1911 vs predators

[SharonAnne]

I lost all of my picture data when i was broke and my storage unit was auctioned off. Try Hatchers Notebook. I have seen pictures in gun magazines of revolvers with the top 3 chambers blown away. One magazine showed a winchester model 70 that had grenaded. The lugs and bolt handle were blown off and the bolt took out the right side of the shooters head. He lost his right eye, sinuses, ear, upper jaw and most of his right hand. IIRC the cartridge was 264 Winchester.
For a time the 2.7gr load of Bullseye got a nasty reputation for blowing up 38 Special revolvers. This was eventually proved to be poor technique resulting in double and even triple charge loads. No fault of powder, pistol or pressure reading.

Just contact the company that printed the load data. Ask THEM if those old loads are safe or recommended. I am quite certain the answer will be a resounding NO.

[Skip_B]

Sharon,

Sorry to hear about your hard times. That's a bummer. I hope things are better now.

I know there are pictures of blown up firearms, that's not up for discussion. I agree with that. What I am saying though is that there are more done because of the same reason that you mentioned rather than the use of data like this. Double charges, too much of the wrong powder, triplex loads, on and on, but few and far between because of using this data.

You are right about the current load data being nowhere near what these manuals espouse. I wonder what changed? Some will say that it is because of the advent of the transducer. I say no, and I have proved that they were available when this data was current. It would be a far stretch to think that a company had the tools to check pressure and didn't use them when working up loads. Even if their data doesn't show the pressure numbers I believe they had the data.

Like I said earlier, these loads are safe in my guns. Don't use in yours, and that applies to anyone, if you don't feel they are safe.


Thanks for your input.

I do hope things turn around for you or that they have, blessings!

[S.B.]

I lost all of my picture data when i was broke and my storage unit was auctioned off. Try Hatchers Notebook. I have seen pictures in gun magazines of revolvers with the top 3 chambers blown away. One magazine showed a winchester model 70 that had grenaded. The lugs and bolt handle were blown off and the bolt took out the right side of the shooters head. He lost his right eye, sinuses, ear, upper jaw and most of his right hand. IIRC the cartridge was 264 Winchester.
For a time the 2.7gr load of Bullseye got a nasty reputation for blowing up 38 Special revolvers. This was eventually proved to be poor technique resulting in double and even triple charge loads. No fault of powder, pistol or pressure reading.

Just contact the company that printed the load data. Ask THEM if those old loads are safe or recommended. I am quite certain the answer will be a resounding NO.

I don't think any resolution was determind for the Bullseye 2.7 loads?

[Skip_B]

I lost all of my picture data when i was broke and my storage unit was auctioned off. Try Hatchers Notebook. I have seen pictures in gun magazines of revolvers with the top 3 chambers blown away. One magazine showed a winchester model 70 that had grenaded. The lugs and bolt handle were blown off and the bolt took out the right side of the shooters head. He lost his right eye, sinuses, ear, upper jaw and most of his right hand. IIRC the cartridge was 264 Winchester.
For a time the 2.7gr load of Bullseye got a nasty reputation for blowing up 38 Special revolvers. This was eventually proved to be poor technique resulting in double and even triple charge loads. No fault of powder, pistol or pressure reading.

Just contact the company that printed the load data. Ask THEM if those old loads are safe or recommended. I am quite certain the answer will be a resounding NO.

I don't think any resolution was determind for the Bullseye 2.7 loads?

Not to my knowledge either. I have never shot anything so low though! Something quite evident in the loads posted!

Again, I know folks that have even used lighter loads, for years and years, with no ill affects. It's very curious. Personally, I think it has more to do with loading practices than powder weight, that's just my opinion though.

[rbwillnj]

2.7 Grains of Bullseye under a 148 Grain wadcutter, or Hollow Base Wadcutter is a long time favorite and Standard for 38 Special target loads in both revolvers and Pistols.

But I thought this thread started out talking about 1911 loads for predators.

[SharonAnne]

ICG, you stated you have proved pressure transducers were available when the displayed data was printed. I may have missed something but I see nowhere that you have done so. Pressure READINGS were published. As I said the copper crusher and lead crusher were in use before the pressure transducer. Copper units of pressure and Lead units of pressure were often converted to PSI. It was found the crusher method was not accurate in reading peak pressures because the use of the crusher was also dependent on time to produce its readings. The pressure transducer showed peak pressures that occurred too quickly for the crusher to react.

RBwill it is about the 1911 for predators but questionable load data must not be ignored in good conscience.

I will repeat, ask the printer of the data if they will recommend such loads today. I doubt any will approve the use of the old data.

[Skip_B]

Ask the printer if they would still use the data? They are some of the same folks that emasculated other former manly rounds. I doubt I will as them!

I have decided to ask others that have used loads like this for years with no ill affects.

Here is a picture from the manual that I quoted. I realize that it doesn't PROVE they use it when developing loads. It just seems kinda foolish to think they would have the equipment and NOT use it.

[rbwillnj]

SharonAnn,   The comment wasn't aimed at you.   I posted because as a Bullseye shooter, I found need to correct any misconception about 2.7 Bullseye in 38 Special loads, and because I didn't see any mention of bullet weight, which does make a difference...... then I got to thinking...am I off topic?? and had to check for myself how the original topic started.

[SharonAnne]

with apologies to AZMARK for contributing to thread drift; Skip, I cannot make out the captions of the two pictures. Please repeat them for us. Thanks.

RB I realize the remark was not directed to me but I thought that I at least would agree that the OP of the thread was asking about 1911/45 and varmints.

[Skip_B]

Trying to get other copies. The ones that were used here aren't good enough to blow up.


Give me some time.

[Skip_B]

OK, let's try this!





Remember that this is circa 1970.


Just because there is no pressure data published doesn't mean that this equipment wasn't used. For sure it was used in the previous manual. It has the data published!

[SharonAnne]

pressure measuring equipment. ok, where does it say pressure transducer? Such instruments were used in monitoring the crushers too.          I said it before. The lead units and copper units of pressure were often converted to PSI.  Just because there is a PSI readout does not mean a pressure transducer was used.

[Skip_B]

Do you know what the thingy is on the right? It's a scope, an oscilloscope. An "O" scope, as those of us in the know call them, gets it's readings from TRANSDUCERS!


For crying out loud!

[SharonAnne]

an oscilloscope reads electric inputs. they are even used to tune cars. just because a oscilloscope is present does not mean it is reading a pressure transducer. And just how are you "in the know"?

[Skip_B]

Sharon,

I am "in he know" about "o" scopes because I am an electronic specialist. To assume that the "o" scope is just sitting there in a ballistic lab and isn't being used is, well, foolish, to be kind.

I guess this conversation needs to end. For most folks the scope in a ballistic lab isn't going to be for anything else other than reading a transducer. To assume a transducer would be used in a ballistic lab for anything other than pressure reading, again, is foolish, again, to be kind.

[SharonAnne]

I at no time assumed the oscilloscope was not being used. To assume an oscilloscope is used to read only transducers is also foolish, to be kind.

[1911crazy]

When my wife was giving birth to our first son while in the room a nurse ran into our room to the window.  Me and her watched a guy being dragged out of a car with 5 shots of 45acp to the gut. I read in the newspaper the next day he lived and was ok.

I was carrying a 1911 at the time and i started reloading the speer 200gr JHP's right away to the max powder charge.  These are the biggest hollow points i have ever seen they look like soup bowels. I made a head shot on a ferel dog once and it made a quarter sized hole going in and it died right on the spot. It just dropped right away.

If i was going handgun hunting for yotes i think i would look at the 357SIG.  The performance of the 125gr jhp's is equal to the 357mag. and you have an auto.

But why not a 7,62x25 tokarev?  There pretty accurate out to 100yds right?

[Mikey]

1911 Crazy:  Yep, the Toks can be accurate enough to 100 to whack a yote.  Just use good ammo.  I went through lots of older mil-surp from Europe and China and found it to be of widely varying quality, most of it not great.  I measured my barrel to .308" and measured the different mil-surp slugs from .305-.307.  Not one hit the .308 mark until I purchased some new S&B ammo and then I started having lots of fun (being able to hit what I was shooting at). 

If you want really definative results with the 7.62x25mm go to Ron Reed's site and check out his Tokarev and CZ52 loadings, awesome. 

I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a 85-90 semi-wadcutter slug that I could use for the 7.62x25mm or the 7.65mm Luger.  Now that would make a good field round...  Just a thought.  Mikey.

[hogwire]

Back to varmint hunting with a 1911. I'm surprised no one's mentioned the 10 MM. Accuracy, greater range and a lot of available bullets. I shoot from 135 gr. to 200 gr. bullets and they all give really good accuracy in my Kimber. Also 6 to 8 inch groups at 100 yds. Don't flame me please but will even shoot 40 S&W in a pinch. (will headspace off the extractor). Everything I've shot with it has died fast and didn't move much! Ammo is no problem if you handload. Any .40 S&W dies will load 10 MM also and they use the same bullets. I guess a good accurate 40 wouldn't be too shabby either!, just not as flat as my 10mm.