Glock Talk banner

OK, I am going to buy a Glock 45 ACP...

5005 Views 77 Replies 31 Participants Last post by  spatin
I was thinking the 30S however it seems there is more recoil with that being lighter than the 30SF or the 30 gen 4 which is is essentially the same as the 30SF with a few enhancements.
Whichever one will be an edc and I will compete with it for practice and to gain competency.

My question now is about powder. I have a 43 & 19/4 and have only used TG to reload my practice and competition rounds due to the deal I got on it, and have a ton left... If TG is a top choice then fine however I don't want to use it just because I have so much if there is better..?
Opinions please...
Thanks in advance from G!
  • Like
Reactions: friej
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
18,795 Posts
I was thinking the 30S however it seems there is more recoil with that being lighter than the 30SF or the 30 gen 4 which is is essentially the same as the 30SF with a few enhancements.
Whichever one will be an edc and I will compete with it for practice and to gain competency.

My question now is about powder. I have a 43 & 19/4 and have only used TG to reload my practice and competition rounds due to the deal I got on it, and have a ton left... If TG is a top choice then fine however I don't want to use it just because I have so much if there is better..?
Opinions please...
Thanks in advance from IGG!
Just understand, if you decide you want to make nice round holes with those 200gr LSWC's. while possible with a Glock subcompact, the OAL is going to be REALLY fussy.

PS - reading about someone who enthusiastically proclaims they are getting their first 45 Auto handgun makes one feel really old. :(
 

· Registered
Joined
·
18,795 Posts
Just too light for my pistol (at that point it had at least 2k rounds through it). It could have been unique to this gun (I'm sure every pistol has its own "personality"), but increasing the powder charge eliminated function issues. Also, perhaps TG has different burn characteristics that would minimize such a problem (??).
I think that is a very common experience with W231. Guns are less sensitive when running at closer to max.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
18,795 Posts
My Glock 30 is very fussy about the OAL of 200gr SWC ammo.

I've got a Glock 21 that is really fussy about the overall length of 200gr SWC bullets.
I have another Glock 21 that just gobbles them up, regardless of the OAL.
My G21 is very tolerant. So much so I use it to shoot up anything that won't feed in any number of other 45 Auto guns I have owned. I bought some copper plated SWC's once and tried everything to get them to feed in any of my 45's, finally just loaded them up and shot them off in my G21. They weren't all that accurate anyway. :)

Quite a few years ago now, a frequent poster on these reloading forums and I (via PM) spent quite a while and quite a few rounds of testing with his G30, to finally get to an OAL that would feed reliably with 200gr LSWC's. He finally nailed it, but it was a slow process.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
18,795 Posts
So taking up more space is good for performance or just being able to see the charge in the case easier?
Only 9 but I have been reloading for about three years so not brand new to it. What would make a soft shooting load for practice & competition and meter well in my 650?
Actually it isn't quite as simple, but load density is a factor in how efficient some powders work. With faster powders (like we have been discussing in this thread), most will work fine at any load density (how much the case is filled). As you move to slower powders load density becomes a bigger factor in performance (efficiency).
 

· Registered
Joined
·
18,795 Posts
Thanks WW, would you mind a short explanation on the slower powders as noted above in bold?
Thx!
I can try. ;)

With slower burning powders, pressure is a larger part of their burn efficiency. Slower powders that are started with a lot of free space left in the case, don't get a chance to get up to their ideal pressure for burn efficiency before the bullet starts moving.

Very fast powders burn relatively efficiently even when starting with quite a bit of free space, most even need a little as a buffer to assure pressures don't spike too quickly, causing an over pressure. That is why OAL (or more accurately, seating depth) matters so much more with faster powders, versus slower powders.

My SD load practice simulator (loaded to simulate my carry round of 124gr +P HST) uses 6.2gr of BE-86, a powder quite a bit slower than say WST, Clays, Bullseye, Titegroup, etc.). This powder charge is over 100% load density, that is, it is compressed. It burns very cleanly in this setup. If I go down to say Hodgdon non-+P start load charge level of BE-86, I get some free space in the case after I seat the bullet to my normal OAL. This load burns pretty dirty, with a fair amount of "debris" floating around after the shot. Combustion was less than efficient. It still will go bang, you are just using a lot of powder for a pretty anemic velocity and some unburned/partially powder.

If I charge the same case with a middle of the book load Titegroup charge and seat the bullet so it is a compressed charge, I would get a case head kaboom, an ejected magazine and maybe a broken gun.

Make sense?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
18,795 Posts
Thank you WW, yes it makes sense however the more one learns the more questions there are! What charts do I look at to be able to research and cross reference stats to make a determination?
The best place to start is the powder makers own web sites. If a powder isn't listed for a load you are looking for it was probably left off for a reason. Sometimes it is because their ballistician's found something they didn't like about the combination, sometimes for marketing reasons where they just would rather hawk a particular offering. Sometimes you won't find a fast powder, heavy bullet combination in their data because there isn't a big enough margin for error from their point of view. Many times you will find, especially with target loads, that something fast for a heavy bullet is everyone's favorite and yet nothing in the load data exists.

There seems to be a great reference work that Dudel has posted a number of times here that outlines all the different powders and their characteristics. Maybe PM him and he can provide a link.

For my own part, most everything is from experience, trying different powders and different loads and learning myself what they do. A burn rate chart (Hodgdon, Lapua (VV powders) and others publish these) can get you in the ball park of what to expect. Another way is just to ask here and guys will tell you what they like.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
18,795 Posts
I am curious, what overall length seemed to improve function? I have a G30SF that doesn't like lead bullets, even round nose 230 grain. I haven't had the time to try and fix the problem, using cheap remanufactured round nose jacketed instead. In the good old bad old days, I loaded 200 grain SWC for my 1911 Colts all the way to the leade with a slightly reduced charge and head spaced off the shoulder of the bullet.
I can't remember what the dimension was that finally worked.

I tried to go back and see if the conversation via PM was still available, but it isn't, too many years ago. I believe the member who I worked on it with was "rebs". I have not seen him around the Reloading forums in quite a while, so he may not have even seen this thread. Maybe shoot him a PM and see if he still has the records on the loads.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top