45ACP Accuracy with SWC moulds

  • 11K Views
  • Last Post 13 August 2016
rmrix posted this 01 November 2010

I am sure this 1911 stuff has been worked out long ago but I know nothing of the accuracy potential of 45 ACP SWC bullets when compared to other designs.

From those of you who have done some comparison shooting I would be interested in hearing what you have learned.

Are SWC 45 ACP target bullets like the H&G 68.452 SWC and H&G 130.452 better/more accurate than Lyman 225gr. RN style? (It is hard to beat the RN for feeding and reliability)

I shoot Black Powder Cartridge Silhouette matches each month with Bernie Rowles of Old West Bullet Moulds, he made available the use (loan) of the two H&G moulds and I have the option to buy one of them. I have other 45 moulds so I really do not need additional moulds but would consider it if there was some great improvement in accuracy to be had.

Is the long nosed H&G 68.452 SWC a more accurate design than others? This is the mould that is in the best shape and cast bullets closest to fitting right out of the mould. I have been putting all my 45 ACP cast bullets through a Lee .452 push-through die after pan lubing them. Pan lube makes for less mess in ALL ways; dies, magazine, storage trays and handgun. And, it is fast!

Without knowing much at this point, it would seem to me that the design of the short sided SWC would cut clean holes in target paper, but at the expense of good support and alignment in the chamber and bore. The longer supporting sides of the RN looks to be better at this job. Is this true or what is the real story? I am sure the bulls-eye match shooters reading this know what really works.

I am only starting to put these type of loads on paper and have no opinion about them yet.

Thanks in advance for weighing in on the merits of these different bullets!

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
fc60 posted this 01 November 2010

Greetings,

You will find that the H&G #68 will shoot better than the H&G #130 in general.

Loads that have done well at 50 yards, groups under two inches for ten shots, will be loaded with 4.3 grains of Bullseye or 4.3 grains of Winchester WST.

You will need to tweak your powder charge for best accuracy. The above will get you into the ballpark.

Cheers,

Dave

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 01 November 2010

Back in the '70's when I was shooting NRA Bullseye competition, I had a Lyman 452374 that cast bullets of 0.452” that would group very well. But others have told me that their moulds made bullets oversize and had problems with resizing.

The problem with it was that it did not cut clean holes in the paper, so if there was a close shot, you very seldom got full count, even plugging. If you are shooting paper, stay with the semi-wadcutter. If shooting steel targets the RN is just fine.

HTH, Ric

Attached Files

LWesthoff posted this 01 November 2010

At the National Championships at Camp Perry in 1982, the H&G 68 flat base out of a 4 cavity mold, over 4.2 Bullseye, shot well enough to get me 1st Civilian Expert in the .45 Aggregate. (Sure wish I could still do that sort of shooting, but when you get up in your 80's some things just get a little out of reach.)

The H&G 68 was pretty much THE bullet when I was shooting bullseye. I don't think you can go very far wrong with it.

Wes

P.S.  That bullet shot, with zero feeding problems, out of my Series 70 Gold Cup, my Clark Heavy slide, and my Curtis hardball gun.  I'd be surprised if it gave you any feeding problems.

Attached Files

Dale53 posted this 16 November 2010

I have about 80 moulds. I have, close to hand, a MiHec six cavity mould for the H&G #68, an original H&G #130 four cavity mould, and the Lee 230 TC (standard lube groove) six cavity mould.

Any of those will shoot good enough to win an NRA Bullseye match.

However the #130 and #68 both will shoot well under an 1” at 25 yards from both of my full size 1911 custom autos and my two S&W 625's. The difference is the #68 cuts a much cleaner hole in the target and the #68 will feed in nearly every .45 Auto “out of the box” (not all but NEARLY all) while the #130 may not.

My copy of the #68 is a flat base.

Dale53

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • acneill
Ed Harris posted this 16 November 2010

H&G 130 preferred by many for use at 25 yards, accurate with lighter loads. so less recoil. Shape similar to factory wadcutter. Use 3.8-4.2 of Bullseye or 4.5-5 grs., of W231.

Longer nosed H&G 68 not necessarily more accurate than #130, but feeds better in most guns set up for hardball without requiring feed ramp or magazine modification. Preferred by most at 50 yards due to better wind bucking.  Will feed full auto in M1A1 and M3 submachineguns whereas #130 does not. Requires slightly heavier powder charge than #130 for best grouping at 50 yards. Use 4.2-4.5 grs. of Bullseye for NRA Bullseye matches, OK to increase up to 5.0 grs of Bullseye for ISPC and SMG use.

Properly loaded, good quality bullets of either type should be able to produce ten-shot groups of 2 inches or less from a scoped heavy barrel single-shot such as a T/C Contender pistol or an accurized target pistol.

When fired at 100 yards and beyond the 230 LRN, flattened ogival nosed cowboy bullets and Keith types continue to group in proportion to the range (3-4 moa) whereas wadcutter dispersion becomes nonlinear beyond about 50 meters or so, depending upon velocity.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • acneill
oscarflytyer posted this 06 January 2012

All I have, and have loaded/shot is the MiHec clone H&G #68.  My gun loves it in front of 5 grns Bullseye @ 1.250 OAL.  One big ragged hole with a mag full from 10-15 yds.

I started, and stopped with this mold/design/bullet/load after the above results.   

Attached Files

Iowa Fox posted this 06 January 2012

I have an old 4 cav Lyman 452460 that casts very nicely. Using 4.5 grains of 700x gives me all I can ask for.

Attached Files

GBertolet posted this 06 January 2012

I have both the 130 and Lyman 452460, both in 4 cavity. They both shoot very well. The 452460 seems to shoot better at 50 yards than the 130. At 25 yards I can't tell the difference out of my Clark Longslide. I use 4.8gr 231 with the 452460, and 4.2gr of Bullseye with the 130. The 452460 cuts a clean hole in paper. I recall lots of heated arguments on scoring, during the indoor 50 ft bullseye league matches, when shooters used RN or truncated bullets.

Attached Files

Uncle Russ posted this 07 January 2012

The #68H&G is the cast bullet for me. Tried a bunch of others and always go back. Pushed along by 231, Bull or even Red Dot it just performs far better then I. Feeds well in my TGO2 Springfield, Colt GC and even some clunkers I tried to put together. The S&W 625 5” eats 'em like popcorn! The S&W 1955 Target is back in its nostalgic days. My S&W 4513 carry gun swallows them up. Need I say more? :fire:

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 08 January 2012

Recently I've been fooling with the Saeco #954 230-gr. Cowboy bullet vs. the similar #955 which has the same profile, but heavier base band to increase weight to 255 grains. Firing in a rifle I've gotten better accuracy at 100 yards with the lighter bullet, rounder groups 3-4 inches, with less vertical dispersion.

Did try some heavier loads with the 255-grain up to 1200 f.p.s. in the converted Marlin with 12 grs. of #2400 lightly compressed, but it did not shoot better than my normal .45 revolver load with 4.2 grains of Bullseye, which gives about 950 f.p.s. in the rifle and 770 f.p.s. in my 4-inch S&W Model 625.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

DonH posted this 09 January 2012

Iowa Fox wrote: I have an old 4 cav Lyman 452460 that casts very nicely. Using 4.5 grains of 700x gives me all I can ask for.

32 years ago when I started out in NRA bullseye pistol, many oldtimers still used the 452460 at 50 yds because they felt wind affected it less and thus better grouping. It is heavier though which can be a factor in one hand shooting. Also it may have some of the feeding problems of the 130s.

I tried different bullets until I came to a 4 cavity H&G mold for the BB #68. I looked no farther for a bullet. Over the years I learned to shoot and acquired an accurized Series 70 GM which was built for hardball competition. By then my eyes were giving me fits so I gave in to an Ultradot electronic sight. That combo - the hardball gun, Ultradot sight and H&G 68 over 4.2gr Bullseye took me to 290-292 on the National course.

That was before I lost my good right eye. Since then, shooting right-handed with my legally-blind left eye I have shot as high as 270 with the setup and load described above. No tears in my beer tho!

The H&G 68 in a GOOD 1911 in the hands of a VERY SHOOTER will make ten holes in the 1.75” X ring at 50 yds. Good 'nuff, I say. 

Attached Files

beerd posted this 03 February 2012

How about the H&G 68 look-alike made by Lee? Any good? ..

Attached Files

Dale53 posted this 04 February 2012

The Lee bullet is NOT an H&G #68. It works well for some and not so well for others.

Feeding is where the #68 shines. It was designed with the same “strike” in the barrel as the 230 gr Hard Ball bullet.

If I had to pick one bullet design for a 1911, it would be the #68 (I actually prefer the #69 which is the same bullet with a flat base).

FWIW Dale53

Attached Files

oscarflytyer posted this 04 February 2012

I have the #68 clone Mihec mold.  It is flat base.  It is fantastic.  Never had a mis-feed with this bullet.  All I shoot in my 1911.

I think Dale has the same mold?!?

Attached Files

rmrix posted this 05 February 2012

Dale53 wrote: The Lee bullet is NOT an H&G #68. It works well for some and not so well for others.

Feeding is where the #68 shines. It was designed with the same “strike” in the barrel as the 230 gr Hard Ball bullet.

If I had to pick one bullet design for a 1911, it would be the #68 (I actually prefer the #69 which is the same bullet with a flat base).

FWIW Dale53Dale, Is yours (#68) a BB? Mine is a flat base, I think? My bullet is for sure flat base and my mould is were I got the mould # to start this thread.  Now I am going to have to go look just to be sure.

I have the Lee BB copy and hate it.  mostly do to being so hard to lube and not getting reliable feeding or not as good as the H&G #68. Maybe the Lee load just needs more work. I use the same powder charge for them.

Attached Files

45ACPete posted this 05 February 2012

The last time the top shooter won at Camp Perry with cast bullets was Darius Young back in the 70's--and he used an H&G 165 g bullet. I used to have that mold, and considered it to be strictly a 25 yd load, but he made it work at 50 yds. Young won again at Perry ten years later, but as a member of the Army Reserve team he used the factory 185g jacketed WC ammo he was issued, as have all the winners in the last 35 years or so--notably Steve Reiter (6 times) and Brian Zins (10 straight wins). Of course, the service team shooters are rarely reloaders--Uncle Sam provides the factory fodder, but I think that if I were ever to shoot at Camp Perry again I would use 185g jacketed WC's, at least at 50 yds.

Attached Files

Dale53 posted this 27 February 2012

Oscar; I have a Mihec six cavity aluminum mould and a four cavity brass mould for the flat based clone of the H&G #68. It just doesn't get any better than that.

When I received my aluminum mould, after it was up and running well, I set aside a bullet from each cavity. After they cooled, I miked and weighed them. They were within .0002” (two ten thousandths) of an inch in diameter and weighed within .2 (two tenths) of a grain. That was ALL six bullets each from a different cavity.

That is the magic of a combination of CNC machinery and a master machinist (and programmer).

Truthfully, the “good old days” are today!

Dale53

Attached Files

Dale53 posted this 27 February 2012

45ACPete; I suspect that jacketed bullets are not any better than GOOD cast bullets. However, I have seen this phenomenon with competition all of my life. Someone wins with a particular set up, and next year everyone shows up with the same set up.

There is no doubting the quality of some of the better jacketed bullet loads and they certainly are consistent. Cast bullets vary depending on the ability of the caster.

Until the recent recession hit, a lot of people had a lot of disposable income that wasn't true in the past (WWII through the eighties or so, at least) so it became easier to “buy a win” and human nature being what it is, store bought bullets became the norm.

My local gun club has 800 members. Most don't really shoot much and are happy if they can just stay on the paper. We have a solid cadre of VERY talented pistol shooters, however, but the numbers are small.

Probably no more than 25-35 of our members reload and no more than half of those cast their own bullets. There's just not much interest. Frankly, it worries me as I think about the future...

They all stand around and rant about the high cost of factory ammo but most do not want to put forth the effort to solve that problem by casting bullets and reloading.

Just a thought or two...

Dale53

Attached Files

oscarflytyer posted this 28 February 2012

Dale53 wrote: Oscar; I have a Mihec six cavity aluminum mould and a four cavity brass mould for the flat based clone of the H&G #68. It just doesn't get any better than that.

When I received my aluminum mould, after it was up and running well, I set aside a bullet from each cavity. After they cooled, I miked and weighed them. They were within .0002” (two ten thousandths) of an inch in diameter and weighed within .2 (two tenths) of a grain. That was ALL six bullets each from a different cavity.

That is the magic of a combination of CNC machinery and a master machinist (and programmer).

Truthfully, the “good old days” are today!

Dale53

Dale - mine is the 6 cav alum.  VERY consistent.  weighed a few of the first ones and figured I was wasting my time after that!

FWIW, I have a MiHec 4 cav brass for the 44 250 Keith clone.  I sure wish it was alum.  That brass is HEAVY!  'Course, I have a bad shoulder that I am getting surgery on, so maybe that is why it seems so heavy...

Attached Files

oscarflytyer posted this 28 February 2012

Dale53 wrote: 45ACPete; I suspect that jacketed bullets are not any better than GOOD cast bullets. However, I have seen this phenomenon with competition all of my life. Someone wins with a particular set up, and next year everyone shows up with the same set up.

My local gun club has 800 members. Most don't really shoot much and are happy if they can just stay on the paper. We have a solid cadre of VERY talented pistol shooters, however, but the numbers are small.

Probably no more than 25-35 of our members reload and no more than half of those cast their own bullets. There's just not much interest. Frankly, it worries me as I think about the future...

Just a thought or two...

Dale53

Dale

I honestly believe that a good cast bullet fit to the gun will out-shoot or at least match any good jacketed bullet.  I am shooting exclusively cast in my Ruger Flattop BHs in 44 SPC and 45 Colt.  Right now, with my groups/loads, I can't imagine a jacketed bullet shooting as well, certainly not better.   44 is a MiHec Keith clone, and Colt is a factory Lee mold...

In the 45 ACP, with the MiHec H&G #68 clone and the Bullseye load, it will out-shoot factory jacketed 230s.

I do agree that there aren't that many that cast their own and work through all the hoops of casting and loading.  Mostly old timers (I am 50, and just started casting cpl yrs ago), but I take my boys and all their buddies out to shoot that want to go.  If each one of us find one kid to mentor and get excited about casting/loading and the resulting shooting, there will be plenty of us in the fraternity.  AND guys like MiHec are also helping us tremendously!!!

Attached Files

Dale53 posted this 28 February 2012

oscar; You think the Mihec four cavity brass mould is heavy? You should try my original H&G six cavity mould for the #251 (148 gr dbl. ended W/C). It weighs nearly five pounds with handles. A LOT of iron in that mould...

I am about to retire my six cavity mould in favor of a newly purchased four cavity H&G #50 BB I bought off this forum. It should be here in a couple of days. That will be MUCH handier to use. I do admit, however, that six cavity H&G is one of the finest moulds I have ever used. You can sure turn out a bunch of match quality bullets in a short period of time if you can handle it...

I'll do my weight lifting at the gym, not in my casting barn...

Dale53

Attached Files

giorgio de galleani posted this 28 February 2012

I have two of lees 6 cavity mould for their replica of the H&G #68.

They are enough for my very modest pistolero ability.

Feed well through my various barrel, Kimber,Norinco and Armando Piscetta. 

You can see some of my bullets,a358Swc a 230 round nose ,a 200 Tumble lube that doesnot cycle well and the #68 replica.

I size it 454 and pass the whole cartridge into the Lee factory crimp die. 

Attached Files

giorgio de galleani posted this 28 February 2012

This is what I can do shootig as fast as I can from the Weaver stance at roughly 18 yards.

Not comparable to what good shooters can do.

 

But it shows a reliable and economic ammo at work.

Attached Files

giorgio de galleani posted this 28 February 2012

I have no inhibitort brakes,Now this is from a pisto made with a hodge-pdge of parts.

A slide  unmarked from a Swiss gun show,many years ago it was legal,The original slide was cracked from hard use,

The frame is marked.UNITED STATES PROPERTY. M1911A1 US ARMY ,SA ,FJA

Te barrel is a 45Acp from Norinco.

Someone might suggest that I inordinately love the 911.

Attached Files

Dale53 posted this 28 February 2012

>>>Someone might suggest that I inordinately love the 1911.<<<

I might suggest you know what you are talking about;).

A good 1911 is about as good as it gets...

Dale53

Attached Files

Dale53 posted this 14 March 2012

Here's my 1911 with a Ultra Dot sight. It was built up by a FINE local pistol smith (Harold Johnson) and will do better than 2” at fifty yards. I have about 100,000 rounds of my cast bullets through this. 75,000+ of those rounds were full house IPSC rounds.

If I had shot that many jacketed bullets through this gun I would have had to replace the barrel every five thousand rounds to maintain accuracy. Ray chapman (World Champion IPSC) had put over 200,000 rounds through his Pachmayr 1911 and it was still shooting well.

This was shot with my 625-8, standing, at 25 yards and will explain why I love my Mihec #68 mould and handgun combination:

Attached Files

medium bore shooter posted this 14 March 2012

rmrix,

I've had excellent success using the H&G68. When I was younger the Series 70 Colt I used in competition would shoot 2"@50yds.

That was after I slugged my barrel and found out it was .449 diameter and changed my sizing die to .451. It won't shoot .452 bullets of any persuasion worth a darn, and generally leads up where the chamber ends and the rifling begins.

Attached Files

Tom Acheson posted this 28 April 2014

I have a RCBs 200 SWC and an Accurate Moulds copy of the H&G #68, 200SWC. Additionally, a friend gave me a bunch (700 or so) of 45 bullets, weighing either 170 or 200-grains, most cast of 50/50 ww/ lino. 

i own two 1911A1's, one left the factory in 1913 and the other a “practical ” thing with a Essex slide, Ithica  frame, commander hammer and Bomar rear sight. Shoots good but haven't messed with it for 30-years. 

There were some old reloads in one of my old 100-round boxes, made with the RCBS bullet and 6.5 WW231.  Then I loaded some of the H&G copy with 4.7 of Tite Group.

Just recently bought a Springfield XDm, 3.8” barrel, chambered in .45 ACP. At 7-yards both loads (above) grouped really nice (at least for me). I used an overall length of 1.240” because I had no notes from the earlier days to go by.

Question: with either the 170 or 200-grain bullets, what is the “standard accepted” OAL?  I have enough empty cases to consume all of the bullets I was given and would like to get a pile of load put together to start getting familiar with new gun. I do have Bullseye, 4756 and Unique available also. Per Ed Harris' advice I use a Lee factory crimp die.

Thanks!

Tom

Attached Files

Dale53 posted this 29 April 2014

Tom; I use the barrel of the gun to set the over all length of my cartridges. Here is a picture: http://s269.photobucket.com/user/Dale53/media/1911Headspace.png.html>

Attached Files

M3 Mitch posted this 14 October 2015

I have an old RCBS clone of the H&G 68, if you can shoot good enough to get a better score with factory softball than that bullet, you ought to think about going pro. The 68 also just plain works in every 1911 that I have tried it in, while the 185 grain Lyman wadcutter usually requires at least polishing the feed ramp (not really removing any material, just polishing the surface) I have not done any formal accuracy testing (I say that too much!!) but I have seen a lot of good shooting done with the 68. Guys I shot IPSC with back in Idaho most all used commercially cast 68, although many stages could be shot and won with mediocre bullets, if you shot fast enough.

Attached Files

wv109323 posted this 27 November 2015

At the National Matches at Camp Perry, I woulld guess that 70 per cent use the H&G 68 design. About 25 per cent use some version of a 185 gn.. bullet and 5 per cent use others. This is in the NRA matches,not the CMP matches where the 230 gn. is mandated. There is a 215 gn. SWC that is also accurate. Yes, I would say the 200 gn. SWC has earned a reputation of accuracy over the RN.

Attached Files

Ken Campbell Iowa posted this 27 November 2015

tom a. ::: how about a follow-up on your springfield DSM 45 ... my son in law has one in 40 sw ... i am pretty impressed but he has only shot it about 500 rounds ... be interested in any thoughts you might have on a 45 version . thanks .

ken

Attached Files

Tom Acheson posted this 30 November 2015

Ken,

The Springfield XD-m (can you believe the m stands for match and it has a 3.8” barrel?) shoots well for me, beter than I can shoot. It seems to like the Accurate copy of the H&G 68 with 4.0 of Bullseye. 

The OAL post above really helped improve accuracy.

My friend bought the same gun in .40 but hasn't shot it much.

I do like the cocked indicator and the round in the chamber indicator but I've been told Glocks also have those.

On every trip to the range, either for a match, a Postal entry or some load development work, I try to stop by at the club's “short range” and shoot a couple mags at 30-feet. 

Tom

Attached Files

MauserMusicMan posted this 07 February 2016

I use the Lee 200 grain bullet over 4 grains of Longshot...it is very accurate in my full-size Citadel 1911 and economical to shoot. It's a great target/practice load...I get 753 fps out of it, just over the 750 fps threshold our local steel shoot competition range places on all loads. It is more accurate than the 230 RN for me. It is close to the H&G...I guess the ultimate test would be if Jeff Cooper would use it...! That we won't know.

Attached Files

Revolverman posted this 09 August 2016

I have a Springfield XD which simply won't feed the 452460.  Looking to trade.  Could any of you recommend what I should look at---guns with good rep for feeding SWC's and accuracy?  Thanks.

Attached Files

MauserMusicMan posted this 10 August 2016

Have you thought about using a round nose bullet mold? That would be cheaper and less hassle than trading guns (unless you just want a new gun, 'nuff said!  :)

Attached Files

Revolverman posted this 10 August 2016

Yep...have a Lee RFN that cycles pretty well---not very accurate though.  I am really trying to find a good enough excuse to buy a Sig P220 and get it past my wife. 

Attached Files

358156hp posted this 10 August 2016

At one point it was usually recommended to try truncated cone design cast bullets in 45 XDs for best reliability. I don't know if that still the favored remedy.

Attached Files

jeff houck posted this 10 August 2016

"I am really trying to find a good enough excuse to buy a Sig P220 and get it past my wife."  

In my home we have a saying: 

New gun, New wife, take your choice.........

Attached Files

MauserMusicMan posted this 12 August 2016

Do you reload? If so, I've had really good luck with Lee's version of the H&G 68 SWC bullet seated with the shoulder flush with the case mouth in my Kahr CW45...these guns are notoriously finicky about what they'll feed. ANY shoulder peeping above the case mouth...no go! I had an XDs and it liked this bullet, but that was my gun a long time ago...yours may be different. I use Tite Group in .45ACP, a shade over 4 grains and it's accurate and produces about 780 fps with the 200 SWC out of my guns' 3.1” barrel. If you don't reload, keep trying the truncated bullet mentioned above from different makers. I'm with you...my son's Citadel 1911 LOVES RN 230s but I've never had a .45 that ate 'em. As for the Sig, well... those are great guns! I'd like to have the only Sig I can afford, the P250. Go for the trade if you try one more more load and it fails...!  :cba:  

Attached Files

oscarflytyer posted this 13 August 2016

no comparison shooting, as a H&G 68 clone was my very first mold (a MiHec!).  But I know my previous old beater 1911, my son's R1911 and the R1911 I inherited from my FIL all shoot the H&G 68 great! Def as well as my old eyes and rebuilt shoulders will shoot.  I can often post 5 shot cloverleaf holes at 10 yds - which is as good as it gets for me these days.

Attached Files

Close