Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Winchester 231 in 45ACP

  1. #1
    GunLoad Trainee
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    7

    Default Winchester 231 in 45ACP

    Hi Guys
    I had decided to use 231 instead of Unique, mostly because of the smoke in indoor shooting. I got out the "One Book/One Caliber" but the data looked strange,so I made a plot of powder weight vs velocity and it looks like two different powders. For example; Hornaday max is 6.5 gr but Winchester max is 5.5gr. for about the same velocity. I dug up some really old data, Ken Waters Pet Loads/ Handloader Magazine (197 where he tried 5.0 and 6.0 gr and reported that 5.0 gr would not function reliably in his test gun. I tried a load listed on the Hodgdon Website of 4.4 gr and it functioned fine in my 1911's. That makes me think that there really are two set of loading data, one for an "old" powder and one for a "new" powder. Maybe Hodgdon changed the powder formulation when they took over making 231.

    The data from the current Hodgdon Website should be the newest (4.4 gr/771 fps and 5.6 gr/914 fps). But the Third Edition of the Lyman P&R Handbook (2004) still has what I think is "old" data.

    This is all data for 200 gr LSWC. What do you guys think ?

  2. #2
    Dogs Like Him versifier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    1,853

    Default

    Published results reflect only what was observed with the specific components and specific test firearm that was used to generate it. Every bullet, barrel, case lot, and batch of propellant are different. It would be very odd indeed if they were all in agreement.

    Old data can be dangerous for several reasons, the two most important are that powders do change and the methods of determining pressure have changed also. Even data five years old can be dangerously out of date for certain powders.

    I think every loader should have a minimum of three current manuals and when contemplating a load should consult all of them. Not only are the testing circumstances and components different, humans can make errors and some of them work in data entry. It is not unusual to find incorrect data in manuals - it doesn't happen often, but still often enough so that I would never rely on just one source, especially if the powder was new to me. And if you have two sources and they disagree, it's nice to have a third and a fourth to double check. Then too, not all manuals will list all available powders and bullet weights, so the more different manuals you have, the more likely it is that all your bases are covered. Think of them as the least expensive life insurance you can buy.
    "Stand your ground.
    Do not fire unless fired upon.
    But if they mean to have a war let it begin here."
    - Capt. Parker, Lexington Militia, April 19, 1775

  3. #3
    runfiverun runfiverun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    soda springs idaho
    Posts
    657

    Default

    also the components used make a huge difference.
    some cases have a tad less capacity,and some bullets have more bearing surface.
    also with the 45's there is a huge difference in chamber tolerences. and the primer brisance in such a small area will affect the pressure too.
    hence the adage of start low and work up.
    ken waters loads seem pretty sensible if you see what he did there.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check        

Gunloads.com Sponsored Links