1911Forum
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > Hardware & Accessories > Ammo Can


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old 05-27-2012, 07:56 AM
downtownv downtownv is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: LBI
Posts: 274



I've been running 230 gr Georgia arms. Never failed! 1000 rds $400
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-27-2012, 10:14 AM
NRAJIM NRAJIM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: FLORIDA
Age: 49
Posts: 547
I run 230 gr. ammo always, the pistol was designed for it and after 100 years it still the preferred choice. Also my pistol fire POA to POI with 230gr. 185s and 200s change the impact point.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-27-2012, 01:12 PM
Laudanum Laudanum is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,519
Not to argue any points here, just some info that Ive seen many times. I dont know it to be 100% true either but the original 45 bullets were said to be 200 gr. The army wanted a heavier round and I believe that was a little over 230 gr. originally and then settled on 230 gr. later on down the road. So if true, yes 230 gr. became the standard but 200 gr. was the original bullet even though it was relatively short lived. I dont base my SD round choice on any of this. We can probably open up a big can of worms discussing the 9mm

As far as bullet weights, I think it's well established that a lighter bullet will hit lower than a heavier bullet but I dont have any concern about it being signifigant should a real life situation present itself, especially in my home. The 200 gr. XTP goes where I want it to better than any other 45 acp round Ive fired. Again, this is a personal choice we have to make for ourselves. There are actually several rounds that I'd be comfortable carrying and any on the list would be among them.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-27-2012, 01:38 PM
skosh69 skosh69 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA
Age: 44
Posts: 3,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by SISKIMBER View Post
Aluminum frame=185gr 200gr tops..
Really??? I'm going to range in a few minutes to run some 230gr reloads through my CDP ( alloy frame ), hope it holds up....
__________________
US Army Tanker 90-97'
Cotep 0451
When you are dead, you don't know that you are dead. It is difficult only for the others.
It is the same when you're stupid.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-27-2012, 02:08 PM
HungrySeagull HungrySeagull is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,178
Fed HST, Ranger T, Buffalo Bore 185 +P and .45 super, ASYM ball etc.

Most all 230 grain, one is 255 hardcast for hunting.
__________________
Colt XSE Gov't Tritium sights and various Wilson Combat parts.
Platinum Plus Member USCCA
Old Dogs can learn new things.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 05-27-2012, 02:34 PM
cam75 cam75 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bloomington, IN
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by NRAJIM View Post
I run 230 gr. ammo always, the pistol was designed for it and after 100 years it still the preferred choice. Also my pistol fire POA to POI with 230gr. 185s and 200s change the impact point.
How does th grain change the impact point? Just weight of the bullet? Is this from any distance?
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-27-2012, 05:08 PM
skosh69 skosh69 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA
Age: 44
Posts: 3,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by skosh69 View Post
Really??? I'm going to range in a few minutes to run some 230gr reloads through my CDP ( alloy frame ), hope it holds up....
Just got back, ran about 100 rds and not one issue! So much for your theory B-Rad.....
__________________
US Army Tanker 90-97'
Cotep 0451
When you are dead, you don't know that you are dead. It is difficult only for the others.
It is the same when you're stupid.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-27-2012, 05:33 PM
Laudanum Laudanum is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,519
Quote:
Originally Posted by cam75 View Post
How does th grain change the impact point? Just weight of the bullet? Is this from any distance?
Lots of theories, one of which has to do with muzzle flip and velocity of bullet ... slower bullet (usually heavier) means more time to travel through barrel before exiting (compared to faster [usually lighter] bullet) and a little more muzzle flip so higher POI. Not sure I buy that theory but it's a popular one. Anyway, you may not notice it at short range, the farther the range the larger the potential difference.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-28-2012, 10:48 AM
CDW4ME CDW4ME is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 492
Shot placement, matching POA & POI

Quote:
Originally Posted by NRAJIM View Post
I run 230 gr. ammo always, the pistol was designed for it and after 100 years it still the preferred choice. Also my pistol fire POA to POI with 230gr. 185s and 200s change the impact point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laudanum View Post
As far as bullet weights, I think it's well established that a lighter bullet will hit lower than a heavier bullet but I dont have any concern about it being signifigant should a real life situation present itself, especially in my home. The 200 gr. XTP goes where I want it to better than any other 45 acp round Ive fired. Again, this is a personal choice we have to make for ourselves. There are actually several rounds that I'd be comfortable carrying and any on the list would be among them.
Bullet weight does affect POI. 230 gr. vs 185 gr. can make an inch (or more) of difference up close (21 feet).
I'm all about having POA and POI match, potentially better shot placement.
I like Ranger T 230 gr. but if it hits high vs a 185 gr. XTP that hits right on, them I'm inclined to go with the lighter XTP.
__________________
No internal lock or magazine disconnect on my pistols!
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-29-2012, 05:32 AM
Rifter's Avatar
Rifter Rifter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: The People's Republic of Illinois, most corrupt state in the Union.
Posts: 3,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDW4ME View Post
Bullet weight does affect POI. 230 gr. vs 185 gr. can make an inch (or more) of difference up close (21 feet).
I'm all about having POA and POI match, potentially better shot placement.
I like Ranger T 230 gr. but if it hits high vs a 185 gr. XTP that hits right on, them I'm inclined to go with the lighter XTP.
Under the right set of circumstances, that could cause a miss. If the pistol has fixed factory sights, then it most likely is regulated for 230 gr. standard loads, and the lighter bullet could hit significantly lower as a result. Obviously, with adjustable sights you can correct POI so that it matches POA. Either way, you should adjust the sights to match the ammo you use.
__________________
Vietnam Combat Vet - U.S. Navy 1970-1974
NRA Benefactor Life Member

Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice - Barry Goldwater
When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance becomes Duty - Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 06-01-2012, 04:05 PM
M4finny M4finny is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,987
For me, I have to go with what feeds most reliably in what I am carrying these days. My Colt Commander will feed Ranger T's and HST's without fail and so, I am currently carrying 230 gr. HST +P rounds in that pistol.

The Colt Defender that I own seems to only reliably feed (100% of the time), 185 gr. Remington Golden Saber rounds. And so, with confidence being high on what works well, I am pleased with the ammunition that I currently have loaded up in the magazines today.

Fin

Last edited by M4finny; 06-01-2012 at 04:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 06-01-2012, 04:34 PM
WobbleZone WobbleZone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 937
I have a 2010 CCO, a Heirtage, and a Valor. All of them require a 6 o'clock hold at 25 yards, and the two full size guns are still a couple of inches high.

The CCO, however, is about 6" high at 25 yards with 230 grain standard velocity ammo. I have gone to 185 grain only in the CCO, which puts it very close to point of aim at 25.

This seems to be a trend with the DW CCO's from what I have read on the DW sub-forum. Several people have inquired about having the front sight changed out because of this. I personally like this set-up because my CCO shoots exactly to point of aim at 100 yards with 230 grain WWWB JHP, and it is a hoot to thump gallon milk jugs at that range (rested, of course) with the little pistol. I load it with 185 grains for defensive carry and am a happy camper.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 06-01-2012, 04:39 PM
Hawg1 Hawg1 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 232
I'm using 230 grain homecast SWC's right now but I tried some 255 grain home cast SWC's and like them much better.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 06-01-2012, 06:25 PM
joshua casher joshua casher is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: lancaster, pa
Age: 40
Posts: 422
In my 5 inch 1911's and G21 I use 230 grain Ball, Jacketed SWC and JHP ammo.

My Commander seems to like the various 200gr. loadings (Fiocchi 200gr. JHP, MacTech 200gr. SWC and Speer 200gr. TMJ) I've fed it. Recoil impulse seems to be a bit less than the 230gr. ammo and reliability with these loadings has been great (knock on wood) so far. If I was unable to get more 200gr. ammo I would use 230's in the Commander without hesitation.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 06-01-2012, 08:46 PM
cam75 cam75 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bloomington, IN
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by WobbleZone View Post
I have a 2010 CCO, a Heirtage, and a Valor. All of them require a 6 o'clock hold at 25 yards, and the two full size guns are still a couple of inches high.

The CCO, however, is about 6" high at 25 yards with 230 grain standard velocity ammo. I have gone to 185 grain only in the CCO, which puts it very close to point of aim at 25.

This seems to be a trend with the DW CCO's from what I have read on the DW sub-forum. Several people have inquired about having the front sight changed out because of this. I personally like this set-up because my CCO shoots exactly to point of aim at 100 yards with 230 grain WWWB JHP, and it is a hoot to thump gallon milk jugs at that range (rested, of course) with the little pistol. I load it with 185 grains for defensive carry and am a happy camper.
Good to hear 185gr doing well in the CCO. I took advantage of a sale at Midway and ordered 2 boxes of Corbon 185gr.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 06-01-2012, 09:04 PM
rrobertson rrobertson is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Alabama
Age: 26
Posts: 771
My personal preferance is Speer GDHP 230gr 53966
__________________
Disabled Combat Vet OIF

"The tree of liberty must be replenished from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 06-04-2012, 09:18 PM
JWnTN JWnTN is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 410
Quote:
Originally Posted by cam75 View Post
How does th grain change the impact point? Just weight of the bullet? Is this from any distance?
"Grain" is a measure of weight, just like ounces, grams, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 06-04-2012, 09:23 PM
iShoot iShoot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Bend OR
Posts: 963
[QUOTE=I12BFree;3889982

The 1911 platform has used the 230 grain bullet weight effectively against one enemy or another for 100 years. It'll do.[/QUOTE]




All my 1911s are 5" A1s and all my ammo is 230g ball.

When I CCW it is a .38 ti snub.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 06-04-2012, 10:21 PM
baccusboy baccusboy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Seoul, Korea
Posts: 856
I read that the 1911 was actually originally designed around firing a 200 grain bullet.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 06-04-2012, 11:06 PM
LARRY LAMBERT LARRY LAMBERT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 603
Quote:
Originally Posted by baccusboy View Post
I read that the 1911 was actually originally designed around firing a 200 grain bullet.
Yep that's true. The army wanted the increase to 230 grain. As to why no one says much of anything about 200 gr, good or bad, I started out thinking that it would give me the best of both worlds, lighter recoil with more energy. While my testing didn't give anything to say that 200 gr is a bad choice (XTP and Gold Dot) it also didn't give any lighter recoil or significantly higher velocity. So in the long run instead of the best of both worlds, it really didn't gain anything, and 230 grain has more momentum.

230 grain standard pressure HST for me.
__________________
Blind faith in one's own competence is found solely among the incompetent. Train your ass off.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 06-05-2012, 09:20 AM
Rifter's Avatar
Rifter Rifter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: The People's Republic of Illinois, most corrupt state in the Union.
Posts: 3,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by LARRY LAMBERT View Post
Yep that's true. The army wanted the increase to 230 grain. As to why no one says much of anything about 200 gr, good or bad, I started out thinking that it would give me the best of both worlds, lighter recoil with more energy. While my testing didn't give anything to say that 200 gr is a bad choice (XTP and Gold Dot) it also didn't give any lighter recoil or significantly higher velocity. So in the long run instead of the best of both worlds, it really didn't gain anything, and 230 grain has more momentum.

230 grain standard pressure HST for me.
I think the 200 gr. was originally used for the 1905 Browning, and JB used it initially for what became the 1911. The Army wanted to duplicate the .45 Colt as close as possible, hence the 230 gr. request.
__________________
Vietnam Combat Vet - U.S. Navy 1970-1974
NRA Benefactor Life Member

Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice - Barry Goldwater
When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance becomes Duty - Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 06-08-2012, 10:00 AM
DeltaKilo's Avatar
DeltaKilo DeltaKilo is online now
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Coloma, MI
Posts: 10,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rifter View Post
Stay with 230 gr. Best factory loads are probably those using the Gold Dot, and a lot of people like the Federal HST (hard to find). Another decent choice is the Remington Golden Saber Bonded (again, hard to find).
Uhm, I'm going to throw the BS flag here simply because the Barnes SCHP, even at 185gr, outperforms the other 230gr SD loads in most tests, based on penetration and performance through barriers. 230gr is the standard and what to stick to for lead-core bullets, but the 185gr TacXP is a very good option and should not be ignored.


Quote:
If you're loading your own, use the 230 gr. Gold Dot, or the Hornady 230 gr. XTP loaded to about 900 fps. It will have some recoil, but nothing you can't handle, and give good performance.
Gold Dot, yes. XTP, no. XTP bullets still don't expand as well or consistently, or maintain their structural integrity consistently enough to be a good choice. Stick with Gold Dot or Barnes' TacXP.


Quote:
Hornady also has a new version of their Critical Defense load, called Critical Duty that passes ALL of the FBI barrier and penetration tests and the bullets do not come apart. Looks pretty good from the test video I saw recently.
This round has not yet been around enough to garner more than a few cursory tests. As of right now, the load is decent, but that is expected because it is a bonded bullet, and would perform well similarly to any other bonded bullet's performance. However, without field use and data, we cannot say for sure yet that the load will be worth looking at. It is also not yet widely available.
__________________
Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum.
http://www.sofrep.com and http://loadoutroom.com -- Check us out on the web!
http://www.beast-enterprises.com Beast Enterprises - Target Stands and Cerakote Services
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rwYqGmVvzQ
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 06-08-2012, 10:52 AM
45'r 45'r is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: AL & Republic of Texas
Posts: 439
DK .... Are the tests and rankings that you present as definative based upon your personal, independent tests or reference material?
__________________
ALWAYS ..... Drink Upstream From The Herd.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 06-08-2012, 11:02 AM
asianhulk asianhulk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: AK
Posts: 365
Consider the fact the 185Gr has more muzzle velocity than that of 230Gr, I personally like big and slow projectiles, 230Gr for me.

In terms of brands? There are a list to choose from and everyone has their own take on brands, ultimately it will come down to personal preference.
__________________
Disclaimer: The writer does not represent any organization, employer, entity or other individual. The views expressed are those only of the writer. In the case of a sarcastic, facetious,nonsensical, stirring-the-pot, controversial or devil's advocate-type post, the views expressed may not even reflect those of the writer [This sig stolen from That Guy who stole it from Brickcop who stole it from Frank Booth].
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 06-08-2012, 11:20 AM
DeltaKilo's Avatar
DeltaKilo DeltaKilo is online now
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Coloma, MI
Posts: 10,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by 45'r View Post
DK .... Are the tests and rankings that you present as definative based upon your personal, independent tests or reference material?
The data is based on
1. My own tests and research into a few thousand shooting cases and discussions/research of medical data surrounding wound ballistics with medical personnel;
2. Published testing conducted by the FBI
3. Published terminal effectiveness findings from major law enforcement agencies such as LAPD, FBI, DEA, NYPD, and many others.
4. Terminal effectiveness observations from noted expert pathologists such as Dr. Vincent Di Maio (he has an excellent book on wound trauma and ballistics)
5. Ballistic data compiled by expert trauma and emergency surgeons such as Dr. Martin Fackler
6.data and testing performed by the US Military.

The data presented in the Self Defense and Duty Load sticky is not my own, but corresponds to my own findings, and is published by Dr. Gary Roberts, a gentleman whom, despite medical training as a dentist during his 20+ years in the army, is recognized by the FBI and Military, as well as numerous law enforcement agencies, as an expert on the subject of ballistics.

All of the loads listed as effective and acceptable are vetted by both passing consistently the FBI testing protocol and documented effectiveness in the field against human and animal targets, with average performance being considered to be over 95% of cases showing significant wound trauma and reliable performance with regards to function and effect on tissue.

This is acknowleging that no single case or specific conclusions can be drawn as to future events, only a study showing percentages of engagements where use of force was applied, shot placement was acceptable, and the level of damage/ physical condition relating to the gunshot wound.

No conclucions as to specific ability to physically stop a threat with any guarantee should be inferred, only understanding the threshold of damage needed to render vital systems dysfunctional to a point of medically impeding further operation of the body. (Destroy enough tissue in the heart/lungs/brain area and the body stops regardless of psychological factors).

I present all conclusions and data as they are presented to me by findings of experts, or based on the outcome of all of my research and personal testing.
__________________
Igitur si vis pacem, para bellum.
http://www.sofrep.com and http://loadoutroom.com -- Check us out on the web!
http://www.beast-enterprises.com Beast Enterprises - Target Stands and Cerakote Services
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rwYqGmVvzQ
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:45 PM.


NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS SITE: By continuing to use this site, you certify that you have read and agree to abide by the Legal Terms of Use. All information, data, text or other materials ("Content") posted to this site by any users are the sole responsibility of those users. 1911Forum does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such Content.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2011 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved