Lighter .45acp load than 230gr?

[Shorts]

Dad and I have both picked up new .45s (Springfield Stainless GI -his and a Colt Combat Commander -mine). I've always shot 230gr from the 5" and the Oacp and have been cluelessly satisfied with the gun's handling. But the time's come to try out different loads and educate myself. The Commander seems to recoil a hint different from the Govt and Oacp, but not for what I perceive as the better - YMMV. And Dad's just curious all around so he can choose what best suits his preferences.

I guess the 230gr is the standard .45acp load? I have seen 200gr ammo listed in catalogs, and 185gr IIRC. Without getting into reloading (one step at a time please), what is your opinion of lighter .45acp loads, both for range practice and carry duty? How do loads affect trajectory and POA/POI? What about cycle timing of the gun? Any other info to be aware of when using a variety of loads?

Thanks

 

[sholling]

Mass = penetration, stick with the 230gr loads. Specifically those approved by Doc Roberts. Two of those would be the 230gr Federal HST and the 230gr Winchester Ranger-T.

 

[Mike40-11]

I agree with 230 gr for carry. For range plinking, 200 and 185 gr generally work fine and do moderate the recoil.

I nearly always shoot straight 230s for plinking anyway though. I believe the 'massive excessive recoil' of the .45 is tremendously overblown. If they're comfortable to shoot and you don't have to stop before you're done because your hand hurts, stick with 230s. They will be slightly more reliable and more closely duplicate what you'd have for carry loads. If it does bother you, by all means, try the lighter loads. 200 gr. is very popular in the gun games because the lighter recoil means faster follow up shots.

 

[Tom2]

Any more in the fullsized pistol I stick to 230 FMJ or HP. Depending on purpose. I used to shoot all different weights of ammo, from 185 up. Even handloads. I did not have any functional problems with the lighter bullets that I can recall. Point of impact will be lower with the lighter bullets as I recall. If you experience less recoil with the lighter loads, so much the better I guess. Any of them will start out making a hole .45 diameter, regardless of weight. I suppose the lightest bullets will have less penetration though. I would say give it a try. As long as the function of the gun is reliable it can't hurt a thing to try the other weights. Just money. And that is not insignificant nowadays with rising prices.

 

[44 AMP]

Different bullet weights

The .45 ACP has been used with several different bullet weights over the years, ranging from 185gr to 230gr in common loadings, and some lighter and heavier loadings made by handloaders for special purposes.

Generally, 230gr has been the standard since GI ball ammo is loaded with the 230gr FMJ. 185gr jacketed SWC has been loaded for years as match ammo for bullseye shooting. 200gr LSWC has been loaded for decades by many, many handloaders as a general target and plinking bullet.

185gr and 190gr JHP bullets became the first comomonly used hollowpoints a couple of decades back, and when bullet technology advanced enough, 230gr hollowpoints became common.

Without knowing exactly what you want from your ammo, one cannot say that one bullet is better or worse than another. General target loads and carry loads are not the same things. Target loads are built for consistant accuracy, and light recoil. Perfect for paper punching. Duty loads are built for maximum punch, penetration and/or expansion, with fine accuracy being of less concern.

1911 type guns are recoil operated, and will function over a fairly wide range of loads usually, but each gun is an individual. There are numerous modifications that can be made to stock guns to increase their reliability with different loads, beginning with spring changes, and going all the way up through custom metal work and tuning of the pistol, should you choose to go that far.

1911s set up for target shooting usually have lighter than standard springs for better cycling with lighter loads, and while they will handle some use of heavier ammo, they should be reconfigured before shooting significant amounts of heavier ammo, to prevent damage to the gun.

Likewise, a gun setup for combat loads may not cycle reliably with light target ammo. Stock guns split the difference, and will take standard GI ball level loads indefinately, some hotter loads in moderation, and will usually cycle well enough with most target loadings.

Everyone has their own favorites, and you can do a lot of study of bullet performance without conclusively proving much. Some light bullet loads will shoot to point of aim, but if the gun is sighted for 230gr, lighter bullets usually shoot lower.

Get a box of each, try them out. Every gun has it's own pet likes and dislikes, and some ammo is great and some is crap. Some shoots right where your sights are, and some doesn't. Price is an indicator, but not a guarantee of good performance.

Good Luck, and good shooting.

 

[HoraceHogsnort]

The 125 gr. HP travelling at 1200 fps from a 357 mag is considered a good stopper. So why shouldn't a 185 gr. HP from a 45 ACP clipping along at 1000 fps do as well? I think that if you keep put'n slugs into a perp until he goes to the ground then maybe these kinds of distinctions are not all that important. Who knows, I ain't never shot nobody and hope I never have to.

 

[Shaun]

When it comes to 357 magnum for personal defense i am a proponent of light and fast....the reason is 357 is a revolver and medium frame revolvers soak up recoil and reduce the snappy feeling you can get with a very fast bullet. Like you suggested Horace, i tried to carry this over to my 1911, i carried lighter bullets like 165 and 185 grain +P bullets, and trusted speed to provide the pentration. The problem is a 1911 is a recoil operated semiautomatic pistol, which, as much as some people might not agree, is not the same as shooting a revolver. I didnt like the snappy feeling i got from higher pressure ammo. I also did some research and saw that unlike heavy magnum bullets that can overpenetrate, 230 grain 45 JHPs are made to stop in a person. The 230 grain bullet is what a 1911 was built to fire, and its recoil is easily managed and it doesnt put un-needed strain on the gun. I carry 230 grain winchester ranger sxt ammunition or federal hydrashoks, just my personal preference.

 

[IM_Lugger]

200gr @ 1000fps isn't a bad load IMO

 

[T. O'Heir]

A cast 230 grain RN or FP with 4.5 grains of Bullseye is a nice accurate target load. There are factory target loads available too. Remington loads a 230 grain JHP to subsonic speeds.
"...Commander seems to recoil a hint different..." It would. It's shorter and lighter.

 

[somerled]

I've used the Federal 185-grain JHPs and Speer 200-grain Gold Dots. They do seem to recoil a bit less in a Commander, particularly the alloy-framed ones. The bullet designs are much better now and 200-grain bullets give up little, if any, in penetration compared to some 230-grain bullets. It depends on other variables, so there aren't etched-in-stone rules.

In many pistols with fixed sights, the lighter bullets will strike lower to the sights compared to the 230-grain loads.

Find what works best in your particular pistols and lay in a good supply. The last .45 I carried liked the Winchester 230-grain SXTs and 230-grain Federal Hydroshoks and 200-grain JHPs would end-nose into the feed ramp every so often.

 

[Shorts]

Thanks for the opinions folks. I got to thinking more about loads after chatting with a gentleman at the gun show who carried a 3" 1911 Kimber in the aluminum frame; he said he shot 165gr (IIRC). That's what worked for him so I figured I'd find a load both my gun and I can agree with.

The differences in perceived recoil go out the window when comparing range practice and a live encounter. The slew of physiological responses does a marvelous job of insulating the senses in a high stress situation. I understand that. The challenge is finding a happy medium to satisfy the senses I am acutely aware of 99.99% of the time.

T. O'Heir, notice I said it recoils different than the 5" AND the Oacp (3.5"). So yes, you're right about it being shorter than the Govt, but it sure isn't shorter than the 3.5"

 

[freakshow10mm]

The only jacketed bullets I shoot in my .45s are the 200gr XTP.

 

[Grandpa Shooter]

I shoot 175g LSWC for target all the time. They cycle my 45 Colt 1991A1 just fine and are very accurate. You don't have to buy into all the "wisdom" that goes with the 45. Shot placement and proper expansion of the bullet are the major factors in effective self defense.

For range purposes, the bullet weight impacts recoil and accuracy. Find a load that works in your gun and that you can handle well. Every gun works well with a different weight and load. you don't have to stick with the conventions.

 

[WESHOOT2]

not me

I recommend ONLY 230g bullets; I, however, most highly recommend lower-velocity 230g ammo for recoil-challenged shooters.

(Odd: I use '45' bullets ranging from 165g up over 250g).

 

[TacticalDefense1911]

The 185 grain Remington Golden Saber is a good load for the 45 if you are interested in trying something lighter. No need to really, though; 230 grain loads will perform very well out of those two guns.

 

[mac45]

My 1911 likes 230 gr best, so that's what I use.
Try a mess and see what works best in yours

 

[Webleymkv]

I personally wouldn't go any lighter than 200grn in a .45. The whole point of getting a .45 is to have big, heavy bullets. If I wanted 165-185grn bullets I'd have gotten a .40 or better yet a 10mm and have a better cross sectional density.

 

[Shorts]

I personally wouldn't go any lighter than 200grn in a .45. The whole point of getting a .45 is to have big, heavy bullets.

Can anyone elaborate on this? Web, not pointing you out, but using it for detail. As I recall, the allure of using the .45 to others is it leaves a big hole. Wouldn't this be the argument if I was asking "9mm or .45"? (Web, I noticed you listed 10mm and .45 as an alternative, however, I've got no experience with those calibers).

 

[pistolet1]

Shorts

I've found over the years that my less than Government sized autos, like the Commander and Officers Model, seem to shoot better with 185 gr. loads. Accuracy is great, recoil is lighter, and absolutely no functioning problems whatsoever. The only problem I have is finding factory ammo in that bullet weight that isn't priced into the upper atmosphere. I did try the Winchester BEB, but the way they leave all that exposed lead at the nose of the bullet was just nothing but trouble in my guns. I stocked up on PMC's 185 gr. hollowpoint a while back, and when that runs out, it will be time to start reloading again.

 

[Webleymkv]

When I stated my opinions on bullet weight, it was out of personal preference. I, personally, don't buy into the idea of the 0.096" diameter difference between the .45 and 9mm or 0.051" diameter difference between the .45 and .40/10mm is big enough to make any meaningful difference. However, I can see possible advantages to the heavier bullets that become available in the .45 as opposed to the 9mm or .40 which pretty much top out at 147grn and 200grn respectively (there are a few 10mm loads available as heavy as 230grn but they're mainly hunting loads). A 185grn standard pressure .45 doesn't really offer a significant ballistic advantage over a .40 in most loadings and likewise a 185grn +P doesn't offer any meaningful ballistic advantage over a 10mm. At that point you may as well, to my way of thinking, go with one of the latter two cartridges and either have a smaller gun and/or higher capacity with the .40 or higher velocities and still slightly higher capacity with the 10mm. Don't ge me wrong here, I don't think that a 185grn .45 is useless. If a person wanted just one semi-automatic handgun a .45 would be a good choice as you can go anywhere from a 117grn Aguila IQ all the way up to the 230grn loads in one handgun and use it for multiple applications (i.e. you prefer lighter bullets for SD but want to be able to use heavy ones to hunt with). If, however, you intend to use mainly or exclusively 165-185grn bullets I think there are better choices as far as caliber is concerned. My opinions on bullet weight are not exclusive to the .45 either, I don't have much use for a 135grn .40 or 10mm because if I wanted to go that light I'd use a 9mm, .357 Sig, or .357 Magnum revolver for much the same reasons.