Springfield XD Forum banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
766 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was just loading some 45 and noticed my bullets seemed to be setting into the case further than normal. The taper on the bullet is pretty much right at or maybe even just in the mouth of the case.

I compared it with an older lot of reloads and confirmed that the shape of the 230gr XTP's do have a different shape.

See below pic. On the left is the newest lot XTP, the middle is an older lot XTP, and on the right is a factory loaded Fiocchi which uses the 230gr XTP as well.

I pulled the bullets from my reloads and below are the differences in lengths with the newer lot bullet on the left.

Has anyone else noticed this drastic of a change from lot to lot of the same manufacturer p/n bullet?
 

Attachments

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,879 Posts
I load the 200 gr. XTP where the first loads were 1.220" as listed in the Ramshot data that I was trying to duplicate. The case-mouth was right on top of the transition from the shank to where the truncated cone starts. I lengthened them to 1.225" to get the transition a little above the case-mouth and my loads look very much like your's with the new lot 230 gr. XTPs.

I have seen comments posted from longtime XTP users that have experienced the same thing. Don't know what OACL you used but your loads with the newer bullet look fine. I believe Hornady's listed OACL is 1.230" in the last manual they gave data for it. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,197 Posts
This happens often, manuf will tweak bullets designs along the way. Why we check when getting into new components.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,581 Posts
I've seen the same thing with the 185 grain XTP's. IMO the only option is to load a bit longer so you can put a proper crimp on the case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
766 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Wow...a tweak of .040-.050" is big! Seems like enough of a tweak that some long time users would have to develop a new recipe. Now that the ogive is longer, the bullet has that much more distance to travel before being supported by the rifling. Now I'm not sure if .040" makes much difference in accuracy from a pistol, but it sure does in a rifle! Now if I was measuring length using the ogive, I would have ended up with a longer COAL which looks like it wouldn't fit in my XDs mag. And if it did, would end up producing different velocities / accuracies than expected.

My COAL is 1.225". It looks like I'd have to go another .010-.015" or so to reliably keep the ogive of the bullet out of the case. And hopefully the increased COAL will not adversely affect the reliability of feeding into this steep ramped XDs.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,879 Posts
Wow...a tweak of .040-.050" is big! Seems like enough of a tweak that some long time users would have to develop a new recipe. Now that the ogive is longer, the bullet has that much more distance to travel before being supported by the rifling. Now I'm not sure if .040" makes much difference in accuracy from a pistol, but it sure does in a rifle! Now if I was measuring length using the ogive, I would have ended up with a longer COAL which looks like it wouldn't fit in my XDs mag. And if it did, would end up producing different velocities / accuracies than expected.

My COAL is 1.225". It looks like I'd have to go another .010-.015" or so to reliably keep the ogive of the bullet out of the case. And hopefully the increased COAL will not adversely affect the reliability of feeding into this steep ramped XDs.

There is a bit of a coincidence here in that guys that have the last couple of editions of the Hornady load manual have said there isn't data for the 230 gr. XTP which is unusual considering they make the bullet. If it were me, I'd load the 230 gr. XTP at 1.230". That will put the transition a little higher above the case-mouth than you presently have them, although I think they're okay at 1.225". It's also an OACL that I've used with other 230 gr. JHPs and all are totally reliable in functioning.

If you don't have Hornady data, SIERRA's data for their 230 gr. JHP can be used. Their bullet has a longer shank than most which will typically have the highest friction in the bore. On top of that, SIERRA loads it shorter at 1.210" and the MAX. Charge is slightly below the last Hornady manual that gave data for the 230 gr. XTP. One possible scenerio here is that Hornady may be trying to get the truncated cone portion of the different XTPs to one similar length. As you can see from my first post, at 1.225", you couldn't tell the difference between your 230 gr. loads compared to my 200 gr. loads until you were looking close enough to see where the base of the bullet is located within the case. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
766 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
There is a bit of a coincidence here in that guys that have the last couple of editions of the Hornady load manual have said there isn't data for the 230 gr. XTP which is unusual considering they make the bullet...
Hmm...that is kinda odd.

I'll see what Hornady has to say about COAL (if anything) before I reload any more.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,879 Posts
Hmm...that is kinda odd.

I'll see what Hornady has to say about COAL (if anything) before I reload any more.

Always a good idea. I don't have a Hornady manual but have been considering getting the latest edition since I'm using more XTPs these days. From what I understand from guys that have the older editions that list 230 gr. XTP loads, they tested at an OACL of 1.230". ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
766 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
I received a response from Hornady on this.
Thank you for the inquiry. We did change the ogive angle on these bullets to eliminate an interference point in certain makes of weapons that utilized match chambers. This change well be seen in our .451" XTP bullets and is the dimension we will continue to use on future production runs. We recommend a COL of 1.235" - 1.245" with bullets produced after this change. Thank you.
Pretty quick and precise answer. Time to do another load workup.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,879 Posts
No load data other than the COL. I didn't ask for additional load data either.

mtnlvr, I'm sure they'd be glad to give you data for the newer bullet style if they have it or have changed it due to the longer nose length. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,581 Posts
I don't seen any real need to "work UP" a new recipe, for Internal Ballistics the only consequence of loading a bit longer will be a slight drop in pressure. I also suspect that the difference in enclosed volume will be low enough that any change in pressure will be pretty small.

Now, because I'm a bit bored and curious I'll do the math to determine the change in volume for a 0.03 inch increase in overall length. First assumption is that the ID of the case will be the same as the diameter of the bullet, or 0.451 inch. So the volume of the change will be ((0.451/2)^2 x 3.141592654) x 0.03 or 0.0047925231549 cubic inches. The Useful Case Capacity of the 45 ACP is listed as 1.14 cc in my Lee manual, so I'll have to convert those cubic inches to cc's. Since 1 inch - 2.54 centimeters the conversion factor is 1 in^3 = (2.54^3) cc's. The change in volume is thus 0.078535383661 cc, or about 7%.

While that is a larger change than I initially expected when you factor in the rate of expansion of the gases in the case and the bullet moving into the barrel I would expect that this change would not produce any significant change in the velocity produced. Worst case is that there may be a slight drop in ignition efficiency. If so, that would show up in chronograph data as in increase in the spread of shot to shot velocities. In that event increasing the powder charge by 1 or 2 tenths might be enough to stabilize the ignition process.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,879 Posts
Good stuff, scooter!

I agree, the former Hornady data will be fine where you increase OACL. I'm just curious to see if they have changed their data , and I wouldn't mind knowing why they didn't provide data for the 230 gr. XTP in the 9th edition load manual. The SIERRA 230 gr. JHP has a longer shank so I'd have no problem using their data, which I have, BTW. Also, SIERRA loads very short, 1.210" I believe without looking,which adds a bit more safety factor in using the SIERRA data. ;)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,879 Posts
After thinking on this some more, if all they've done is lengthened the nose, there may no need for a change to their pre-existing data. Could be that there is no change to the internal case capacity because of the longer OACL recommendation combined with the lengthening of the bullet. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
766 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
I don't seen any real need to "work UP" a new recipe...
I'm not going to do an entire load work up, but I will be loading 2 or 3 different charges with the longer COL to verify velocity, accuracy and function.

...I'm just curious to see if they have changed their data , and I wouldn't mind knowing why they didn't provide data for the 230 gr. XTP in the 9th edition load manual....
I received a response from Hornady on this and was told the load data is on page 852 of the 9th edition manual.

230gr XTP, Win231, 5.0gr start, 5.7gr max, COL 1.210" "...but longer if needed for proper function in your firearm..." (in an earlier email from them, they stated to run a COL of 1.235-1.240" with this new bullet shape.

I loaded a half dozen XTP's into some empty cases last night at their earlier emailed recommended COL of 1.240" and they all dropped into the barrel nicely and cycled from the mag nicely. Now to get some time to load some real rounds and go have some fun.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,879 Posts
I'm not going to do an entire load work up, but I will be loading 2 or 3 different charges with the longer COL to verify velocity, accuracy and function.


I received a response from Hornady on this and was told the load data is on page 852 of the 9th edition manual.

230gr XTP, Win231, 5.0gr start, 5.7gr max, COL 1.210" "...but longer if needed for proper function in your firearm..." (in an earlier email from them, they stated to run a COL of 1.235-1.240" with this new bullet shape.

I loaded a half dozen XTP's into some empty cases last night at their earlier emailed recommended COL of 1.240" and they all dropped into the barrel nicely and cycled from the mag nicely. Now to get some time to load some real rounds and go have some fun.

Sounds great! Good to know that there's data in the 9th. Maybe it was the 8th where guys said they skipped the 230 gr. XTP. As far as the W231 data they gave you, it's identical to SIERRA's including the OACL. If I loaded the 200 gr. XTP that short, the transition point between the shank and the nose would be below the case-mouth. Don't know how that could be different with the 230.

I'll probably get some 230 gr. XTPs in the near future where I'll load them with True Blue, hopefully. My 200 gr. XTP load chrono's 933 FPS with a standard deviation of 7 for 10 rounds. I'd prefer them to be around 1000 FPS from my SR45 but my shooting partner carries a DW CCO that has an alloy frame, so I load with it in mind. The 230 gr. XTP might be better for our needs where I'd run them at around 875 FPS. I believe that as long as you have that transition point between the shank and the nose at .005" above the case-mouth, you're good to go. My early loads with the 200 gr. XTP came right out of an older Ramshot load guide where they loaded at 1.220" which put the case-mouth right on the transition. That's why I lengthened them to 1.225" and my approach to loading the 230 gr. XTP will be similar.

Glad they're working out for you at 1.240". Let us know how they shoot! ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
766 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
I got to shoot some fresh reloads last weekend. I loaded 23 rds at the recommended 1.235-1.245 COL using very little flare and zero crimp (at the advice of the owner of a reloading supply shop in the area to see if I was over-crimping and inducing a bell in the case reducing case tension on the bullet). The start of the ogive looked to be in a good loaction in reference to the case mouth. All bullets dropped into the barrel and fell out without any convincing. I cycled a full magazine through once and measured no setback. At the range, all cycled well. Now I have to get a stand-alone crimp die as the Lee bullet seat and crimp die seems too sensitive on jacketed rounds.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,879 Posts
I'd definitely recommend a good taper crimp die and there are none better than REDDING's. All jacketed bullets should be taper crimped and if you're trying to seat and crimp in the same operation, maybe that's causing problems? Using the die you have I would seat with no crimp where you can just feel the die body contact the case-mouth when you set the die. After seating, remove the seating stem and set-up for crimping separately.

I recommend the REDDING's because I've been using mine for years and it gives a flawless taper crimp in 2-steps. First, there is a slight taper that works on the case-neck to help insure tension. The second taper angle is very short and slightly more severe and works only on the top few millimeters of the case-mouth. IMO, this is the way all taper crimp dies should be made.

There are other issues to be aware of: namely, cases like Remington that have very thin case-walls, other brands as well. I only use those cases for cast or poly-coated bullets that are at least .452". My carry loads are only loaded in once-fired brass and none of my JHP loads get loaded in cases where the case-walls are thinner than .0105", or in-between .010 and .011" on my dial calipers. All of my defense loads get loaded on a REDDING Boss single stage with REDDING dies. Sensitivity is great enough that I can tell by feel when case-walls are too thin and/or soft. They go in the cast load bin as well, so I sort of segregate my .45 ACP brass where I am comfortable using WIN., S&B and Fiocchi (G.F.I. is also Fiocchi) brass for JHP loads.

The way I recommend for properly setting up a dedicated taper crimp die like the REDDING comes from something I've practiced for years. Using cases that average close to the same case-wall thickness measured within 2 or 3mm of the case-mouth, a simple formula can be used to execute a flawlesss taper crimp. I'll use the thinnest cases that are used in my defense loads as an example. The formula is CWT X 2 + BD - .002" minimum of taper crimp. In this case, .0105" X 2 = .021" + .451" = .472" - .002" (taper crimp) = .470" at the case-mouth and .469" is fine for cases this thin. Then just change the variables based on the actual average case-wall dimensions and the amount of taper crimp desired. Nominal diameter for JHPs like the XTP is .451". Some guys buy specialty dies to deal with thin case-walls. I choose to use such cases only with over-sized cast or poly-coated bullets. I'm not one for buying a special tool to correct a problem that shouldn't exist like REM. brass being as thin as .008" because they don't have much concern for what a reloader does with their cases after shooting their factory loads. Hopefully, Winchester won't take a similar course with "value engineering." ;)
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top