.45 ACP and AA No. 2 Powder - data has changed

Status
Not open for further replies.

1-12 INF (M)

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
132
In 2009 I loaded a couple hundred of these with a 230g FMJ and 5.6g of No. 2. At the time, I am confident that it was load that was midrange and didn't exceed published maximums. The cartridges did seem pretty 'stout' but the accuracy was there and they performed well.

Now I go to make more, and I see the published Max is 5.4.

Has anyone else experienced this change in AA's data?
 
Pretty much - it's for 230 FMJ, although a different brand. I loaded Montana Golds, and their data lists Sierra.
 
5.6 sounded high, not midrange, so I looked.

From the Accurate 3.2.2 PDF. The oldest one I have.

No.2 230 SIE FMJ 4.6 769 5.4 881 20,800 1.250
 
Correct, that's the current data. I'm sure that the old data was different from that.
 
Whoops, not the oldest one I have.

From the 2002 PDF.

SRA 230 FMJ OAL = 1.250"

No.2 5.5 804 6.1 874

Wow. 6.1 sounds stout.
 
Last edited:
The PDF. Tread carefully. :)
 

Attachments

  • Accurate 2002.zip
    514.8 KB · Views: 23
11-2006 @ 70 Degrees
Zero 230 Gr JHP @ 1.245 OAL
5.3 Grs AA #2 (Not new improved)
3" 1911 - 740 FPS
4" 1911 - 774 FPS
 
1-2007 70+ Degrees
Berrys 230 gr RN @ 1.260 to 1.265 OAL
5.4 Grs AA #2 (Not new improved)
4" 1911 - 763 FPS
 
The 2005 reloaders guide from Accurate that I have shows .45 acp SRA 230 FMJ COL 1.250" No. 2 start 4.6gr, Max. 5.4gr.
 
The Accurate Arms Loading Guide Number 1 (circa1994) shows the data the OP was referring too.

243-F19-F6-092-F-4781-A1-BF-0-BBE67-A79-C1-A.jpg

It (the data from back in the day) is quite different from what their load data from the website reflects today.

Reference the first edition of their loading guide, I stopped using the data in that manual when they (Accurate arms) started publishing it on the internet.
 
When significant changes in load data occur like this, does it usually result from different type of pressure measuring equipment used in older vs newer tests?
 
Whoops, not the oldest one I have.

From the 2002 PDF.

SRA 230 FMJ OAL = 1.250"

No.2 5.5 804 6.1 874

Wow. 6.1 sounds stout.

Although AA #2 data is not included, Midway's .45 ACP LoadMap does have A LOT of WW231 data, and it's STOUT! Some 230 grain bullet loads go up to a 6.6 grain max/21,000 psi/925 FPS from a 5" barrel. I tried their Speer 230 GD load using 6.1 grains WW231, COL of 1.20", and got this from my 4.4" SIG P220:

230 grain Speer GD, 6.1 grains WW231, CCI 300

812, 825, 820, 822, 825, Avg 820 ES 13 SD 5

FWIW, they list 6.5 grains of WW231 as MAX!!!... And mind you, these max loads are rated at 21,000 psi, being max standard pressure. When really pushing things, I always used AA #5, or HS-6, and in testing grain-for-grain, I got very similar results from my particular lots of propellant made many years ago... But even their data for HS-6 is over a full grain more than I used, topping out at 9.9 :eek:. I'm not saying it's unsafe data; just the same using it in a 26 oz pistol with an AL frame is beating up both of us pushing nearly 1000 fps.

Of course WW231/HP38 are not exactly the same as AA#2, I thought I would show what a very near relative would produce, and that a lot of older lab produced data was MUCH stouter. AA #1 manual was one I recall being just that, and many loads have since been radically reduced (AA2460 in .223 w/55 grain FMJ being one off the top of my head).
 
The Accurate Arms Loading Guide Number 1 (circa1994) shows the data the OP was referring too.

View attachment 830233

It (the data from back in the day) is quite different from what their load data from the website reflects today.

Reference the first edition of their loading guide, I stopped using the data in that manual when they (Accurate arms) started publishing it on the internet.

That exact manual is what I was referring to my in my post - I was typing, while you were posting :). I was given a copy of this manual when I visited them for a job interview, and some *&^%$% stole it a few years later. As I recall, their data for 7.62 Tokarev was something else. Need to find another copy, as the closest I still have is this, which was current to the #1 manual:

20190309_133826.jpg
 
An interesting discussion all around. I was confident I didn't even a approach a max load (I hardly ever do), yet looking back on my notes, shooting these in my P220, recoil was 'snappy'. I just recently got a chrony, next time I'm outdoors I'll set it up and tell everyone how fast that pill is moving under that charge of No. 2 out of my Kimber 1911. I don't think I'd want to shoot that in a alloy frame gun anymore...
 
I have a jug of #2 I bought during the last "famine" when did "new and improved" #2 come out?

Russellc
 
Interesting, I guess one of my favorite loads is over the top now. I have been using 5.5 grains of AA#2 with a plated 230 grain bullet for quite a while. It only averages 795 FPS out of a Colt 1911 through my chrony. I guess I will have to rethink that load.
 
There seems to be a new variable as well, "new" no. 2 vs. 'old' no.2. I have a big jug of the 'old'. But 795 doesn't seem excessive. In my notes the 5.6 seemed very sharp compared to the clays target loads I was shooting, but I saw no signs of excessive pressure on the cases.
 
Interesting, I guess one of my favorite loads is over the top now ... I guess I will have to rethink that load.
There seems to be a new variable as well, "new" no. 2 vs. 'old' no.2.
When in doubt, ask the powder manufacturer for most current load data to factor in change in powder formulation.

If there was powder formulation change and/or testing variables and/or updated pressure test data, powder manufacturer should be able to tell you what the current "safe" max load data is for current formulation of powder we are using.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top