Henry BB 45 Colt

[Ian]

I meant nose length being about .300" long, meplat's about the same at ~.305" depending on how you measure, so something like 65-67% meplat. With cases at max length they'll still load out at 1.590" OAL, well under SAAMI max. I'm interested to compare how my Henry likes this bullet compared to the AM 255C, the main difference being how much metal is out there in front of the crimp groove. The AM bullet only has a nose base diameter of .450", I bought that one after frustrations with aged bullets swelling after loading and not fitting throats. A .450" nose base will chamber in anything, and it still shoots well.

 

[fiver]

I got to thinking about it some and recall my dads 73 absolutely choking on the 664.
it was just too long. [it fit's the 73 revolvers like a champ though]
[now I'm wondering if he still has that rifle, heck I'm wondering if he has any of his rifles]

we are talking quite a bit of difference in oal here, 40 thou actually.
that's a lot if lyman did re-design the mold, but I can see why they would shorten it up.
[I just can't see them doing something sensible like that]

it wouldn't be too hard to re-design and re-dimension the 664 and have Tom cut it.
get the length down, drop 10-15 grains, and have the front [not really a] drive band cut to make 450.
the thin wide shallow lands would appreciate an angled nose transitioning into a short bore ride section like the one I put on the hm-2 9mm mold.
there is plenty of lube groove there to also shorten it up some without sacrificing the rear drive band strength.

 

[Ian]

the thin wide shallow lands would appreciate an angled nose transitioning into a short bore ride section like the one I put on the hm-2 9mm mold.

I was holding off replying until I had time to drag the camera out for some pictures. I don't have a photo of the mould you're talking about, but here are a few of the moulds I have.



Left is the AM 255C, nose is the right length but pretty small on the nose base at .450".

Next is the Lee 255, which has the same problem but shoots ok crimped in the top lube groove, though that makes it too long for the Henry.

Then the 452664 that I really can't complain about except I don't like how bulbous the nose is, would like it longer and more streamlined.

Far right is the one I designed for revolvers, along the lines of what Brad is trying to do with the 44-287B, but it's a pain because the fit is so precise. It also is JUST barely too long to fit the Henry if the crimp (middle) groove is used.

I'm really wanting a bit heavier bullet to fit all my revolvers and rifles/carbines, and am still leaning toward the 45-275D with a little smaller meplat, full-diameter nose base, and maybe stretch it a bit to bump the weight up to 280 or so.

 

[fiver]

I can see the difference there.
my 664 is more like your 4th one from the left, but I think with a touch more nose length, and of course it still has the base radius.
if you look from the meplat down you can see the chunkiness.

Toms mold looks like an upsized 429667, which I use in my 44's but wish it had a little more meplat.

that 275 looks like a good design as is, a little bigger than I would prefer in diameter on the drive bands but otherwise real solid.
the COG should be right at the base of the crimp groove.
it should feed and chamber easily but not give up too much space.
the .330 from top of crimp groove to meplat needs a little scrutiny for cartridge OAL adjustment but other than that it's a good solid design.

 

[Ian]

The .455" spec is negotiable. I'd ask for .453" with straight wheel weights, that spec gives me some options from .4525" to nearly .454" depending on mould temperature and what I do with adding tin or pure lead.

 

[gman]

Ian if you want any of the 255A's to try let me know.

 

[Ian]

Gman, the plain-based 452664 is pretty near that, I haven't had a chance to shoot any yet to see how they do. In a moment I'm going to head out and try some of my 310 RF bullets with some SL-68B lube I made last weekend and see how they do. Preliminary tests of the bullet were good even though the castings were crappy and only about 14 hours old when fired. Today I have some much better castings, aged a full week, and possibly some better lube. Fingers crossed I can see the sights today....

 

[S Mac]

Funny this thread came back up, my lgs has one I'm tempted to put on layaway. Decisions decisions. I've already got moulds, dies,brass.

 

[Ian]

Back from the range again, seems like I took a couple steps backwards. The lube, which was equal parts of SL-68.1 and two other lubes where pure beeswax and pure Gulf paraffin were used for waxes. I also bumped the powder charge .4 grains to try and get the velocity up to 1K fps from the 930-ish I'd been getting before. While I was at it, I ground the front bead and tube off off of the post and lowered the rear aperture some, which gives a much better target picture for me.

First groups were hovering right at 3", but started getting 1 in 5 high flyers. Noticed some light lead streaks on top of one land and in two grooves. Kept shooting, 40 rounds total, and it settled in to 4", 10-shot groups that would be 3 to 3.5" if two high flyers were scrubbed.

I'll clean the bore and go back down to the previous load with this lube and see if that doesn't do better. Paraffin is a double-edged sword, never liking the heat or hot barrels. Recovered bullets from the berm looked pretty good, but still had lube in them about halfway up from the bottom. I did notice some base wash-out, almost like a slight bevel base, so that makes me think I over-stepped the powder charge a bit and explains where the leading is coming from. No big chunks of lube missing, though!

 

[Ian]

This rifle is PICKY!

So I cleaned it (big mistake as usual, but I wanted to get the lead out). No big clumps, just some wash that came right out with a brush. Then I had 30 of those 452664 plain based bullets all lubed up and looking lonely on the sizing bench, so I switched back to Universal, this time at 6.9 grains, and gave them a go. You ever see a 20.5" 25-shot group? I did today. WOW. I thought it might just be the barrel getting its season back, but apparently it did that on the first shot (lowest of the group) and just flung them everywhere. I did 15 for the chronograph and let it cool, went back to the house for a few minutes to let ME cool, then went and shot another 10 for a group, which included the two highest hitting shots of the day, nearly made it off my 24" backer. For grins I saved the last for my revolver, which put three close and two way out to make about an 8" group offhand at 25 yards.

Being thoroughly flummoxed, I grabbed the box I loaded last night with the 310RF bullets, lubed with SL-68B-ish lube and loaded back at the first level of True Blue that I had tried first with that bullet and right off shot a 3.5" round group of ten. WTF says me. Oh, and with the B lube they gained 16 fps average. Still single-digit SD.

Tried the revolver again with the 310RF and got a 3" group at 25 off hand.

So this 310RF is a good bullet, all I can figure. I ended up making the nose too dang long by about .010", so unfortunately it's kind of back to the drawing board unless I file on the lifter or hollow-point the mould and use the pin to shorten the nose just a bit.

 

[fiver]

want me to mail you some 664's?
I probably don't have any unsized [452] but I don't think a couple of handfuls would be noticed out of the bucket.

 

[Ian]

I still have the other 664 mould I got from Beagle that casts perfect bullets. It must be the Universal or something, I don't know. The velocity was all over the map, maybe it wasn't throwing correctly. I did notice the first 310 with True Blue behind it was the fastest of the lot and the second shot one of the slowest....but they hit nearly touching so that sorta throws out the velocity theory when one bullet makes a 20" group and the other makes a 3.5" group in the same afternoon.

 

[fiver]

I would consider it sort of an achievement to shoot a 20" at 50 yds.


I have shot 1-2 groups that didn't hit berm, heck they might not even have made it that far since
I never seen any dirt kick up anywhere, but I did get a nice poof ball of grey smoke at the muzzle.
no leading though, so my lube must have been working over time

 

[Brad]

My Marlin 45 Colt feeds almost anything I give it. It also shoots almost all of them well.
Must be the loading gate.

 

[freebullet]

Huh, that's pretty wild. Have you played with TG in that yet? In casull cases I've had joy with 300gr over 8-8.5gr.

I did not get a chance to cast any mp 308k's yet, but it's on my short list.

 

[Ian]

It was 75 yards, off of very good bags. Definitely an achievement of some sort. That's twice this rifle has done this, once with the MP 270SAA and once with this PB 664.

I'm working on a theory now and am on the hunt for some steel dies.

 

[fiver]

I don't think you can retro-fit a loading gate by using steel dies.

I would try another powder.
some guy in Mi. err Kentucky told me universal sucks in the 45 colt.
it seems to work in the 44 special from what I've seen though.

 

[Ian]

I think there's a breakover point with Universal. It works wonderfully in the .45 ACP and pretty well in the .38 Special, but sucks in the Magnum case even at .38 pressures. Never tried it in the .44 Magnum, always used either Unique, Bullseye, or 2400...until I found True Blue and then I never looked back.

I'll probably try those 664 PB bullets again with True Blue, though at 14K max and a bullet that light I kinda have my doubts. Did someone say "Titegroup"?? 6.5 grains under a 255 has been my go-to for the .45 Colt for a long time, not sure why I haven't gone back to it for this.

 

[waco]

My "Evil Roy" .45 Colt likes the RCBS 45-270-SAA with 8.0gr of Universal.

 

[Ian]

Looks good, Walter, but I'm not willing to go 50% above maximum pressure in a standard-pressure gun.

I remembered late last night why I didn't put Titegroup in the lineup for this workup. Part of this journey is to find a one-size-fits-all load suitable for use with my suppressed rifles and that means powder coating. That means no Titegroup. However, my stinky old friend Bullseye looks to be just as fine of a choice as it always has been for the .45 Colt.