 3.5 grains, so I may up it to the 3.5. Accuracy is fine so far as I can tell; although I wish I was a good enough shot to know for sure! When I've got the trigger finger under control the .45 seems to shoot almost as well as my .22. Crimping is tight enough to resist any attempt to set the bullet back with finger pressure or through cycling of the action. Wouldn't crimping only affect accuracy if it extended a long way down the length of the bullet? I would think that as long as the bullet engages the lands over most of its length and the base makes an intact seal for the gases pushing it along the barrel, it wouldn't make a noticeable difference over 25 yards?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
Those are some light loads, even by bullseye standards. I'm not surprised that they're dirty.

Does the residue build up to the point that the pistol doesn't function reliably? If not, perhaps you shouldn't worry about it.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top