"Cowboy Loads"

Old Grumpy said:
I had been using VV Tin Star for .45 Colt plinking rounds. It was a fairly bulky powder so double charges would be rather obvious. VV powders burn pretty clean even at lower charge weights. With Tin tar out of the equation, what are the choices? Ideally, it would be a bulky powder, clean at lighter charge weights, and non-positional. Some powders heat up the weapon during prolonged range trips, but that's not an automatic pass.

So, what do people use for .45 Colt loads running 600-700 fps. I use mainly cast 200gr RNFP bullets (uncoated).

Grumpy
Click to expand...
Try some Unique.
 
A guy here sent his Rugers off to Magnaport for the full treatment.
I saw that barrel ports and a red insert front sight were not a happy marriage. One cylinder and the insert would look purple, a couple more and it was smoked black.

My usual non-magnum powder is HP38; I have tried others out of curiosity or cheapness.
Titegroup is dark and dense and can hide down in the bottom of the case.
HS6 is the only powder I dismiss as "dirty", it would foul out a gun in less than 100 shots.
Power Pistol has amazing flash and blast. Some people consider that an asset.
I am loading .45 Minor with Bullseye, more consistent than HP38. I think it would work for all my loading, I have some 9mm to shoot.
 
I’ve pretty much transitioned to titegroup for low to moderate velocity loads in 45 Colt. It works well. Follow proper reloading procedures and don’t double fill the case.

I’ve never noticed any problems with it being dirty. It leaves the cylinder and barrel as clean as anything else. Some black soot on the front site is fine with me as I do not use red ramps or fiber optic doodads.
 
The Gun Club I belong to has an outdoor range. Depending on the time of day, red inserts can be really hard to pick up for this old man. I picked up some white and some yellow fingernail polish and keep them in my range bag. I've been known to color the front blade mid range trip. Stinks to be old.

Grumpy
 
Last edited:
Jim Watson said:
Right. W244 is made by an improved process, less waste, probably cheaper all around.
A Hodgdon rep said right here that W231/HP38 would stay in the lineup as long as there was a demand. But they don't control what St Marks MAKES.
Click to expand...

That's my understanding of it. As the manufacturers are trying to move more towards 'green' items... and always more profitable items... I saw the release of powders like W244, W572, and the IMR Enduron line as a way to transition away from older, more costly products to produce, and at the same time get away from waste byproducts and the costly disposal of it. The problem is, they are trying to supplement tried and true powders, with a nearly rabid following... like W231 and, for example, IMR4350. I don't think it's working as well as they'd like to hope.
 
Charlie98 said:
That's my understanding of it. As the manufacturers are trying to move more towards 'green' items... and always more profitable items... I saw the release of powders like W244, W572, and the IMR Enduron line as a way to transition away from older, more costly products to produce, and at the same time get away from waste byproducts and the costly disposal of it. The problem is, they are trying to supplement tried and true powders, with a nearly rabid following... like W231 and, for example, IMR4350. I don't think it's working as well as they'd like to hope.
Click to expand...
Many powder manufacturers operate under the theory of, "they'll buy whatever I decide to produce". Yes, I believe they are gravitating towards more "green" items (got to please the millennials) that they can produce at a lower cost (equal or better performance is secondary at best). The money they save by producing less expensive to make powders just means more profit for them. That's the real goal. Just how much "altered performance" the consumer will accept before they decide to use another powder is the big question.

Grumpy
 
Military and other government contracts dwarf consumer demand. Period.
The contract procurement process has stringent requirements; including compliance with environmental regulations and safety standards. Those compliance requirements cover the facility, not just the contracted items.

The individual distributors who supply consumers get some say in what is made but not how it’s made.

No one in their right mind would give up billions of dollars in contracts because a few hundred dollar per year cheapskates complain about a small change in the end product. It’s not greed or uncaring, it’s just good business. If any facility had to survive on commercial contracts alone, they would go under in a few months.
 
GeoDudeFlorida said:
It’s not greed or uncaring, it’s just good business.
Click to expand...

I'm not one of those that think higher profits in a business is 'greed' ...as you say, it's simply a tool to survive in the competitive and demanding marketplace. Unfortunately, there is sometimes a very fine line between making a product at least as good, if not better, at the same or lower cost, while satisfying a 3rd party demand for compliance.
 
Just because we "understand it" does not mean we have to be happy about it. I fully realize supply and demand drives most of industry's operations. Doing something because it is more environmentally responsible is also good. Sadly, the pendulum does not always swing both ways the same. It is one of the founding principles of capitalism that money rules. Whoever spends the most money gets what they want and gets to set the rules of the game. It just stinks to always be at the bottom of the pecking order.

Grumpy
 
Old Grumpy said:
Just because we "understand it" does not mean we have to be happy about it. I fully realize supply and demand drives most of industry's operations. Doing something because it is more environmentally responsible is also good. Sadly, the pendulum does not always swing both ways the same. It is one of the founding principles of capitalism that money rules. Whoever spends the most money gets what they want and gets to set the rules of the game. It just stinks to always be at the bottom of the pecking order.

Grumpy
Click to expand...
Also important to remember most of the powders under discussion are made outside the United States: Trail Boss - Australia; Tin Star (N32C) - Finland. Lots of powders are made in the USA but most are made in Canada or Europe and a goodly amount is shipped in from Australia. We don’t control their environmental regulations none of those countries are die-hard champions of “capitalism.”
There’s lots of powder that works in the old .45 Colt round, including good old smokeful Triple-F. If you really want that full 1870’s experience, there you go :)
 
Dead Eye Duck said:
Grumpy,
I sent you a PM. I have 6 pounds of Tin Star N32c I don't even have the load data for
Click to expand...

Here is the data I got from VV. I ran 8.8gr under a 200gr Cast RNFP and got 878.24fps, 7.2gr under a 250gr Cast RNFP and got 808.41fps. Both loads gave excellent accuracy out of my 4" Redhawk. As you can see, both are closer to VV's top than their bottom. Saw you PM, just wish I was closer to Florida. Not sure, without the required forms and certifications, we can even ship hazmat items. 😢

Grumpy

Tin Star 45 Colt.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Mag Primers w/light loads in 357??
Replies
2
Views
802
stans
S
A
  • Locked
.45 Colt Cowboy Load...Powder Choice?
2
Replies
29
Views
5K
AethelstanAegen
AethelstanAegen
S
  • Locked
Cleanest 45 acp load
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
earplug
E
B
  • Locked
Reloading the Colt .45
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
35 Whelen
35 Whelen
J
  • Locked
Loading Blanks for Cowboy Action Shooting - 45 Colt
Replies
5
Views
3K
Randy1911
R
Back
Top