230 grain vs 165 gr in .45acp

[RedHawk]

Ive never even thought about this before because Ive never shot 165 gr , anyone want to tell me the differences regarding these 2 ,Im thinking the stopping of the 230 is probably alot higher ,but I dont know anything about rounds , other than the rounds my gun "likes" or "dislikes" .

Please educate me!!

[Alpo]

Accuracy would probably suck. Bullets are, generally, much longer than they are wide. This cylindrical shape allows them to have more of their surface area in contact with the rifling. This is called the bearing surface. When you lighten a bullet, they weight much come from somewhere. You can remove it from the inside, like a hollow point, and keep the same length, but still be lighter. Many match rifle bullets are hollow-point especially for that reason. They can be longer for their weight, and have a longer bearing surface. The more of the bullet that is in contact with the rifling, the stabler and more accurate the bullet is likely to be.

But, usually, when you want to lighten a bullet, you just shorten the base, which causes you to lose bearing surface, and potentially means bad accuracy. See attached ABSOLUTELY NOT TO SCALE drawing of regular bullet and light bullet.

Then you have the rifling twist. This controls how fast the bullet spins. Normally, a "faster twist" is used for a heavier bullet, while a "slower twist" is used for a lighter one. If a twist of "one in twelve" is used, that means that the bullet makes one complete spin in twelve inches of travel. If you have another barrel with a "one in six" twist, if bullets were fired are the same velocity from both guns, one bullet would be spinning twice as fast at the other one. The speed of the bullet also impacts the speed of the spin. If you take two bullets, fired from the same twist barrel, but one is going 500 fps and the other is 1000 fps, the second bullet is also spinning twice as fast as the first bullet.

The rifling rate for any specific barrel is decided upon based on the weight of the bullet, the speed of the bullet and the bearing surface of the bullet. If you change any of them drastically, you might need to go to a faster or slower twist barrel, to keep your accuracy.

A 70 grain weight change in a 600-grain elephant gun bullet isn't that much. A 70 grain change in a 110-grain 30 carbine bullet is HUGE. A 70 grain change in a 230-grain bullet isn't that bad, but it's still a 30% weight loss. I doubt that a bullet set up for a 230-grain bullet would provide good accuracy with one that small.

[RunningOnMT]

Alpo, are there charts which provide the gr.wt. bullet providing optimum performace for barrels of various lengths and twist ratios in a given caliber?

[Alpo]

I'm sure there are, but I don't know where they'd be.

I got interested in this, from reading about the M16. When it was first issued, the Black Rifle was deadly as hell. 55 grain .22 bullet at 3000 fps and a 1-in-14 twist was just barely stable, and when it hit a soft target it yawed, and did massive tissue damage. But they changed the powder from IMR rod to WW ball, and the speed went up to 3200. Now it was stable, and drilled nice little 22 caliber holes through Charlie. That won't work. Increase the bullet weight. There we go. Now it's slightly unstable again, and does massive tissue damage. But if it's just barely stable at 3200, when it drops to 2500 - out there around 300 yards or so - it's so unstable that the accuracy is gone. We must make it accurate. Go to a faster twist, to stabilize the bullet. That worked. 1-in-12? 1-in-11? Anyway. Now they are accurate. But they don't kill worth a damn. Heavier bullet makes it slightly unstable, so it does damage. But now it's not accurate, so increase the twist, that makes it stable, so it does not damage, so increase the weight to make it unstable, so it isn't accurate, so increase the twist to make it stable, etc., etc, etc. What is it now - something like a 72 grain bullet and a 1-in-9 twist?

Then I found out that Pennsylvania long rifles had like a 1-in-40 twist, to stabilize a round ball. Lightweight with very little bearing surface. My T/C Renegade has, I believe, a 1-in-28 twist. Fast enough to still stabilize a round ball, but also slow enough to stabilize a Maxi-ball, which is both much heavier and has a long bearing surface.


Oh, here we go. Stole this off Wiki.

Twist rate and bullet stability

In 1879, George Greenhill, a professor of mathematics at the Royal Military Academy (RMA) at Woolwich, London, UK[10] developed a rule of thumb for calculating the optimal twist rate for lead-core bullets. This shortcut uses the bullet's length, needing no allowances for weight or nose shape.[11] The eponymous Greenhill Formula, still used today, is:


where:

* C = 150 (use 180 for muzzle velocities higher than 2,800 f/s)
* D = bullet's diameter in inches
* L = bullet's length in inches
* SG = bullet's specific gravity (10.9 for lead-core bullets, which cancels out the second half of the equation)

[Alpo]

So, lemme see here.

150 x .452 = 67.8, squared = 4596.84, /.660 = 6965

hmmm. That seems wrong.

Lets try C x (D squared) instead of (C x D) squared.

150 x .204 = 30.65 / .66 = 46.4. 1 in 46. That seems more likely.

Been a while since I been in math class.

[Alpo]

Back figuring.

Colt 1911 is 1-in-16, according to the chart in the back of my Sierra manual #1.

We are figuring for L - the bullet's length, not its weight.

C x (D squared), /L = 16

(150 x .204)/L = 16

30.65 / L = 16

30.65 = 16L

1.92 = L

The optimum bullet length, for a 45 bullet and a 1-in-16 twist, is 1.92 inches.

Somebody want to check my math? Like I said, Algebra class was 40 years ago.

40 years? God I got old!

[RunningOnMT]

Thanks Alpo. The thing is it doesn't suggest barrel length or the best round for a given barrel length. For example 230 gr. .45 typically has a muzzle velocity of approx 830 fps out of a 5" barrel. Now that's pretty slow but would imagine even slower out of a 3.5" barrel. So would it be better to use 165 or 185 gr bullet to bring the mv back up a bit? That's why I wondered if given the barrel length and twist rate in a given caliber, if you can determine the optimum gr wt bullet to use.

[Old Grump]

Corbon .45 ACP "Compact Gun Load"

160-gr. DPX

By Stephen Camp

Corbon ammunition frequently offers the highest velocities for a given caliber and bullet weight of any commercial ammunition on the market. It comes as no surprise that most of it is rated +P. Rapidly expanding bullets, often with fragmentation, have been seen more often than not in ballistic gelatin blocks smacked by their ammunition.

Much of their line utilizes the aggressively expanding Sierra PJHP (Power Jacket Hollow Point), but in more recent times the company has developed a new line of personal protection ammunition. It is designated "DPX" for Deep Penetrating X-bullet and uses a homogenous copper alloy hollow point made by Barnes. The Barnes X-bullet has been long known to rifle hunters, but has not been used as much in the handgun community until more recent times.

Corbon offers DPX ammo in several calibers including 9mm, .38 Special, and .45 ACP.

This article will focus on a new load developed especially for the short-barrel .45 ACP handguns that continue to gain popularity. In fact, the box designates this load "Compact Gun Load". It should also be noted that unlike the majority of their ammo line, this is a standard pressure load.

http://actionsbyt.blogspot.com/2007_04_29_archive.html

According to this it is a high velocity load that will give you better penetration for a short (3") barrel than can be achieved with standard 185, 200 and 230 gr loads from that small a gun. Looks to me from looking at the bullet that the weight was taken from the hollow point and not so much from the base so accuracy shouldn't be that much affected, at least for up close and personal self defense ranges.

I think I will stay with my 230 gr bullets when plinking at 2 liter water jugs at 200 yards. It may take awhile for the bullet to get there but get there it does and in a nice group if I am paying attention and do what I should be doing.

On the other hand if I want a small compact gun in 45 ACP then this bullet may very well be the way to go.

Somebody want to check my math? Like I said, Algebra class was 40 years ago.

40 years? God I got old!

Only 40 years ago? Dadburn young whippersnappers. I still have my slide rule from calculus class. I can't remember how to use it anymore but big deal, I don't remember where I put my 7.5x55 box of ammo I wanted to shoot today and that's more important.

[RunningOnMT]

Originally Posted by Old Grump

I think I will stay with my 230 gr bullets when plinking at 2 liter water jugs at 200 yards. It may take awhile for the bullet to get there but get there it does and in a nice group if I am paying attention and do what I should be doing.

I'd sure love to see that. Hard to believe one can hit anything at 200 ft. let alone yds. with a .45 cal handgun. Makes me embarrassed to admit I only practice at 7 and 15 yds.

[RedHawk]

highest velocities

rated +P

yep I was wondering because a site I was looking at touted the +P ammo @ 165 gr!!So for a Government model the 230 would be preferable and a Commander it would be the 165? Or is the 165 +P strictly a duty carry round?

[JLA]

Originally Posted by Alpo

So, lemme see here.

150 x .452 = 67.8, squared = 4596.84, /.660 = 6965

hmmm. That seems wrong.

Lets try C x (D squared) instead of (C x D) squared.

150 x .204 = 30.65 / .66 = 46.4. 1 in 46. That seems more likely.

Been a while since I been in math class.

P.E.M.D.A.S. Alpo, mathematical order of operations. Apply it before trying to figure compound equations such as the greenhill formula. It makes life easier..

[JLA]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

Thanks Alpo. The thing is it doesn't suggest barrel length or the best round for a given barrel length. For example 230 gr. .45 typically has a muzzle velocity of approx 830 fps out of a 5" barrel. Now that's pretty slow but would imagine even slower out of a 3.5" barrel. So would it be better to use 165 or 185 gr bullet to bring the mv back up a bit? That's why I wondered if given the barrel length and twist rate in a given caliber, if you can determine the optimum gr wt bullet to use.

Its all irrelevant ROMT. Concerning the .45ACP with bullet S/D bullet weights from 185-230 grains, any velocity over 600 FPS is gonna penetrate well into or completely thru a 'soft target'.. A standard ball load in a 5 incher, 230 grain bullet at 830 FPS, will run about 750 from a 3.5" barrel. Still plenty fast enough to get the point across.. So to answer your question.. Optimum is what your weapon shoots best.

[JLA]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

I'd sure love to see that. Hard to believe one can hit anything at 200 ft. let alone yds. with a .45 cal handgun. Makes me embarrassed to admit I only practice at 7 and 15 yds.

I wish you were closer ROMT. At my range we do stuff like this all the time. I like to shoot at water balloons with my 1911s. It does take a good while for the bullets to get there and if the sun is at your back you can see them arc to the target. Its really cool..

[JLA]

Oh yeah.. I almost forgot.. I have a link here that calculates optimal twist for any bullet at any concievable velocity. All you have to do is plug in the variables of your particular bullet and load..

http://kwk.us/twist.html

It sure beats long form mathematics like the stuff Alpo so painstakingly posted for us

[Alpo]

Originally Posted by JLA

P.E.M.D.A.S. Alpo, mathematical order of operations. Apply it before trying to figure compound equations such as the greenhill formula. It makes life easier..

Had to google that, to find out what you was sayin'. Yeah, I remember "order". You do what's in the brackets first. If there are no brackets, you do it in order.

That's why I did CxD, and then squared the product. If it had said C(D squared), I'd have squared D first, but it didn't so I didn't. Apparently you are supposed to do exponents first.

Like I said, high school math was 40 years ago.

[JLA]

Parentheis, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction..

Parenthesis does include brackets, but in an equation that includes both brackets and parenthesis, you would do the parenthesis first then the brackets.

[RunningOnMT]

Originally Posted by JLA

Its all irrelevant ROMT. Concerning the .45ACP with bullet S/D bullet weights from 185-230 grains, any velocity over 600 FPS is gonna penetrate well into or completely thru a 'soft target'.. A standard ball load in a 5 incher, 230 grain bullet at 830 FPS, will run about 750 from a 3.5" barrel. Still plenty fast enough to get the point across.. So to answer your question.. Optimum is what your weapon shoots best.

Thank you sir. I guess I can use the same .230 gr Golden Sabers I use in my 1911's in my M&P compact and Kahr CW45 as well. That's great. I hate to have to stock very many different varieties of ammo.

[JLA]

No need. I promise the squids will look the same.. I have tested expansion on goldensabers in everything from 3 inch barrel BUGs to a 6 inch barrel S&W 625. they all made 3/4" diameter squids and penetrated between 10-14 inches in wet phonebooks. The average human torso is only about 10 inches thick sternum to spine. Just so you know..

[carver]

Personally, I don't like the lighter bullets. Let's face facts, handguns balistics are at best just barely acceptable for SD. I don't trust the lighter bullets to give me the penitration that is needed to stop the BG. As Josh stated the 230gr Golden Sabers gave him up to 14" of penatration in wet phone books, that would probably jump to 18" if shooting at lined up gallon milk jugs of water. These lighter bullets travel faster, and have more of an incident of coming apart. We all know that there are two ways to get a sudden stop on a living target, one is a hit to the brain, or spinal cord. The other is a sudden loss of blood pressure. A .22 bullet to the brain, or spinal cord will drop you where you stand, but a hit to the body will most probably not give you the loss of blood presure needed to make a quick stop. To assure the quick loss of blood pressure you need to make big holes (2 or three hists) that leave large, deep, wound channels. Wound channels deep enough to reach the spinal cord. And only the heavy bullets can be relied on to get to the vitals, and sometimes they won't make the trip! Shot placement is everything in handgun SD. Will your bullet of choice pass thru the arm of an assaliant, and then enter the body, through clothing, creating a large, deep, wound channel, that will reach the vital organs?

[hogger129]

I stick with 230gr loads. The 185's are okay, but my gun doesn't like to feed them as reliably because of the bullet shape.

[Old Grump]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

I'd sure love to see that. Hard to believe one can hit anything at 200 ft. let alone yds. with a .45 cal handgun. Makes me embarrassed to admit I only practice at 7 and 15 yds.

Porch-light is always on and the coffee is always hot. Were not that far from Akron. I was doing some 100 yard work with my 45, 22 and 44 mag this morning, it isn't just a once a year thing. Anybody can do it with a little coaching and a halfway decent gun.

A lot of people don't respect the 45 because of the old mud proof shoot under any conditions WWII guns that worked well but weren't terribly accurate. The 45 caliber 230 gr bullet is a wonder designed to knock down bad guys but when fired from a good barrel in a tight gun it will fly straight for a long time.

It was one of my stunts when I was teaching marksmanship to young cops. About every 3 months some youngster would tell me that his daddy, grand daddy, chief, (fill in your own blank) told him that beyond 25 yards you might as well throw the gun at him for all the good it would do.

I would give that rookie a 50 yard pistol target and send him down to the 100 yard range and put it up. Then I would shoot 5 rounds out of my 45, 5 out of my 22 and 5 out of his gun whatever it was. Then I would send him down to get the target, half of them came back talking to themselves but all of them started believing me and started shooting groups at 50' 25 yards, and 50 yards. Not good but at least groups instead of patterns because all of a sudden they gained a new confidence in their gun and their smartass instructor.

It made me feel better knowing if they had to shoot a boogerman across the street they were going to hit the boogerman and not my dog, my car, my next door neighbor or worse yet, me.

I shoot other bullet weights but my standby is and always will be 230 gr FMJ. Blame the 5th Army Pistol Team Coach for that. He would not let us shoot match ammo or 38 wadcutter guns in matches till we got to All Army and then he only allowed 45 hardball match ammo. He figured if we could hold our own with hardball against other teams shooting match ammo we could hold our own at All Army.

[RunningOnMT]

If I was able I'd sure like to visit you and gain a few tips. I do ok for close range self defense but that's about it. My hands are just too shaky. I can blow out the heart of a silouete target at 7 yds but am lucky to hit paper at 25.

40 yrs ago in the service I was a bit better, qualifying expert on a 900" range, but I can't imagine ever being able to hit anything at 100 or 200 yds.

I try to improve but not sure any amount of instruction can make me much better due to physical limitations. Kinda discouraging so haven't been to the range in two months.

[JLA]

My personal favorite bullet weight for the .45ACP is 200 gr at about 950. It outshoots 230s on paper and out penetrates 185s. A great all around IMO..

[American Leader]

I carry & use 230 Golden Sabers in all my 1911's, including the compact size. My reloads are a little hotter than factory though. You fellas are really getting technical on this one?

[Old Grump]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

If I was able I'd sure like to visit you and gain a few tips. I do ok for close range self defense but that's about it. My hands are just too shaky. I can blow out the heart of a silouete target at 7 yds but am lucky to hit paper at 25.

40 yrs ago in the service I was a bit better, qualifying expert on a 900" range, but I can't imagine ever being able to hit anything at 100 or 200 yds.

I try to improve but not sure any amount of instruction can make me much better due to physical limitations. Kinda discouraging so haven't been to the range in two months.

This was yesterday afternoon's activity with 15 year old nephew. The range is in my back field, not fancy but I have 7, 15, 20, 25, 40, 50, 60 and 100 yard targets available. I'm developing Parkinsons, growing cataracts and I have a bad back so standing unsupported is a pain in the ass, literally. I am closer to 70 than I am 60 and not getting younger. Nothing magic about what I can do, its just the basics and not worrying about not being able to shoot like I could in 1970.

[IMG] [/IMG]

Guns were Ruger Super Blackhawk, 44 mag, S&W M41 22 cal, and Colt 1911A1 45ACP.

45ACP ammo was all 230 gr FMJ, Blazer, Mag Tech, Winchester White Box, it doesn't make a lick of difference. I save the LSWC 200 gr reloads and 230 gr match ammo for close up fine shooting in competition, this day was strictly chuckles and giggles shooting.