1911Forum
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > Hardware & Accessories > Reloading Bench


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-14-2008, 03:22 PM
HarryT HarryT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 588
.460 Rowland cast bullet load




Can someone suggest a hard cast lead bullet (Lee 452-200-SWC) load for a .460 Rowland. I'd like to have powder weight and loaded cartridge length if possible.
They'll be shot through a Combat Commander prepared by Clark Custom Guns.

Thanks,
Harry
SC
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-14-2008, 05:56 PM
MSgt Dotson MSgt Dotson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,772
Is this a Commander with a coned comp barrel?

Hodgdon has .460 Rowland data, but only with jacketed bullets, but I'm sure you could start at .45ACP +P loads and slowly work up, stopping about a grain short for 200 gr jacketed data... (I'd start at 11 gr of Longhot, working up to perhaps 12 gr, which is a 200 gr jacketed start charge; for the shorter Cmdr, I'd lean towards lower charges for pistol longevity, perhaps down to 'mere' .45 Super pressures/velocities)

OAL is identical to .45 ACP length (hovering near 1.26" for full profile bullets, 1.23 for JHP bullets or flatpoints), but with a longer case. and less exposed bullet.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-14-2008, 09:08 PM
HarryT HarryT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 588
460 Rowland

This has a straight barrel and bushing with the front sight on the comp.
I've got lots of jacketed bullet loading data but not many jacketed bullets!
Hoping someone had some proven loads for the shorter barrel and homemade bullets.

Harry
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-15-2008, 06:42 AM
MSgt Dotson MSgt Dotson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,772
How do you have both a bushing, ...*and* a comp?

How is the comp attached?

Proven loads safe in someone else's pistol may not be safe in yours, depending on how your barrel is throated, etc...;

(Is the barrel ramped, or conventional?)
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-15-2008, 08:17 AM
WESHOOT2 WESHOOT2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Vermont (Caspian country)
Age: 60
Posts: 15,322
thought

Have you asked Clark?
__________________
'
"all my ammo is mostly-retired factory ammo"
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-15-2008, 08:40 AM
HarryT HarryT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 588
Speaking on behalf of lawyers everywhere, hot loads out of cool guns are not recommended. Here's some loads suggested by Mr. Taffin:

.460 ROWLAND CAST BULLET LOADS
LOAD BULLET MV GROUP
12.0 gr. AA#7 Lyman #452424/245 gr. 1080 2"
13.0 gr. AA#7 Lyman #452424/245 gr. 1128 3/4"
14.0 gr. AA#7 Lyman #452424/245 gr. 1231 1/2"
11.0 gr. AA#7 RCBS #45-255/260 gr. 923 1"
12.0 gr. AA#7 RCBS #45-255/260 gr. 968 1 1/2"
13.0 gr. AA#7 RCBS #45-255/260 gr. 1119 1/2"
12.0 gr. AA#7 Lyman #452423/230 gr. 1079 1"
13.0 gr. AA#7 Lyman #452423/230 gr. 1158 1 1/8"
14.0 gr. AA#7 Lyman #452423/230 gr. 1243 2"

Commander length 460 Rowlands are not too popular so there's not much info on them.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-16-2008, 09:00 PM
tsp45acp tsp45acp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Greensboro, N.C.
Age: 53
Posts: 6,768
MSgt Dotson,

My longslide comped bbl has a bushing. You can get them either way---coned/bull or standard bushing type. My bbl is a Storm Lake Mach Co. bbl.

I thought (when I bought it), that I could take it down like a standard bushing type gun. But the bushing fits up inside the back end of the comp, so you can't take it down with a bushing wrench. Hindsight----if I'd known then what the end result would be, I'd have gotten a bull/coned comped type bbl just for the extra wgt out front. Tracy
__________________
Tracy # 16000
1988 Colt Delta Elite, 2001 Colt LTW Commander XSE, 2003 Colt Gunsite Nite Sites, 2009 DoubleStarr Ar-15,
1996 Colt Special Combat 45 ACP(Carry version- Blued w/ Nite sites)--Wife's gun, 1998 SA Comped Longslide 45 Super/45-08 Armco, 1997 SA V-10--Wife's gun 04/98-Lee Pro 1000

Last edited by tsp45acp; 10-16-2008 at 09:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-17-2008, 12:12 PM
ClarkEMyers ClarkEMyers is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,460
" you can't take it down with a bushing wrench" ? just has to be open end?

Quote:
" you can't take it down with a bushing wrench"
? just has to be open end? Clark, with their conversion kits, ships an open ended bushing wrench - appears to be a standard double ended wrench with one end cut open.

Works for me with a conventional Clark compensator kit .460 Rowland barrel on a nominal 5" pistol. Does help to have three hands like the old collett style to pull the slide back so there is a gap between comp and bushing/front of the slide e.g. a delrin block or discarded magazine on a board in a vise to stabilize the pistol - lots of third hand rigs..

See Handloader Issue #247 - June, 2007 for 2 cast bullet loads - though myself I tend to approach such loads the same way I would Bob Hagel's rifle loads. I am quite sure they are accurately reported I'm not sure I want to use them in my own firearms for any length of time.

230 Oregon Trail lead roundnose Accurate AAC-7 see the magazine or LoadData for exact charge 1,100
250 Leadhead SWC Accurate AAC-7 see the magazine or LoadData for exact charge 1,065


Particularly with respect to Mr. Taffin's loads - those I have seen were developed when the Rowland was new; I have no idea what date applies to the loads quoted above - but in general No.7 has been discussed many times as quite different between early and late lots. Handloader magazine says this:
Quote:
Introduced in 1983, No. 7 has changed slightly over the years as the original foreign source, Israel, I believe, gave way to the current Czech Republic. No. 7 is a double-base, ball-type propellant. Early nitroglycerin content was given as 10.5 percent but changed to 12.0 percent in 2002.
Myself I bought No.7 along with my Rowland cases because of Mr. Taffin's loads but I prefer to use current data.

Last edited by ClarkEMyers; 10-17-2008 at 07:05 PM. Reason: add No. 7 reference correct typo
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-17-2008, 04:59 PM
Bearbait in NM Bearbait in NM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Taos, NM
Age: 52
Posts: 448
I have not loaded a lot of 200 grain lead bullets, but lots of 225 and 250 grain. The lead behaves, pressure wise, very close to the jacketed counterpart. There are a few sources of jacketed load data out there. Go with jacketed data for the 200 grain, start low and work up, and you will be fine. You could even extrapolate between 185 and 230 grain data and work up. I do not recall seeing final numbers on target velocities for a Commander Rowland in any of the published data, so you are going to be a bit in the dark, if you plan on using velocity for any pressure readings. I am at the office right now, but I will check my notes later, to see what I have with 200 grain lead at home..

Bear in mind that you are going to get a lot of residue from the comp, on the comp and slide, and depending on how hard/brittle your bullets are, and what type of lube you are using, a lot of buildup inside the comp, and possibly in the barrel.

Craig
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-17-2008, 09:24 PM
HarryT HarryT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 588
460 Rowland

I'm using Felix's World Famous Bullet Lube recipe:
2 Tablespoons mineral oil
1 Tablespoon castor oil
1 Tablespoon Ivory, or homemade soap (grated)
1 Tablespoon Lanolin
Beeswax - Piece approximately 3 1/2" X 3 1/2" X 1 "

Are you having any problems with 250 grain bullets? I'd rather shoot heavier bullets but I notice the commercial loaders have stopped producing them for safety reasons (?). Supposedly having setbacks.
Thanks for the info.
Harry
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-17-2008, 10:09 PM
tsp45acp tsp45acp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Greensboro, N.C.
Age: 53
Posts: 6,768
Clark,

I took an old Wilson blue plastic bushing wrench and cut the opening for the comp setup----wouldn't work for me w/o a third hand. I just take the front of the 2-peice guide rod out first, then take out the slide release and slide the slide off slowly capturing the recoil spring and back half of the guide rod with my left hand. Unless I'm putting the #24 recoil spring in, it's no prob taking apart or putting back together. Tracy
__________________
Tracy # 16000
1988 Colt Delta Elite, 2001 Colt LTW Commander XSE, 2003 Colt Gunsite Nite Sites, 2009 DoubleStarr Ar-15,
1996 Colt Special Combat 45 ACP(Carry version- Blued w/ Nite sites)--Wife's gun, 1998 SA Comped Longslide 45 Super/45-08 Armco, 1997 SA V-10--Wife's gun 04/98-Lee Pro 1000
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-17-2008, 10:18 PM
Bearbait in NM Bearbait in NM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Taos, NM
Age: 52
Posts: 448
Harry,

I am mostly focusing on heavy weight bullets now. The 250's, 240's and when the article comes out on the other furum, likley the very heavy weights (300 grain and higher).

No problems with 250's right now. I am using mostly 250 XTP non-mag, the 240 XTP mag, and even the Rainer Plated 250. Here's the kicker for me. I am holding the 230 XTP's to just a fuzz over 1200 fps, and the 250's about 1150ish. The published data for 230's is 1350ish. This has been safe in my guns, but is pretty hard on everything. The 250's doing 1200 fps have shown no pressure signs, but I am pulling back a bit out of defference to the platform. I did have a setback situation with a 230 grain bullet that actually blew out a case and wrecked an early gun combo. Cracked the slide, etc. My problem was not bullet weight, but a 28# recoil spring. This was early in my Rowland testing, and after reading 45 Super threads I though more recoil spring equals better. WRONG. I have come a long way since then. Bullet setback and excessive pressure will be an issue with any bullet weight that is not feeding correctly. Not just 230's, and not with 250's if feeding properly.

What is critical with any bullet weight, besides the obvious over pressure due to too much powder is smooth feeding. I have played with 5 or 6 different Clark barrels (and many thousand Rowlands down range) on various frames/slides, and the important thing that has to be watched is that any of the assorted issues that 1911's have, become dangerous with the 460 Rowland. Things not timed right (barrel/slide), extractor tension, mag springs/style. Any of the problems that are not dangerous at 45acp levels become critical at Rowland pressures.

Back to the setback question, what is most important is that the bullets feed smoothly, and do not clunk or "hitch" going into battery. Combine this with maximum case neck tension, and no over crimping, and I have had no problems with 250 grain bullets. Your slide stop may need to be relieved on the inside, if the bullet ogive bumps the stop when feeding, but I have only found this with some 250 grain lead bullets. The 250 XTP feeds like butter in my current gun. Same with the 230 XTP, and all of the lighter bullets. I have not quite gotten the 240 XTP to feed as smoothly. I think I need to play around with the OAL a bit.

That is quite the bullet lube recipe. I do not cast, but have been playing with factory cast bullets for a lot of years in the Rowland, heavy 45 Colts and 454's. You'll know pretty quickly wether or not your combination of lead hardness and lube will cause any problems. The issue I have been having with commercial cast in my Rowland is the leading in the comp. It gets pretty heavy at times, especially at the mouth of the barrel, where the Clark threads end. I have not a clue whether it will eventually affect accuracy, but it is hard to get out. I am hesitent to go into that area near the crown to mechanically remove the fouling. With my revolver cast loads, the "smoke" and fouling in the air has never been a problem, as it takes a bit to recover from recoil and reacquire the target. The smoke clears. Due to the minimal muzzle rise of the 460 Rowland, I find that I am actually ready for the next shot, before I have a clear target. May not be an issue for most folks, probably just me.

Craig
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-18-2008, 10:51 AM
Bearbait in NM Bearbait in NM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Taos, NM
Age: 52
Posts: 448
Harry,

I opted for a new post, rather than edit my old one to perhaps ding you with an e-mail notification.

I went through all of my notes, and could not find much SWC lead bullet data. Mostly RNFP and TC, and other shapes.

With the 200 Bull "X" SWC, I used a 1.275 oal, wlp and 11.0 grains of Longshot for 1304 fps. That length seems long, but did work in my mags of the time. The only other load perhaps close was a National Bullet, 215 SWC. With an OAL of 1.230, wlp and 12 grains of Longshot I was getting 1290 fps. These both were with a full size Rowland.

I did confirm that in all of my older lead bullet testing, with lead I always started with the minimum jacketed numbers, and worked up, with no anomolies noted.

Craig
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-18-2008, 12:37 PM
ClarkEMyers ClarkEMyers is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,460
Heavy bullet thoughts -

Quote:
"Are you having any problems with 250 grain bullets? I'd rather shoot heavier bullets but I notice the commercial loaders have stopped producing them for safety reasons (?). Supposedly having setbacks."
There is no question that Georgia Arms stopped loading 230 grain because the bullets set back.

My current practice is to use CorBon:
Quote:
460 ROWLANDS 255 GR [HT460255/20] $28.35
460 ROWLANDS BULLET WEIGHT=255 GR. BC VELOCITY= 1100 FPS / ENERGY= 685 FTLBS 20 ROUNDS PER BOX
I have not chronographed the load myself, someday, but I do tend to trust CorBon to meet its claims - I don't know the tolerance for variation in either speed or pressure. I do know some higher velocity higher pressure loads are less consistent in handguns (at least the 9x23 esp with SP2 from personal experience though the same percentage variation might be more fps variation as the performance goes up +/- 10% at 600 fps .45 wadcutter is less than +/- 10% at 1500 fps trick bullet in the 9x23) regardless of how likely an official screamer in benchrest is likely to be from a screaming load.

I am, currently and subject to change from day to day, in agreement with Cooper and others who suggest bigger and heavier over faster and faster - though my carry is a 9x23 because my hands hurt (was it Skip Talbot who ruined his hands with heavy loads? heavy in that case being dinosaur killers) and my splits take forever with modern magnum loads - there is no Utopia.

Although I am perfectly willing to sacrifice a slide if I somebody would tell me the guaranteed life expectancy (smiley) the .460 Rowland makes me nervous - I take measurements and I was looking at a dye chek kit from Midway - wish I had access to a good mag/penetrant guy free these days.

I quite agree on feeding and other issues - the Rowland is IMHO opinion a good place to stick close to Browning - no ka chunk feed from extended magazines, trick followers or wadcutter feed lips. Fresh cases have better tension too IMHO. I mostly take all of John's ('Tuner) advice except the don't do it part.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-18-2008, 06:56 PM
Bearbait in NM Bearbait in NM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Taos, NM
Age: 52
Posts: 448
Clark,

Thanks for the heads-up on the Corbon 255. I have not purchased any factory 460 loads. If Corbon is running their 255's at 1100, then perhaps my 250's at 1150 are not insane. I do know that it usually takes me getting the 250's to 1200 to start to see the brass signs that I get with a 230 at 1350. I find it odd that GA was having problems with 230's setting back, as I thought these were XTP's, and all XTP's feed like butter in my guns. The only one that is on the edge of rough feeding is the 240 XTP mag, and its nose profile is significantly different than the 230 and 250 non-mag XTP. I would wager a bet that if all 460's out there were built from scratch, and properly fitted GA would not have had setback issues with the ammo. I think the obvious downside to a drop-in conversion is that in reality no 1911 parts are really drop-in. Certainly a bit of dice rolling going on.

Hunter, on the other board confirmed my thought about velocity with Johnny Rowland. What he (Rowland) was after was pure velocity, probably as a marketing tool. From performance standpoint, with hunting in mind, a heavy wide properly constructed lead bullet will penetrate for days even at 900 fps. John Linebaugh, Mr. BIG when it comes to insanely wide and heavy bullets at light speed has written extensively about how well wide heavy bullets perform at moderate velocities. The problem here is that it takes a more "sophisticated" hand gun hunter to sort through a lot of this. Heavy, wide and fast is an easy sell. Light, wide and fast looks good as well to most folks. Heavy, wide and slow usually takes seeing to believe.

In my lengthy 460 testing, I have come to worry less about the slide, and more on the frame and barrel. As to destruction, I have sheared one barrel lower lug, and cracked one frame. On the cracked Colt frame, a used S70, I went on to shoot probably a thousand additional 460's before retiring it. The crack at the dust cover got to a point, and then never got larger. I only recently retired this frame from 460 shooting, as I have a new S70 SS gun that I am building. On the sheared lower barrel lug, as I have written before, was a destruction test confirming that the Clark comp may be needed. I had a spare 460 kit that I removed the comp, and polished the threads smooth. Inquiring minds want to know kind of thing.

I am with you about JMB design. I like the series 70 for the slide, as the lack of lowering and flaring might help with slide life. Haven't a clue, but makes intuitive sense. Same with the mags, for me it is 7 round Colt mags, period. And in dealing with setback issues, I am running a 20 pound ISMI recoil spring, shock buff, EGW fps and 25 pound main spring. Trying to keep the feeding side of the cycle closer to stock.

And for me, what makes the 460 attractive as an option is that I am not hung up on the life expectancy of the gun. While I am not made of money, I enjoy the shooting and hunting benefits of the 460 enough that if the gun gets "broke" in something less than the 50K that folks expect from a 45acp, so be it. This is why I have a few spare Rowland kits in hand, and picking up a new Colt was pretty easy. I would caveat that statement with your concern about the slide. I try and not do anything that could endanger me, and I do keep a sharp eye on the gun. My 460's get detail stripped a lot. And, I have a pretty good handle now on what full throttle loads do to the brass and gun. I have throttled back a bit now.

Craig
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-19-2008, 12:55 PM
HarryT HarryT is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 588
460 Rowland

Craig, Thanks for all the information!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-19-2008, 03:00 PM
ramptester ramptester is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Georgia
Age: 43
Posts: 699
I suspect that the Georgia Arms problem might have something to do with their brass cleaning media, along with a crimp on the light side. They also don't make enough money on the rowland to justify a lawsuit, etc. I also suspect that the vast differences in setup of spring weights and slide lengths on Rowland guns would make a commercial loader tend to crimp on the heavy side just to be safe.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-20-2008, 11:58 AM
Bearbait in NM Bearbait in NM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Taos, NM
Age: 52
Posts: 448
Ramp,

The only problem with the crimp theory is that too much crimp actually reduces bullet tension. If you squeeze the case and bullet to the point of deforming the bullet, the case will "spring" back ever so slightly, while the deformed lead may not not. The only time I have been able to mondo crimp, is with a 45 Colt lead bullet with a cannelure that hits in the right spot. I disremeber which bullet this sort of worked on, but I think it was a National, or similar where I tapered my crimp into the groove. This didn't work well, as the OAL was just on the edge of working, and any time you try and use a crimp groove on the bullet case OAL becomes critical. Read that as trimming. Not to mention this is probably an improper use of the taper crimp. Another of the Inquiring minds want to know kind of thing.

As was pointed out to me by another board member, if GA wanted to mechanically lock the bullet, they could always use the canneluring tool which crimps the case below the bullet. Probably too much grief for them.

Craig
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-20-2008, 02:59 PM
ClarkEMyers ClarkEMyers is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,460
It pays to have a variety of dies and expanders -

It pays to have a variety of dies and expanders -

My only loads that look area ruled are in the magnum revolvers where the case indeed does look like the proverbial snake swallowing a pig - with a heavy roll crimp - said to give improved performance with 296/H110 and by test not inclined to pull bullets after multiple trips around the cylinder - or any other way really.

I wouldn't dream of pushing any envelopes without a variety of dies and expanders accumulated over the years to size brass thick and thin to suit myself with expansion to a diameter and depth to suit myself - using a variety of expanding plugs not just from the variety of dies but also type M and modified - frex a bunch of dies in the .35 bore area from .380 or Corto all the way up past 9x19 and 9x21 and 9x23 (yes could load those with just the 9x19 but I don't, I even have different 9x23 dies for different chambers smiley though those are relatively new after my hands started hurting) to .357 Magnum and Maximum will come with shorter and longer expander plugs and with different diameters by natural variation and that's where I started mixing and matching my dies.

Seating trick points, mostly hollow of one sort or another has led me to use glass bedding - (filled epoxy molded to fit with parting compound on the bullet and all) - to customize a seating plug that will keep the hollow point open while putting quite a bit of pressure on to seat the bullet in a tight neck case. Pays off just as much with a true soft point - anything but hard cast flat point large meplat where large flat is on a large flat.

I am personally of the belief that even the enhanced N-frame runs out of strength at the .41 Remington Magnum; I tried to like the big H&K and other options for the .45 Super and .460 Rowland and just couldn't do it. I also think the 1911 and the Rowland is a great combination - I can definitely perform better and carry more comfortably than with anything else of comparably size and power.

Still I think the 1911 runs out of reserve somewhere shy of the .460 Rowland so I mostly shoot it a little and go with factory loads in the Rowland.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-20-2008, 04:54 PM
WESHOOT2 WESHOOT2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Vermont (Caspian country)
Age: 60
Posts: 15,322
great thread

Thanks for the info and discussion; as always, much to be learned.

I satisfy myself with my 45 ACP / 252g LSWC / 900fps (plus a little more if I need it; I still got that Redhawk).

Now I hit "SAVE"
__________________
'
"all my ammo is mostly-retired factory ammo"
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-20-2008, 08:26 PM
Bearbait in NM Bearbait in NM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Taos, NM
Age: 52
Posts: 448
Clark,

Intersesting thought, forming your seating stems from Accra-Glass/Gel. I use a lot of that stuff for a lot of things, but had not pondered seating stems. I may have to ponder on that one. Thanks. I do get a bit frustrated with jacketed HP's and stems, as they do get to be a bit buggered, and unless you use a bullet Comparator tool, you can really chase your tail around trying to get that last 0.005+/- of OAL. It may not matter much for a pistol round, but given the pressures involved here, I like to be able to at least duplicate my work precisely, batch to batch. I have been known to alter stems, and I almost always end up mixing and matching die sets.

My 460's with new brass and .452 bullets do look swollen. I can cleary see my bullet base. As a matter of fact, with that combination, on my Dillon 550B, I cannot seem to get enough precision in the seating stage to keep all of the bullets "square" to the case. Toss in a little play in the press, and I have decided that for the Rowland, I size, prime and flare on the 550B, dispense with a Harrell's thrower, and seat and crimp on the Rockchucker. This also gives me a better feel for how "snug" a bullet goes into the case. While not terribly scientific, every once in a while I get a bullet that goes in way too easy. When I check that one over, the rim usually indicates that it has been reloaded a few times. That case gets chucked. It could be a weak case getting ready to split, a split case or just general case fatigue. As I seat and crimp seperately, I also get a good tactile feel for the crimp on each round. Again, not scientific, but a little Zen never hurt anyone.

Right now I am only using new cases for my full throttle loads, which are a bit down from published. I also found that the powder thrower on my 550B was not very good for the Rowland with Longshot. Very ugly ES's. I also use a similar strategy for my full throttle 454 loads. I split them up between the 550 and RCBS, for similar reasons. For 45acp and 454 Colt level loads, the 550 works fine. And I do know that there are lots of folks using the 550 or similar for everything, but one blown Rowland case was one too many for me. I guess other than segregating my brass and tending to primer pockets, I tend to approach the Rowland more like reloading a rifle round. And I guess when you look at the numbers, it ain't that far off. I know when I touch off one of my insane (but published) 454 rounds in my FA gun, I do not worry as the gun is over-engineered. I don't have the same confidence with the 454 in my Puma '92, but I keep on using it. I also do not get the same warm fuzzies with the Rowland, but I'll keep on using it, trying my best to mind my p's and q's.

Craig
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-21-2008, 01:22 PM
ClarkEMyers ClarkEMyers is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,460
Agreed I can see the bullet base or at least I think I can -

Agreed I can see the bullet base or at least I think I can; enough neck tension is equivalent to a cannelure - agreed on fresh brass - likely I should have said that the longer case and slower powder leads me to exagerate with the revolver what I try to do in most cases. A case full of 296/H110 responds well to working the brass really hard much as Winchester always said it would. I've never felt the same need with a smaller quantity of #7 in a shorter fatter case.

As noted I do find ES to be annoying in many loads - especially with SP2 in the small bore - it would be nice if the majors did more development of the classic load testing in a variety of temperatures and a variety of positions. Given that the bullet makers and powder importers seem to be hiring their manuals done I doubt the same level of effort is still there that e.g. Ed Matunas brought to doing Lyman when he did. Neal Knox suggested long ago that the variety of powders on the market meant a better selection but each for a specialized use; that is more to choose from but a more careful choice is necessary - I think there might be a gap between powders aimed at shotgun/handgun pressures and powders aimed at rifle pressures where few powders are aimed at high handgun but low rifle pressures - maybe more work with primers? I use Winchester small rifle in the 9x23 and by the source book with #7 in the Rowland with some bullet substitutions. I'd love to see Barnes do a full workup for the Rowland and if they did I'd likely buy their bullets and follow their suggestions. I notice the Barnes #4 suggests powders in the same range but not the same powders I'm most accustomed to for their lead free rifle bullets.

Given that I carry factory ammunition, reloads in 9x23 and .460 Rowland are mostly to entertain kibitzers who enjoy shooting something exotic while spending a little less of my own money. I'll do draw and shoot one sort of drills with a Service Ace myself and high round count exercises or games with .45 Auto or less often 9mm for lost brass. I had to give up gas guns and go break open shotguns for clays because I keep lifting my head and following the hull - still happens with brass some sort of frowning smiley.

Agreed on treating some handgun loads like precision rifle loads. When I was commonly carrying a Model 58 I enjoyed popping hand size rifle gongs at 110 yards.

Time was I wouldn't much worry doing mass production with the classic plinking/gallery load of 3.5 Bullseye behind a #130 with Alox and beeswax which works well but leaves the throat primed for a drink to end the day. I don't have a need for mass production in high pressure cartridges. My very first press was an original Rockchucker, later bought a Hollywood Universal Turret because Elmer Keith said it was the best. These days almost all work is done with a CoAx press and weighed charges. I believe without knowing that the 180 degree throw gives me a better touch.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-22-2008, 09:07 AM
WESHOOT2 WESHOOT2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Vermont (Caspian country)
Age: 60
Posts: 15,322
I love my Co-Ax

Too bad they're a bit pricey for most newcomers....
__________________
'
"all my ammo is mostly-retired factory ammo"
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 03:08 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.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2011 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved