What would be the absolute lowest charge that could be used with Titegroup powder, .45acp, 185 grain LSWCHP bullet, in a M1911? At this point I'm not concerned with function, more concerned with safety. I loaded this recipe with 3.5 grains with very good results. Just loaded 25 pcs with 3.3 grains and am now having second thoughts about "light load detonation". Some people believe "light load detonation" can happen with any combination, others say it only happens with slow burning powders. Your thoughts? Thank you.
Absolute lowest charge Titegroup .45acp ?
- Thread starter Mike38
- Start date
ShootistPRS
New member
I never found a load that didn't function in my 9mm and I got down to under 60% of the listed max load. I was told by Hodgdon that the powder is not location sensitive so It should be possible to reduce loads even farther.
The Finnish Gunwriters site had a report of a .308 Mauser disassembled by a 2 gram subsonic lead bullet load of N320 pistol powder. That works out to just under 12% case fill. If your LSWC is seated 0.28" inches into the case, that would correspond to about 1.3 grains of Tightgroup in the .45 Auto. However, the .45 has a very short powder space and uses a large primer that heats the whole space up pretty well—certainly a lot better than it does a .45 Colt's powder space—so I doubt you will see the same problem. Detonation seems to require an initially failed ignition that fuses the powder into a solid (needed to conduct the shock wave in detonation) and that reignites while still very hot. I don't think your small powder space will allow that to happen and I know of a number of folks who've experimented with 2 grain loads in that chambering without issues. But if you are still concerned, don't drop below about 20% fill, or about that 2 grain level with the seating depth I gave.
Seating Depth = case length + bullet length - COL
Seating Depth = case length + bullet length - COL
No cast data on Hodgdon's site but a jacketed 185 start load is 5.0. A 'LSWCHP' is a pointless cast HP, but cast just the same.
3.5 grains is very much too far below minimum to be safe.
The lowest load is what your manual says it is. Not something you've decided it can be.
"...only happens with slow burning powders..." That's nonsense. Handgun cartridges don't use slow burning powders for one. The question is not, "What powders?", but, "How far below minimum will it happen?" Mind you, as mentioned, you'll have squib loads with bullet stuck in the barrel before it happens anyway.
3.5 grains is very much too far below minimum to be safe.
The lowest load is what your manual says it is. Not something you've decided it can be.
"...only happens with slow burning powders..." That's nonsense. Handgun cartridges don't use slow burning powders for one. The question is not, "What powders?", but, "How far below minimum will it happen?" Mind you, as mentioned, you'll have squib loads with bullet stuck in the barrel before it happens anyway.
T. O'Heir said:
Utter nonsense. A quick perusal of target loads used by bull's eye champion shooters going back three generations show 3.2 grains of Bullseye used by some for gallery loads. That load is 38% fill, which was the worst bad spot for pressure spikes in rifle cartridges found in Dr. Lloyd Brownell's study of the .30-06, yet it causes no issue in the 45 Auto's tight powder space. Add to this that Bullseye is a slower powder than Tightgroup and the odds of trouble drop even further. Add to this that many people firelapping routinely load down even further until the bullet barely makes airgun velocities and do so without having trouble in short pistol cases.
Pathfinder45
New member
Why do this at all? What are you trying to achieve?
I was wondering the same.
I have a Colt 1911 that is in a well-deserved state of semi-retirement. I have a 12 Lb recoil spring in it and it only shoots very light pooper-popper 200gn LSWC's. I've loaded them down to about the 650 f/s neighborhood and have gone lower in my load workups ("workdown," actually
). I used Nitro 100, Bullseye, W231, and N-310. N-310 runs the best turned down that low. I did not test TiteGroup for this purpose because I already did much the same with 38 Special, and . . . In 38 Special, TiteGroup gets to running amazingly sooty. Which came as quite a surprise to me, considering how spunky and energetic is. ALL of the above-mentioned propellants for my 45 ACP tests ran cleaner in such a low pressure condition with 38 Special - yes, even Bullseye.
For the record, it's not really "soot" so much as it is a grainy residue that seems like partially burnt propellant. To me, it's actually more annoying than traditional soot.
Point is, if I were conducting our OP's experiment (I have, sort of) I wouldn't turn to TiteGroup.
I have a serious problem with anticipating recoil with the .45. Trying to lessen the recoil as much as possible. I know it's a mind game. Something in that cranium of mine switched and I have become recoil sensitive for some reason.
My previous "go to" load was 3.9 grains of Titegroup and 200 grain LSWC bullets. Dropping down to 3.3 grains of powder and 185 grain bullets should significantly reduce felt recoil, or at least I would think it will.
I've done some searching on the internet, and opinions run all over the place on light load detonation in .45acp. What I think I'll do is single load these 25 rounds I reloaded, checking the bore between each shot. If it works, I'll load up 100 rounds and shoot for accuracy.
What I really need to do is spend some cash and get a target pistol chambered in .32 wadcutter or .32acp. With light "bunny fart" loads, it's not much more than a .22lr.
Thanks for the replies!
mikejonestkd
New member
I have worked at the lower end of the spectrum with 45ACp for quite some time, and you should be just fine with 3.3 gr of titegroup and a 185 SWC.
You are probably going to have to a 9 or 10 pound spring to get it to cycle.
I have run thousands of powder puff loads through 1911s without an issue, although I use bullseye, your results should be similar.
You are probably going to have to a 9 or 10 pound spring to get it to cycle.
I have run thousands of powder puff loads through 1911s without an issue, although I use bullseye, your results should be similar.
The other thing about the 1911 is that the sharpest apparent recoil results from the slide hitting the frame sharply. If you play with the load and recoil spring (get a set for this purpose; Sprinco sells good ones) combination, you will find one where the slide doesn't quite make it back to the frame, but still goes back far enough to strip the next round from the magazine and go into battery properly. In that narrow sweet spot, the recoil goes from sharp to spongy feeling and isn't difficult at all.
What I used to do for practice was take my Ruger Blackhawk in .41 magnum out to the range with me and fired a dozen full power loads in it before starting in on practice with the 1911. The 1911 felt like such a creampuff by comparison that any temptation to anticipate recoil was eliminated, at least for the time being. This is the opposite of warming up with the .22 and then going up, as bull's eye matches do. By reversing it, the 1911 recoil just didn't seem to matter much afterward.
What I used to do for practice was take my Ruger Blackhawk in .41 magnum out to the range with me and fired a dozen full power loads in it before starting in on practice with the 1911. The 1911 felt like such a creampuff by comparison that any temptation to anticipate recoil was eliminated, at least for the time being. This is the opposite of warming up with the .22 and then going up, as bull's eye matches do. By reversing it, the 1911 recoil just didn't seem to matter much afterward.
I tinker ALOT with titegroup, my findings are short of just crazy small loads the determining factor is case capacity. Example, I loaded 38 special below hodgons lowest recommendation of 3.2 grains under a 125 grain lead bullet. If the gun was tipped back the roumds would shoot just fine, a nice "bunny fart" load, but when the gun was tipped forward I would often get fizzles/squibs etc. My experience taugh me that it will work but with caveats, like any power it needs to be kinda sort near the source of ignition to properly light off.
My results were the same with 44 mag and 45 colt. I would recommend a more case filling power. Ive got to trail boss as it pretty idiot proof stuff.
My results were the same with 44 mag and 45 colt. I would recommend a more case filling power. Ive got to trail boss as it pretty idiot proof stuff.
Jim Watson
New member
Sorry, I had pretty well gotten over Titegroup before I started loading .45 Minor.
After HP38, WST, Solo 1000, 700X, and Clays, I settled on good old sooty Bullseye.
Clays was good, if your measure is accurate in small doses.
I think N310 would be good, if you don't mind the higher price.
After HP38, WST, Solo 1000, 700X, and Clays, I settled on good old sooty Bullseye.
Clays was good, if your measure is accurate in small doses.
I think N310 would be good, if you don't mind the higher price.
Pathfinder45
New member
Maybe 45 ACP just ain't your game..... I've shot some 1911's a little with full power 230 grain bullets.... I shot OK, but noticed that it was less comfortable to shoot than my Vaquero 45 Colt with quite a bit more power. Not all 1911's are equal. A full-size, all-steel version will have less recoil than a lighter, Commander-style pistol. Good luck with your endeavors.
Stats Shooter
New member
I did this accidentally once. I went and patterned my new turkey choke with 3.5" shells, 2.5oz of shot, at 1300 fps...then shot a 338 win mag with 225 gr hunting loads for my dad. The 338 felt like a .243 after shooting 6 rounds out of my shotgun
Where did you find my secret, Uncle Nick? Like certain member of this forum likes to say, I am the only reloader who does this. Guess not. Actually I apply the same principle to other guns, pistol or rifle. It works like magic. I call this window the buffered zone.
-TL
1) The "fear" of pressure spikes/detonations was for LARGE rifle case and VERY SLOW powders for the cartridge. It has NOTHING to do with pistol cartridges. Also, testing has indicated that the conditions required can NOT be duplicated with reloads.
2) Somewhere below 500 fps is where the bullet can stick due to friction over coming the powder pressure in LONG rifle barrels.
3) 3.8gn of TG with 185gn L-SWCHP is the lowest match load I have heard of, but that is NOT a minimum load and is still good for 50 yards.
2) Somewhere below 500 fps is where the bullet can stick due to friction over coming the powder pressure in LONG rifle barrels.
3) 3.8gn of TG with 185gn L-SWCHP is the lowest match load I have heard of, but that is NOT a minimum load and is still good for 50 yards.