1911Forum
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > Hardware & Accessories > Reloading Bench


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-28-2013, 09:10 PM
6591BRASS 6591BRASS is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 25
CFE Pistol




Anyone gotten their hands on the new CFE Pistol powder by Hodgdon?

If so who from?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-28-2013, 09:25 PM
tsp45acp tsp45acp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Greensboro, N.C.
Age: 53
Posts: 6,736
No, but I'm curious as to it's speed and what it's close to....fast=Bullseye, medium=Acc#5, slow-Blue Dot...???????

Since the small blurb I saw was referring to it's cleanliness, I'm guessing it's not geared toward lead bullets.
__________________
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
  #3  
Old 12-28-2013, 09:40 PM
Nick A Nick A is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,390
It's listed in the online Hodgdon Reloading Data for 17 common pistol cartridges.

In the data, it is listed between AutoComp and HS6 for burn rate.
When you look at the Hodgdon burn rate chart, AutoComp and HS6
are immediately adjacent to one another with AC a hair slower than HS6.

So CFE Pistol is same burn rate category as HS6, just a teeny bit slower.

Per grain of powder, it gets more velocity than any of the slower powders
in 45acp, 9mmLuger and most others. Good velocity indeed.


When they announced CFE 223 like this, it took them 2 months to ship it
beyond the original availability date.
CFE Pistol is announced to be released December 2013, it may be
a while before we actually see any.

At that burn rate, it will be very interesting as a major PF competition powder.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-28-2013, 11:06 PM
tsp45acp tsp45acp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Greensboro, N.C.
Age: 53
Posts: 6,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick A View Post
It's listed in the online Hodgdon Reloading Data for 17 common pistol cartridges.

In the data, it is listed between AutoComp and HS6 for burn rate.
When you look at the Hodgdon burn rate chart, AutoComp and HS6
are immediately adjacent to one another with AC a hair slower than HS6.

So CFE Pistol is same burn rate category as HS6, just a teeny bit slower.

Per grain of powder, it gets more velocity than any of the slower powders
in 45acp, 9mmLuger and most others. Good velocity indeed.


When they announced CFE 223 like this, it took them 2 months to ship it
beyond the original availability date.
CFE Pistol is announced to be released December 2013, it may be
a while before we actually see any.

At that burn rate, it will be very interesting as a major PF competition powder.


Haven't been able to shoot much for a while, and have waaaaaay to much powder to justify buying any more, but it does look promising, and I wonder how it will stack up for 10MM. Surprised that it listed for lead bullets as well.


I did notice that virtually all the powders on the site used CUP except for the new CFE-Pistol and TiteGroup which used PSI.
__________________
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
  #5  
Old 12-29-2013, 02:00 AM
Nick A Nick A is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsp45acp View Post
I did notice that virtually all the powders on the site used CUP except for the new CFE-Pistol and TiteGroup which used PSI.
That indicates the equipment they used.

Copper crusher equipment from the 1920's to 1950's use copper cylinders,
which don't give a pressure measurement. You just measure how much
it squashed the copper cylinder and then convert that to 'Units' using a chart.
That's where Copper Units Pressure (CUP) comes from.

SAAMI standardized piezo protocol 30 or 40 years ago, just about all
modern pressure equipment works on piezo transducer now,
which is calibrated in true pressure units, PSI.

Since the squash of the copper cylinder depends upon the copper alloy,
the diameter of the hole it sits in, the diameter of the hole in the brass,
and so forth, one cannot convert CUP to PSI. Repeat: Cannot.
Well, I guess you can fool yourself and convert it.
Go knock yourselves out if you wish.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-29-2013, 11:28 AM
jondar jondar is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 25
Interesting. Brings up the subject of Keith's classic load for the .44 Special which produced, according to Keith, 1200 fps at a pressure of .......what? Was this c.u.p. or psi? I once was taken to task for saying that load produced 21,000 lbs. pressure, which was what Keith said it was. Now there are people that say the load was actually 26,000 lbs pressure. Keith had the loads checked with the Peters Cartridge Company sometime before his book was published in 1955 and they verified the pressure at 21,000 lbs. Somehow I can't see Keith running the higher pressure thru those old SAA's. Can someone clear this up? Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-29-2013, 11:41 AM
Nick A Nick A is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,390
I don't know for sure, jondar. But all the stories and articles written over the years
(not excluding Keith's own tall tales) probably twist and turn the truth until we'd
barely recognize it today.

Some folks get the impression that those guys in the 1930's and 40's developed
cartridges by 'feel' because they simply 'knew' what was right and what wasn't.
But the record shows that Keith and others worked carefully with ballisticians,
engineers, gun manufacturers, and ammo manufacturers to develop new and
better high-performance cartridges.

We would have to dig deeper to determine actual psi for Keith loads.
I bet they have been tested and published with modern equipment
in accordance with SAAMI test standard. You'll have to dig to find it.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-29-2013, 12:27 PM
tsp45acp tsp45acp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Greensboro, N.C.
Age: 53
Posts: 6,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by jondar View Post
Interesting. Brings up the subject of Keith's classic load for the .44 Special which produced, according to Keith, 1200 fps at a pressure of .......what? Was this c.u.p. or psi? I once was taken to task for saying that load produced 21,000 lbs. pressure, which was what Keith said it was. Now there are people that say the load was actually 26,000 lbs pressure. Keith had the loads checked with the Peters Cartridge Company sometime before his book was published in 1955 and they verified the pressure at 21,000 lbs. Somehow I can't see Keith running the higher pressure thru those old SAA's. Can someone clear this up? Thanks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick A View Post
I don't know for sure, jondar. But all the stories and articles written over the years
(not excluding Keith's own tall tales) probably twist and turn the truth until we'd
barely recognize it today.

Some folks get the impression that those guys in the 1930's and 40's developed
cartridges by 'feel' because they simply 'knew' what was right and what wasn't.
But the record shows that Keith and others worked carefully with ballisticians,
engineers, gun manufacturers, and ammo manufacturers to develop new and
better high-performance cartridges.

We would have to dig deeper to determine actual psi for Keith loads.
I bet they have been tested and published with modern equipment
in accordance with SAAMI test standard. You'll have to dig to find it.



I'm not ANY kind of "Keith" expert, but of the few stories I read about some of his load development, He blew up a couple guns/cylinders along the way.
__________________
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
  #9  
Old 12-29-2013, 12:28 PM
tsp45acp tsp45acp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Greensboro, N.C.
Age: 53
Posts: 6,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsp45acp View Post
Haven't been able to shoot much for a while, and have waaaaaay to much powder to justify buying any more, but it does look promising, and I wonder how it will stack up for 10MM. Surprised that it listed for lead bullets as well.


I did notice that virtually all the powders on the site used CUP except for the new CFE-Pistol and TiteGroup which used PSI.


Did a quick check on the 10mm.......Longshot is still a much better choice.
__________________
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
  #10  
Old 04-29-2014, 11:48 PM
Cult Hero Cult Hero is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 12
not to bump an old thread, but here goes anyway! My local shop got a load of this in and I bought three pounds today. Loaded up some test loads based off the IMR website and will chrono them later this week.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-30-2014, 03:03 AM
Nick A Nick A is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,390
Thanks, Hero.

(Thread isn't that old. I'm old. This thread isn't.)

Keep us updated. Especially on the smell. CFE223 smells like ammonia when it burns.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-30-2014, 06:01 AM
Capt Ramius Capt Ramius is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Posts: 88
Bought a pound at the Chantilly VA Gun Show this past Friday. Waited an hour and a half in line at a vendor who had lots of powder (amazing!). By the time I got to the front all they had for handguns was CFE Pistol. I bought a pound, as did the two guys in front and in back of me. Will try it out on 45 ACP soon and get back on how it goes, including the smell, Nick.
__________________
"Ryan, be careful what you shoot at. Some things in here don't react too well to bullets."
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-30-2014, 08:28 AM
ouluckydogu ouluckydogu is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,091
Am going to watch this post for advice on the 45 because my lgs has a couple of pounds of it. I like the 200 lswc.

Lucky
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-30-2014, 09:05 PM
Plaidad Plaidad is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 422
I bought some recently and have loaded 230 gr Bayou Bullets and 115 gr Rainier plated 9mm. So far, I like it. It meters very well in my Lee Autodisk, and seems fairly clean. I don't have a chronograph. I used mid-range loads, and it seems as accurate as my old Win 231 loads with similar recoil.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-01-2014, 08:49 PM
Cult Hero Cult Hero is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 12
CFE Pistol

So I shot and chrono'd three loads of CFEP today along with two loads of 700X and SR7625

All loaded with Hornady 230 gr RN with Winchester primers.

My groupings were kinda all over the place as I am still learning the point of impact on my TRP. Seems to be about a 6:00 hold so you will see groupings moving down, lol.

All shot at 15 yards with my Springfield TRP.

CFEP 5.4 gr averaged 712 fps over 5 shots

CFEP 5.7 gr averaged 755 fps over 5 shots

CFEP 6.0 gr averaged 802 fps over 5 shots

700X 4.5 gr averaged 741 fps over 5 shots

700X 4.8 gr averaged 785 fps over 5 shots

SR7625 5.5 gr averaged 721 fps over 5 shots

SR7625 5.8 gr averaged 737 fps over 5 shots

American Eagle factory loads 230 gr RN averaged 824 fps with my chrono fwiw

Pics #1 is CFEP #2 is 700X #3 is Am Eagle, #4 is SR7625

Needless to say I am not the greatest shot but the groupings with the CFEP aren't terrible. Like I said still trying to find POI.

No noticeable ammonia smell that I could detect from the CFEP.

Click image for larger version

Name:	ImageUploadedByTapatalk1398995244.606097.jpg
Views:	34
Size:	256.8 KB
ID:	119351Click image for larger version

Name:	ImageUploadedByTapatalk1398995256.889100.jpg
Views:	32
Size:	287.5 KB
ID:	119352Click image for larger version

Name:	ImageUploadedByTapatalk1398995270.988974.jpg
Views:	30
Size:	272.1 KB
ID:	119353

Click image for larger version

Name:	ImageUploadedByTapatalk1398995009.424170.jpg
Views:	28
Size:	277.1 KB
ID:	119350

Last edited by Cult Hero; 05-01-2014 at 09:16 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-04-2014, 03:57 PM
rduckwor rduckwor is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: LA - Lower Alabama
Posts: 628
Here's my CFE Pistol data from a 5" 1911, MO Bullet 200 Gr LSWC:

__________________
RMD
===================================
COTEP, Guns? Enough!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-04-2014, 09:40 PM
diver64 diver64 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 972
I have nothing against new powders from the manufacturers but a copper erasing powder for a handgun? Can't say I've ever had that problem.

I'd rather they concentrate on producing the powder they have now to supply a thirsty market.
__________________
The gods of the valley are not the gods of the hills, and you shall understand it.
Ethan Allens reply to the Kings Attorney General of New York claiming authority over Vermont before picking up arms.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-19-2014, 05:00 PM
Cult Hero Cult Hero is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 12
Shot some Hornady XTP 200 grain today. Started at 6.3 then 6.6 and finally 6.9 which produced a good grouping at 15 yards

Click image for larger version

Name:	ImageUploadedByTapatalk1400536787.407477.jpg
Views:	141
Size:	163.5 KB
ID:	120828

Click image for larger version

Name:	ImageUploadedByTapatalk1400536806.689440.jpg
Views:	139
Size:	280.4 KB
ID:	120829

Click image for larger version

Name:	ImageUploadedByTapatalk1400536817.006793.jpg
Views:	140
Size:	268.1 KB
ID:	120830
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-20-2014, 12:15 PM
Capt Ramius Capt Ramius is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Woodbridge, VA
Posts: 88
Fired 60 of my reloads using CFE Pistol for the first time two weeks ago: 45ACP, 230grFMJ RN. 20 loads of 6.0 gr, 20 of 6.4, and 20 of 6.8, which covers the range from low to high in the load charts.

No failures, no odd smell. All were acceptable in accuracy, with the 6.4gr loads being the most accurate...for what it's worth in a small experiment of this nature.

Also, it seemed the pistol wasn't as dirty as when I fire the same amount of Federal or Winchester. Subjective judgment, but I'm the guy who cleans it after every trip to the range so it should have at least a little merit.

I'm good to go with CFE Pistol.
__________________
"Ryan, be careful what you shoot at. Some things in here don't react too well to bullets."
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-20-2014, 03:13 PM
Cult Hero Cult Hero is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 12
strange I found mine was particularly dirty, but then again I did have 50 rounds of American Eagle through it too. That is not the cleanest burn. Likewise I have no issues with it and the groupings I got were enough to please me.

Interesting side note. I loaded Hornady 200 Gr XTP at 1.22". The IMR website has the COL at 1.15" which came out with the bullet buried way past the shoulder and into the ogive.
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 05:08 AM.


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