45ACP Hardball Challenge 2024

First topic message reminder :

Hello,

Next year, I'm planning on shooting 45ACP 230 gr ball ammo in CMP EIC matches. I'm well aware that this is not necessary. Additionally, I'm not interested in the "I did this (leg out) when it was harder," discussion, as that is not fruitful.

What I *am* interested in, is the current consensus/fact/opinion on two things:

1) What really counts as "ball ammo" velocity that would have been issued on the line?
2) What sort of velocity is necessary for accuracy at 50 yards?

I've read this thread with data provided by Jack H: https://www.bullseyeforum.net/t1396-hardball-loads#6974

I've also caught basically the same information/post, though with a little more information/context from the link http://barilin.com/advice/hardball.html using the Wayback machine. I've researched other threads here that may have insight (but sadly cannot find a single test target to look at), but have mostly found discordant views.

It does seem clear that velocity has increased in commercially made 45ACP ball ammo from original introduction of the cartridge (though perhaps that is an artifact of improved chronographs). It also seems to be the case that some of the last stuff issued on the line, TZZ (or IMI, if you prefer) was known to be particularly hot. Of course, lot to lot variance can tell some of the story on perception of how hot some ammo was. So, too, can velocity measurements, as Jack H was kind enough to share, and Julian Hatcher was nice enough to write down (he said 820 fps).

So, let's hear it- what do you know about 45ACP ball ammo velocity that you'd like to share? I'm listening.


Thanks,
Chase

My bone density scan said I’m in the 98-99th percentile with very dense bones. But I have zero interest in pulling the trigger on 5 grains of old or new BE underneath a 230 grain projectile, regardless of jacket. OUCH!!

Wobbley wrote:CAUTION,!!  This is for HERCULES powders only….  It dates from 1987 when Hercules still had the Kenvil NJ plant.  By 1994 they were making powders in another facility and the formulations were different, and they were now “Alliant”.  So if you’re loading “HERCULES” powder you can use this data as a guide

There are two loads for a 230 RN…
4.0 BE behind a 230 RN Lead bullet giving 810fps, and
5.0 BE behind a 230 FMJ giving 910 fps.  

If you’re loading FMJ I think you’ll find that 4.3-4.5 will be close to ideal, but as always YMMV.  If I recall, Sierras 230 FMJ was the most accurate, but was much more costly.  

YEP! that's the data I'm using, but actually says 905, for the IDPA and USPSA I've been loading 4.5 grains with a 230 coated bullet, but I have no idea how much I've decreased velocity? my club has a labradar, but it must be special because they never bring it out. I've got cans of unique and 2400 so it's good to have this data, the old BE was hotter.

mbmshooter wrote:

Cmysix wrote:I am loading out of a can of Hercules Bullseye, So I found some load data from 1986{hercules} and it says a 230 FMC 5 grns 905 fps

After I was no longer able to find and buy DOD White Box ammo, I began loading Winchester 230gr FMJ over 5.0gr of Bullseye in an effort to replicate the 820 fps of White Box.  I never did chrono those loads but relied on info I was given. 
If you have access to a chronograph, I would try to get as close as possible to the 820fps that Winchester found to be the "sweet spot" for their projectiles.

Mike

I tested some BE behind various 230 gr. bullets recently. My results were (average):

5.0 grains : 835 FPS
4.7 grains : 795 FPS
4.0 grains : 670 FPS
3.8 grains : 662 FPS

5 grains will get you to 820 without issue, at least, my lot of powder (purchased within last year or two) will. It's entirely possible in a different barrel this would turn in 820 FPS. Or another lot of powder. Or different case. 

-Chase

Jon Eulette wrote:Chase,
On opposite side of spectrum I’ve been shooting 3.8 & 4.0 BE with 230 jrn for service pistol 900. I’ve been shooting 840+ average for several years. If you ever barrel test that load I’d be interested to know how it grouped.
Jon

Jon,

I think you'll be pleased with the 50 YD results:

3.8 BE WW230



Average velocity was 662 FPS.

4.0 BE 230 Montana Gold



Average velocity was 670 FPS.

I've noticed that there really isn't much difference in velocity readings between Sierra, WW, and Montana Gold when using the same powder charge. As far as I'm concerned, they are interchangeable at the chrono. 

They do behave differently at the target, of course.

-Chase

Chase wrote:Jon,

I think you'll be pleased with the 50 YD results:

3.8 BE WW230



Average velocity was 662 FPS.

4.0 BE 230 Montana Gold

Chase, 
Thanks for loading/shooting/testing my go to load. I had a feeling it would hold 10 ring.
Really appreciate.
What barrel did you use?
Jon

The barrel is out of the pistol I'm going to use for the challenge: it is a Kart 45 NM.

The thing I've noticed in this testing, which is not terribly extensive or deep enough to make big claims, is that these bullets don't seem to like to go fast (no matter the make).

I did take another Kart NM barrel with me to see if I could duplicate results between barrels. Again, not extensive testing by any means, but it seemed like one barrel preferred one bullet over another (same velocity/powder charge/case- only bullet was different) and the opposite choice was true in the other. Not conclusive in any sense, but anecdotally does give credence to the notion that pistol barrels can have preferences.

-Chase

Chase Turner wrote:The barrel is out of the pistol I'm going to use for the challenge: it is a Kart 45 NM.

The thing I've noticed in this testing, which is not terribly extensive or deep enough to make big claims, is that these bullets don't seem to like to go fast (no matter the make).

I did take another Kart NM barrel with me to see if I could duplicate results between barrels. Again, not extensive testing by any means, but it seemed like one barrel preferred one bullet over another (same velocity/powder charge/case- only bullet was different) and the opposite choice was true in the other. Not conclusive in any sense, but anecdotally does give credence to the notion that pistol barrels can have preferences.

-Chase

 what is the difference between any barrel Kart makes and a Kart NM?

All Kart barrel are NM quality barrels.
Jon

Jon Eulette wrote:All Kart barrel are NM quality barrels.
Jon

OK, I own two actual NM pistols all the parts on the gun are marked NM came out of the RIA, built there, what makes a Kart barrel a NM?

That Kart dimensions their barrels in the same way that the NM specification calls for is what makes their barrel a "National Match" barrel. Not sure who came up with the spec- Colt or the Army, be my guess.

I don't have it handy, but I believe the differences between a regular GI barrel and a NM one is outlined in the Kuhnhausen book. Volume 2, I think.

-Chase

NM barrels have oversized hoods and lugs for fitting to pistols. The barrel bores were air gauged for dimensional tolerances. I don't recall the standard/tolerance.

Kart made/makes NM barrels that were/are marked with NM serial numbers on the chamber area. I have a friend who has been educating me on some finer points of rifling designs. There were different groove to land ratios as well as number of lands.

Chambers were all over the place. They could vary as much as 0.020" headspacing after fitting. Headspace was actually controlled by the extractor.

Air gauging the bore was/is how bores were checked for uniformity/tolerance. Used for both rifle and pistol barrels.

Factory Colt barrels shoot excellent from a barrel test fixture. But their hood and lugs are under sized. So Giles and others used to shim the upper barrel lug when fitting to a slide. I personally do not care for this method. Clark welded and refit Colt barrels in majority of his pistol builds.
Jon

Just because.....

The article from that test is also a good read.
The pages are a little out of order at the link making it a little difficult to follow.

American Hand Gunner Sept./Oct. 1998 Charles Petty


[url=https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/c9b14fbd-cb95-41fc-aa9a-abc26840275a/downloads/Acuracy Got You Over A Barrel]https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/c9b14fbd-cb95-41fc-aa9a-abc26840275a/downloads/Acuracy%20Got%20You%20Over%20A%20Barrel%20Article.pdf?ver=1600177314209[/url]


The forum does not seem to like the links with spaces in them,
You can get to the article here:

Kart Precision Barrel Corp. - Kart, 1911 Colt Barrels (kartbarrel.com)

Was filing away some of my older targets and chronographing data this morning & ran across tests I'd done with both WCC 90 and TZZ factory 230 ball match ammo.

Chrono 10' from muzzle.
Win-830.4, 810.9, 816.7, 812.5, 810.2, 805.2, 829.9, 816.2, 829.3, 809.4, 826.7.

TZZ- 830.4, 810.9, 831.2, 812.2, 805.9, 795.4, 817.0, 806.1, 803.4, 830.4

Data wasn't dated, but being I only chased points until 2003, it would have been sometime prior to that. The Winchester shot better at 50 than the TZZ, IIRC.
Al

Cmysix wrote:

Jon Eulette wrote:All Kart barrel are NM quality barrels.
Jon

OK, I own two actual NM pistols all the parts on the gun are marked NM came out of the RIA, built there, what makes a Kart barrel a NM?

OK thank you all! I now have an understanding.

Jon Eulette wrote:
Just because.....

Jon,

Thank you for posting this chart.  Even though it's 25 years old it still illustrates that the barrel maker does make a difference.  There are several other manufacturers such as KKM not listed which seem to provide very good results.
My question is this: does it make sense for a gun builder such as yourself to bother testing a batch of barrels BEFORE even beginning the build process?
I can think of at least one such 'smith who wound up rejecting the majority of the barrels he received.
What say you?

Mike

p.s.

I noticed that all of these tests were performed using the Federal Gold Medal 185gr FMJ-SWC ammo.  This, of course, was the "gold standard" ammo used by many/most gunsmiths for their test targets.
I still have over three cases of this GM45B ammo, lot#FC-02H021-001.

Does it matter or can the average smith afford it. If I was younger I would own one. Just my experience with one this year

Mike,
I can answer that question, but it will cost you 3 cases of ammunition! 

In last 30 years I've had 3 barrels not shoot to expectations.  We're replaced for free but I had to refit new barrels. If I used one I would have to start charging more for my services.

When I test fire a new build I can tell if it's grouping or not right away. Also the way I fit my barrels, when new they will string slightly vertical from RR. But shoot perfectly on call from hand. John Zurek has set 4 national records with gun built this way. It's never been rested.
I have customers send me RR groups that are darn good after some mileage on the guns.

Maybe someday.....
Jon

Jon Eulette wrote:Mike,
I can answer that question, but it will cost you 3 cases of ammunition! 

In last 30 years I've had 3 barrels not shoot to expectations.  We're replaced for free but I had to refit new barrels. If I used one I would have to start charging more for my services.

When I test fire a new build I can tell if it's grouping or not right away. Also the way I fit my barrels, when new they will string slightly vertical from RR. But shoot perfectly on call from hand. John Zurek has set 4 national records with gun built this way. It's never been rested.
I have customers send me RR groups that are darn good after some mileage on the guns.

Maybe someday.....
Jon

Jon,

I'll swap you the ammo for one of your sub-one inch .45s.   

Mike

I've collected some additional data that may be of interest.

Recent lots of powder, along with the velocity per the charge weight. Please note: my chronograph data was collected using a Labradar. I mention this because it may help to explain the wide swing in velocity difference that seems apparent when comparing my data with Jack H's.

Powder/Charge in Grains = Average Velocity (FPS)

TG 4.8 = 852 FPS
WSF 6.3 = 900 FPS
BE86 6.0 = 815 FPS

All of these measurements were collected using WLP, various bullets (WW, S, MG) and mixed or new brass. I haven't averaged all lots, but generally these figures represent the various data collected across two different Kart NM barrels.

-Chase

If you have any interest in Factory 45 230 gr match ammo, Federal shows the Gold Medal 230gr FMJ in stock $72.99 / 50 , Midway also has it with a limit of 2 boxes at $59.99 /50 

Federal shows a muzzle velocity of 860fps

DA/SA wrote:Just dug this out.

Date us 1963.

I concur

shanneba wrote:If you have any interest in Factory 45 230 gr match ammo, Federal shows the Gold Metal 230gr FMJ in stock $72.99 / 50 , Midway also has it with a limit of 2 boxes at $59.99 /50 

Federal shows a muzzle velocity of 860fps

Well, if anyone is interested in going this direction, I would sell this case of Remington Match 230 gr ball a lot cheaper than that.
Phil

mbmshooter


I noticed that all of these tests were performed using the Federal Gold Medal 185gr FMJ-SWC ammo.  This, of course, was the "gold standard" ammo used by many/most gunsmiths for their test targets.
I still have over three cases of this GM45B ammo, lot#FC-02H021-001.


For anyone interested in the Federal Gold Medal 185 gr FMJSWC- (GM45B) it looks like Federal actually recently made some.
First time in about 2 years that I have seen it available. $72.99 /50
Maybe some of the ammo sellers will get it soon.

I also noticed Federal introduced Gold Medal 9mm 147 gr and 40 S&W 180 gr.

shanneba wrote:For anyone interested in the Federal Gold Medal 185 gr FMJSWC- (GM45B) it looks like Federal actually recently made some.
First time in about 2 years that I have seen it available. $72.99 /50
Maybe some of the ammo sellers will get it soon.

I also noticed Federal introduced Gold Medal 9mm 147 gr and 40 S&W 180 gr.

Only $1.46/shot….now that’s hard ball!