Bullseye Shooters 185gr vs 200gr LSWC

[chiltech500]

I am getting better prepared for Bullseye and would like to know if any of you have information/observations on 185gr vs 200gr LSWC from Missouri Bullet.

I ordered some 185gr LSWC based on talking to a shooter who told me "most" Bullseye shooters he knew used the 185. I personally have only shot the 200gr and a 185 gr JHP.

I am currently using 5.0gr Green Dot on the 200's, and have used 4.0gr VV N310 as well. I don't recall my Bullseye or Titegroup loads.

Thanks.

 

[koz4guns]

I think it can go either way on 185 or 200 grain bullets.

The deciding factors will be which one does the gun shoot the best and which one has the recoil impulse the shooter prefers.

The Bullseye-L Forum has a sticky in their ammunition section of loads that Masters and High Masters have used with success.

http://www.bullseyeforum.net

Koz

 

[LiveLife]

PM me and I will send you some Missouri 200 gr SWC (12/18 BHN) and 185 gr SWC so you can see which bullet your pistol likes better.

 

[saltydog452]

Once Upon A Time...

Some BE casters/shooters used the 185 H&G 130 for the short line and the H&G 68 for 50 hds.

The idea was that 130 stabilized just as good at the leasurely speed of BE loads and didn't use as much lead as the heavier 68/78 boolits. Didn't need much energy to poke holes in paper.

Normal velocity/loads were 3.5 B.E. in the 130 at the short line. And 3.8/4.0 B.E. (or B.E. equivelent) under the 68 for the 50 yard slow fire match.

I couldn't shoot well enough to tell any consistent difference in accuracy with either load/bullet when using MY components, MY bullets, and with ME behind the wheel. So the lower recoil and the less weight H&G 130 , 185 gn.,saw more use.

Diffferent folks will have different reason why, or why not, a thing was done. Thats mine.

salty

 

[HighExpert]

I agree with SalltyDog about the reasoning. I use 200gr for everything. Same load (3.9 BE) and it took 2clicks difference from 25 to 50.

 

[chiltech500]

Thanks for the offer bds. I currently have 200gr lswc from MBC and ordered the 185's last evening from them as I want to try both.

Does the H&G 68 have a greater bearing surface thus needs more powder? I am a bit confused, don't lighter bullets need more powder

Salty did they need lighter recoil springs when shooting 3.5 BE, or were they using a revolver?

 

[243winxb]

45 acp

The Lyman 200 gr bevel base has been the most accurate for me. Starline brass. WLP, 3.8 gr Bullseye powder.

[/URL][/IMG] For slow fire, seating the cast lead bullet just into the rifling will remove end play. But the barrel has to be throated correctly. Works well with my old Gold Cup series 70. I set my COL by the shoulder of the bullets, not the nose.

[/URL][/IMG] This trick was posted in an old 1960's NRA reprint of the 45 acp.

 

[saltydog452]

Chil,

Your're asking a quetion that isn't answerable. And, perhaps, isn't relevant, at normal pistol ranges.

You asked about weight differences. As a 'daily driver' at matches, one was as good as another at my level of competion using my stuff. (not Missouri Bullets).

Not intending to appear to be disrespectful, but maybe success has more to do with the Indian than the Arrow.

PMs welcome.

salty.

 

[chiltech500]

Thanks 243win, appreciate the bullet pics cause it puts a good visual on the bullets in my Lymans.

Salty, I am new to bullseye but want to start with the straightest arrows possible

 

[243winxb]

Missori Bullet. Sorry, no side by side with Lyman.

 

[LiveLife]

new to bullseye but want to start with the straightest arrows possible

Since bullseye match loads often are reduced powder charge/lower pressure loads, softer bullets will deform better to seal with the barrel (obturation), especially if your barrel is slightly oversized. Missouri 200 gr SWC comes in 18 BHN (IDP #1) and 12 BHN (Bullseye #1) while 185 gr SWC comes in 18 BHN (IDP #3) and 12 BHN (Bullseye #2).

With reduced powder charge/lower pressure loads, you want to use softer 12 BHN bullets that will deform better to seal the high pressure gas which will result in more consistent chamber pressures that will result in more consistent muzzle velocities/lower SD numbers for smaller shot groups.

In theory, as you can see from the bullet comparison picture above, 200 gr SWC has longer bullet base/driving band/bearing surface than 185 gr SWC which should better stabilize the bullet but until you actually range test the loads in your pistol/barrel, you won't know how they will perform and that's why I offered to send you 18/12 BHN 200 gr SWC and 12 BHN 185 gr SWC bullets.

For even quicker/more consistent chamber pressure build up, some shooters will use flat based bullets instead of bevel based bullets but Missouri don't offer flat based 185/200 gr SWC bullets.

Not sure what BHN your 200/185 gr bullets are, but if they are 18 BHN, let me know and I will send 12 BHN bullets for you to do comparison range test with.

 

[velocette]

My experience in bullseye shooting with my 1911 .45 was that the cast lead alloy 200 swc bullets in the H&G style gave me better accuracy from a Ransome Rest than the 185 cast lead alloy bullets. (Alloy was 90% wheelweights 10% 50/50 solder for bullets approximately 5% tin 4% Antimony & 91% lead roughly equivalent to Lyman's #2)
My best 200 swc's were cast using a Lee 2 cavity mold. (I tested several including the venerable H&G 68 steel mold) Lubricant was the NRA Beeswax & Alox.
My best accuracy (all testing was done with a Ransome Rest) was using Remington 185 gr Jacketed SWCs.
The .45 was (and still is) an Essex framed pistol with a Colt NM slide, Bar-Sto barrel fitted by Irv Stone.
Basic load for all bullets was 3.8 gr of Bullseye, Fed LPP primer, Starline brass. I tried more powder, less powder & settled on 3.8 gr. Used the same ammo / load for both 25 & 50 yds.
Got me to Master classification many years ago (well, I use-ta-could).

Hope this helps
Roger

 

[chiltech500]

BDS, I have both BE#1 and IDP#1 in 200 gr LSWC. I don't have 185 gr LSWC.

Very odd Ballistic Data on a new thread I started comparing among other things, N310 with 4.0 and 3.8 grains pushing a MBC 200 gr LSWC wherein the lower powder load generated over 100 FPS faster results. There are also some results for 185 gr MBC bullets with N310 and Green Dot here: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=749766

Thanks for the pictures BDS and 243 winxb. I must figure out how to use the macro on my new 35mm digital camera.

 

[chiltech500]

Correction made to ballistics data, I was NOT using a MBC 200 gr LSWC for the odd N310 4.o gr data. It was a budget bullet and I am not certain of the weight after breaking down a round (powder stuck to the lube strip).

Today I am testing MBC 200gr LSWC: IDP #1 (bhn18) vs Bullseye #1 (bhn12) with verified 4.0 gr of N310 and an OAL of 1.254-1.255 (most at 1.255) with all matching headstamps and large primers.

 

[chiltech500]

For those who may be curious:

This is a comparison of some Missouri bullets and N310 powder. For fun there is some data on Green Dot which I don't hold to the same standard as the N310 because of metering challenges.

Accuracy is the main goal and I will be testing loads with a rest but I was very curious about velocity and variance. In the N310 4.0 loads I am questioning if a 834 FPS round will have the same result as an 770 FPS round all else being equal.

The rounds I took the most caution preparing were 4.0 gr N310 pushing 200 gr Missouri Bullets (the same bullets I used for the 3.8 gr N310 load. I used a single headstamp.

I haven't re- measured yet but there is a chance the 3.8 gr N310 rounds pushing the 200 gr bullets have a slightly shorter OAL which may account for the higher velocity. I may be looking at 1.250 vs 1.255 OAL.

Interesting Comparison in the first 2 columns because it is MBC IDP#1 bullet vs MBC Bullseye #1 bullet.

[/URL][/img]

 

[chiltech500]

My experience in bullseye shooting with my 1911 .45 was that the cast lead alloy 200 swc bullets in the H&G style gave me better accuracy from a Ransome Rest than the 185 cast lead alloy bullets. (Alloy was 90% wheelweights 10% 50/50 solder for bullets approximately 5% tin 4% Antimony & 91% lead roughly equivalent to Lyman's #2)
My best 200 swc's were cast using a Lee 2 cavity mold. (I tested several including the venerable H&G 68 steel mold) Lubricant was the NRA Beeswax & Alox.
My best accuracy (all testing was done with a Ransome Rest) was using Remington 185 gr Jacketed SWCs.

Velocette, what you say makes sense in the 200 vs 185 gr because of lower potential load bearing surface as seen in pics above. From what I have read on Target Talk and the BullseyeLForum most shooters agree with you that the most accurate are the 185 gr jacketed often the jhp because of the base shape.

Using a Mountain Competition Pistol w/Schuemann AET Barrel.

185 Zero JHP = 4.5gr N310 =- 1.5" group at 50yds .470cr 1.205 oal
200 LSWC = 3.7gr N310 = 2.0" group at 50yds .470cr 1.244 oal

 

[Jim Watson]

Yes, I have seen a lot of target shooters going to JHPs. The first I read of was the Marine team with 185 gr Noslers and N310. It looks like Zero has really ramped up their operation and is now producing an X ring bullet.

It makes sense, the center of gravity of a hollowpoint is favorably located, the base is "crisp," and the ogive of a modern HP generally feeds well. Also there is a lot more demand for JHPs than jacketed SWCs and availability is likely better.

Casting precision bullets is a tedious chore and I can well understand why a lot of shooters have gone to jacketed. I don't know if bulk commercial cast bullets can do the same job. It will be instructive to see the targets from the Chilltech Tests.

I had one brand of bulk cast bullets that looked no different from anybody else's, but they would shoot better than anything short of factory match. Of course the company folded a year or two after I discovered it.

 

[chiltech500]

Most of the mention of bullets I have seen on those Bullseye forums talk about the Zero 185 gr bullet which must be the common "go to" now.

I personally don't want to spend $.20 or more per bullet so will stay with lead. Or, does it make sense to practice with lead and shoot jhp's?

I do have some 185 gr jacketed target bullets, forget who the maker is because I bought them when 1st getting into reloading. I remember the manufacturers blurb being they were based on their jhp's. Perhaps I will chrono some of those out of curiosity. I have suggested loads from targettalk and bullseyelforum.

 

[koz4guns]

chiltech500

Take a look at the Zero swaged lead 185gr SWHP it has a profile more like a 200gr. It is a very accurate bullet and less expensive than the jacketed but slightly more than cast.

Right now I'm shooting the Zero bullet at the long line and shooting MBC or Dardas 185gr cast at the short line.

Koz

 

[chiltech500]

Koz really appreciate your input.

What is your load with the mentioned 185's at the long and short lines? Thanks

 

[koz4guns]

I'm using 3.9 grs of Clays for both, I was using 4.2 grs of WST but it seemed to leave a lot of unburned granules in the gun I didn't like.

 

[chiltech500]

BDS and others referred to accuracy along with ballistics for the N310 so I ran a test this weekend. 14 shots from a Hyskore rest with chronometer tests concurrently. The table below shows results.

There were 3 flyers out of an otherwise consistent pattern. Shots really were in a 1.5" group at 25 yards, between 749 to 781 fps.

There were two shots high and 1 shot low that ruined the 1.5" group - these ballistics were the highest (818) and lowest (722 and 725) of the shots. These odd shots were about an inch outside of the tight group. I did not individually weigh bullets or powder, but headstamps used were the same - I wanted to mimic my normal prep.

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[velocette]

I did not have a chronograph when I shot bullseye. However my 1911 would give me consistent 1 5/8" groups @ 50 yards with 185 jacketed SWC Remington bullets. The groups at 50 yards with the Lee 200 swc cast as noted earlier ran at 1 3/4" as an average with an occasional round out at at about 2".
All of this from a Ransome rest on a concrete pedastal. Always with the 3.8 gr of Bullseye.
I tried all kinds of different powders but found none that would even equal, much less improve on the Bullseye powder.

Roger

 

[chiltech500]

Thanks Velocette. I am told that N310 and Bullseye are close in load and accuracy. Many now use the N310. I find it much cleaner from my limited experience. Unfortunately I will always buy my bullets because casting just isn't an option for me and MBC is good for me for now. I do need to compare their 185 lswc with their 200. Total accuracy isn't such an issue, starting at almost 59, I don't think I will ever achieve high results, just looking to reduce variables

Truth is playing with the chrono and rest and trying different loads and bullets is amusement of its'own sort.