PDA

View Full Version : High velocity .45 bullet



stlgreg
26th September 2008, 09:40
I am in the process of building a dedicated .460 Rowland. Clark barrel, Caspian slide, Springfield frame, and a Sprinco recoil system. Everything fits well, functions perfectly, and accuracy is good. I plan to use this .45 for deer hunting and was wondering if anyone knows of a high velocity, 200 grn bullet I could use to load? I am aware of the Barnes bullet but would like to practice at less than a dollar a shot.

wjkuleck
26th September 2008, 13:08
Hornady makes a 200gr. HP/XTP that might fit your needs:


Hornady HP/XTP (https://www.hornady.com/shop/Bullet_XTP_popup.htm)

Regards,

Walt

stlgreg
26th September 2008, 14:17
That is what I have been using so far. The Hornady manual, Vol 2, has a muzzle velocity range of 700-1100 fps. for this bullet. I chronograph 1422 on average and wet phone book testing has produced one too many fragmentations on impact at 15 yards. It could have been the one bullet that failed out of the fifteen I fired but my hunting goal is to stop them where they stand.

Thanks for the reply!

Hunter
26th September 2008, 16:08
I am finishing up my review of the Wilson Combat Hunter in .460 Rowland and I have learned a lot about the cartridge.
I had a chance to talk with Johnny Rowland about some of his favorite loads in his caliber (he is a very nice man by the way and knows his stuff).
He favors the 185gr bullet for the .460 Rowland and had good things to say about Nosler. he also mentioned SR4756, WST, and AA #7 powders. I believe the AA#7 formula has changed a little so be advised to carefully work up and get current data
I have had good luck with Unique in my home cast 200gr LSWC and 325gr LFP as well as 230gr FMJ.
I have tried some Cor Bon in 185gr JHP, 230gr FMJ, and 255gr JHP and for factory loads they are pretty stout.
I am impressed with the .460 Rowland and found it works well with a wide range of bullet weights.

wjkuleck
26th September 2008, 16:13
Give Hornady a call, ask for tech support. They may have some better ideas.

I've worked with their chief engineer & some of their sales management, and find them both resourceful and innovative.

Regards,

Walt

toolman
26th September 2008, 16:36
Some handgun hunters swear by a LSWC for hunting big game. They say the square shoulder of the LSWC cuts a big wound channel causing a lot of damage and great penetration. Perhaps you could find a LSWC with a gas check.

horse 91-A1
26th September 2008, 17:50
I think this is going to be where things will start to get interesting. These Sierra 240gr JHC bullets are a dedicated hunting bullet designed for the .45 Colt/.454 Casull up to 1400fps. One of the great things about revolver designed bullets is they can be designed to hit more aggressively than their pistol designed counterparts.

http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o144/aztrekker/At%20the%20range/SWM25-2024.jpg

In both of my 1911 Colts, this bullet functioned w/o any hiccups and at 800fps matched up well against some stout 10mm loads. Sierra has 1911 pistol loading data for this bullet up to 900fps and 1100fps in .45auto revolvers.

Just for fun, it would be interesting to load up the 185gr Noslers in the .460 Rowland vs the S&W M25-2; I know the Rowland numbers are in the stratosphere. But, then we'll see how the Rowland launches the 240gr Sierras compared to the 25-2 and I'll also load the Sierras in an XSE for function.

So Hunter, you or anyone else up to the task??? :appld: :appld: :)

Bob

Hunter
26th September 2008, 18:19
So Hunter, you or anyone else up to the task??? :appld: :appld: :)

Bob
Count me in.
What recipe shall we try?
I got 815 fps from a 325gr home cast with 5.6gr of Unique from the .460 Rowland with very little recoil.
I love experiments, lets give it a go.

Jitterbug
26th September 2008, 18:43
Hunter

Any idea's on when you'll be posting the review?

horse 91-A1
26th September 2008, 19:07
Count me in.
What recipe shall we try?
I got 815 fps from a 325gr home cast with 5.6gr of Unique from the .460 Rowland with very little recoil.
I love experiments, lets give it a go.

So, I guess you think that load will work on pack rats??? :lh:

Bob :bf:

Hunter
26th September 2008, 19:31
Hunter

Any idea's on when you'll be posting the review?
Well I was finished with it last week when Duane from Wilson Combat called me about the other model of the Hunter (got to love that name) in 10mm. They wanted to send me that pistol as well to review.
Since they are the same pistol just different calibers we decided to do both pistols in one review.
I should be finished with the 10mm review in the next week or so and send it to be edited.

I reckon I could of just said "in a few weeks" but I figured I would let you know why.
I sure do like those Wilson Combat pistols though. The .460 Rowland is a lot of fun.

horse, I bet the 325gr would do well on those pack rats. It did a number on the impact berm at the range I promise.

stlgreg
26th September 2008, 19:54
I appreciate all the feedback I read. I am a little concerned about leading with cast bullets. I use them in a bunch of other firearms I shoot, mainly black powder, and they are very effective game getters. I have yet to encounter any published loading data for bullets heavier than 230 grn. for the 460 Rowland. I’ve been loading my own for 25 years or so and have never strayed very far from published data. I am not stuck on the 200 grn. weight for hunting but started there due to trajectory and energy levels.

horse 91-A1
26th September 2008, 20:03
Well I was finished with it last week when Duane from Wilson Combat called me about the other model of the Hunter (got to love that name) in 10mm. They wanted to send me that pistol as well to review.
Since they are the same pistol just different calibers we decided to do both pistols in one review.
I should be finished with the 10mm review in the next week or so and send it to be edited.

I reckon I could of just said "in a few weeks" but I figured I would let you know why.
I sure do like those Wilson Combat pistols though. The .460 Rowland is a lot of fun.

horse, I bet the 325gr would do well on those pack rats. It did a number on the impact berm at the range I promise.

I'm really looking forward to your reviews, both are power house calibers and I've been able to do a lot of 10mm testing with a 6" barrel. I wish Speer would offer a shallow cavity 155gr/165gr Gold Dot for the 10mm like the 125gr GD design for the .38Super - in direct comparison to the deep cavity 124gr GD/9mm design.

I've been thinking about a Rowland conversion in a Springer GI for some time now, and especially for the 240gr Sierra to make the Springer a true, fast shooting trail gun to complement the .38Super.

The 265gr slug from the .455 Webley running in the mid 600s established a great record of short incapacitation times during combat, I expect your high sectional density 325gr slug in the 800s would be unstoppable. What is the meplat diameter of your 325gr casting?

Looking forward to your review, learning which pistol designed bullets hold up to the Rowland's velocity and which ones don't. :)

Bob

Hunter
27th September 2008, 01:52
Meplat diameter is about .311" on the 325gr bullet though once sized, lubed, and gas checked they weigh close to 340gr.
Here is a picture that will be in my article.
Far left is a 230gr Armscor in .45 Automatic for comparison. Going to the right Cor Bon 230gr FMJ, 185gr JHP, 255gr JHP, my 200gr LSWC and the 325gr LFP all in .460 Rowland.
http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h264/Hunter1911/Picture013.jpg
The same bullets loaded in .45 Colt cases so you can see what the bullets look like.
http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h264/Hunter1911/Picture036-1.jpg

Jitterbug
27th September 2008, 10:27
Hunter

Well I can hardly wait. I can imagine the fun you’re having with these guns and loads. I've been scouring the internet for write ups on the Wilson Hunter in both calibers as well as other variants like the .45 Super etc.

I'm very interested in the 460 Rowland and I've been a fan of the 10mm for about 20 years now, especially as a trail gun. I went to 10mm in 1911 about a year or so ago after starting with the 10** series S&W, then spending a lot of time and money trying to make a Glock 10mm shoot like a 1911.

I've read everything I can find on "hot" 1911's for the past year on this site and others. One concern I see expressed over and over again by "old timers" and professional gunsmiths is that the 1911, specifically lugs and other parts and pieces were never designed for the pressures generated by cartridges like the 10mm, .45 Super, Rowland etc. And their predictions are that it will eventually fail, some even predict catastrophic failure.

I'm hoping to get your opinion on this issue.

And some more practical issues such as will the Wilson 5.5" barrel really fit in a standard 5" holster, is the compensator a necessity such as Clark recommends on their setup. IIRC Wilson offers both a compensated and standard 5.5" barrel. I'm also wondering if a standard 5" barrel would work with the 460? Why did Wilson go this way?

I hope I'm not intruding by asking to many questions or picking your brain to much, just really excited about and wanting to know about these things.

I really respect and value your opinions and reviews and will wait patiently for the final results.

Thanks for doing the review on this 1911 and calibers.

Hunter
27th September 2008, 12:00
The Hunter model is brand new this year so I don't know of any other reviews for the .460 Rowland. The 10mm I have was one of the first Wilson made and no more have shipped to testers that I know of.
The pistols are overbuilt compared to the standard Government Model. I have better than 410 rounds so far through the .450 Rowland and other than being real dirty it looks new.
The 5 1/2" barrel will fit in a standard "1911" holster if it is open ended. I am not testing a compensated model so I cannot say about those.
I believe Clark recommends a compensator on their conversion kits to help with pressures on the conversion but the Wilson was built for the .460 so it should take it (and so far it has).
I am very close to finishing my review but I can tell you I have shot both pistols enough to like them very much.
I am in love with the .460 Rowland and feel fortunate to have been able to test one.

Jitterbug
27th September 2008, 15:41
Thanks Hunter, I'm glad to hear your testing a non compensated barrel, just for the simple reason of an apples to apples comparison.

You are fortunate indeed to be able to work one up. I'm in love with the exterior ballistics of the Rowland, especially in a 1911 platform.

It would seem to solve the dilemma of a "woods gun" for the 1911 fan.

I've always wanted a Wilson or two from their LW 4" .45acp on up.

Looking forward to the review!

Mike1951
27th September 2008, 23:08
If I can contribute a few things that I've picked up while delving into the .460.

Clark claims their compensator is not just for recoil but also changes the lockup to better handle the cartridge.

If that's correct, I wonder how the Wilson will endure in the long run. Is Wilson just using stiffer recoil springs and buffers?

Corbon's loads, worked up in conjunction with Wilson, are less stout that the Johnny Rowland/Clark/Georgia Arms developed loads. Is that because the Wilson is less able to withstand the extreme loads?

Hornady told me that all of the 185, 200, and 230 XTP's will do fine between 700 and 1500fps.

There is information circulating about AA-7 stating that the problem is powder from two different sources with different characteristics. Accurate denies this. Instead they state that their initial test results were inaccurate yielding unsafe results and they later corrected the data. Current data for AA-7 shows maximum load velocities of 1350, 1263, 1175 for 185gr, 200gr, and 230gr, respectively.

From the Taffin Test report:


Speer's Gold Dot bullets that are designed for the .45 ACP are too soft for the .460 Rowland at top end pressures.
Of course, this same report recommends the extreme AA-7 loads.

Hunter
28th September 2008, 00:35
I believe the compensator does help in lock up but the Wilson seems hand fitted to be sure there is enough lug engagement to handle the added pressure.
Wilson does run a heavy recoil spring, shock buff, and a modified firing pin stop to also lessen the strain on the pistol.
I believe Wilson has taken into account the pressure of the round and built the pistol accordingly so.
I will run enough standard pressure ammunition through the .460 to hopefully see any accelerated wear.
Across the chronograph there is little difference between Cor Bon and Georgia Arms.

Mike1951
28th September 2008, 00:47
Keep in mind that Georgia Arms offers two 185JHP loads.

The first, using a Nosler 185 JHP, is rated at 1550fps.

They also offer a milder 185 JHP at 1400 fps.

These results were obtained by a member of TexasCHLForum:


by ghostrider on Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:52 pm

I chronographed a few rounds of the Georgia 185gr load yesterday and got these numbers:

1554, 1544, 1550, 1543, 1555

That gives an IPSC power factor of about 288 :-)

The Corbon 185gr load gives: 1443, 1443, 1461, 1447fps

The 255gr Corbon load gave me 1099 and 1118fps.

To be completely honest, I haven't shot mine yet. I installed it with the heavier recoil spring, but may try the 20# later. I did order a heavier mainspring and one of the EGW firing pin stops, but need to evaluate how the Clark kit does before I start tampering with things.

stlgreg
28th September 2008, 20:16
I ordered a Caspian frame to complete my 460 build. I fit the slide to a Springfield frame but did not modify the frame at all. I have several upper for an AR receiver and tried the Rowland by fitting it to an STI slide and swapping out top ends. The Springfield still shoots very well with the factory slide and before I get too much further along and possibly damage anything, I will just build a dedicated .460. I used the 24 lb recoil spring supplied with the Clark conversion along with a Sprinco recoil system designed for upper pressure cartridges in the 1911. It almost takes a team of mules to draw the slide but there was no battering on the Springfield frame after 200 rounds. Everything ejected and the last shot hold open was perfect. I had been using 12.5 grns of Power Pistol behind the 200 grn XTP because it is a listed load and worked the action, but when I get the project completed and worn in, I will go for a little better accuracy. The cartridge is certainly capable!

Jitterbug
29th September 2008, 10:37
This is real interesting!

Bearbait in NM
1st October 2008, 13:08
Cool, a new 460 thread. I have been playing with them for quite a few years, with many k down range. My latest (and hopefully lastest build) is a stainless Rowland kit on a new S70 Stainless gun.

As to bullets, I too have been going a tad heavier. I have been recently working with 45 Colt bullets, 250 and 240 XTP's, along with some cast 250's. Right now, I am starting to lean towards the 240XTP mag bullet, as it is designed for the 454 Casull, and my newsprint testing seems to indicate it holds together a bit better than the 250 and 230 XTP. The 250 XTP seems a bit stouter than the 230 XTP. The only tricky part with the Colt bullets (.452) is that you have to pay attention when seating, to make sure you do not get bulges in the case that limit chambering.

A few years ago I did some testing with 255 cast bullets, and did have one flavor of bullet that keyholed badly. I am curious how the ultra heavy that Hunter is working with will shoot and stabilize.

I did a test with a Rowland barrel sans comp and did shear off the lower lugs of a barrel. This was intentional testing, knowing that it could happen. The comp. as explained by Rowland, appears to be necessary in his drop in configuration, where barrel fit may be less than optimal. I am very intrigued by the Wilson non-comp appraoch, as to durability. I am betting that the Wilson approach is to work with and minimize tolerances.

As to the current loading of the round, I can say from my testing that the jump from a 230 at 1200 to a 230/1325 is significantly harder on the gun and brass. I fisrt started without a shock buff to test this, and with a drop in fit of everything, the 230/1325 really beats up on the dust cover/guide rod head/frame abutment area. I have destroyed one full length guide rod. Right now I am testing with shock buffs, and the CP seem to hold up better than the Wilsons, but they all take a beating. In an older Colt 70, I could not slingshot my slide with any buff. With the new s70 SS, I can just slingshot with either buff. The CP is a little thicker than the Wilson buffer. I have not had any feeding problems that I would attribute to the buffers, but I am also running extra power mag springs in my Colt factory mags.

As to the mags and the exposed lead tip bullets being tested, I have played with the Nosler 250's and Sierra 240's. The exposed lead tips do get a bit mushed in the magazine under recoil, and they can be a bit more tempermental in feeding. I have had a few nose dive feeding problems with these bullets in a couple of my barrels. Again, these are drop-in barrels with the obvious less than perfect geometry fit of everything.

And just for reference, Paul at Clark Custom fits all of the Rowland barrels to a Kimber gun they have in house. I have mostly run them in two Colts, one Springfield and one franken gun, and fit has been pretty decent. Usually only needing to address the length of hood, and just slightly. Right now the only part that is giving me fits with the Clark is the link. My last 3 came with -6 links, which were too short for my Colts. I am running .278 in them, and fit is better (more upper lug engagement), although 2 do ride the link slightly. Them seem to bed properly, and I have lost some of my barrel/ramp gap, but they feed just fine. I have decided that I would rather err on the abuse happening at the lower lug/link/bed side than on the upper lug area. If I stretch a link or pin, I can fix that. A sheared or failed upper lug could be messier.

I am really looking forward to Hunter's article. Thank you very much. And, thanks to all of the knowledable folks here who have helped with my tecnical questions. One thing I have learned with all of my Rowland testing is that many of the issues that arise here with acp questions, really take meaning when you are running ++++P pressures.

Craig ( a Rowland junky)

RifleMaster
1st October 2008, 19:09
Anyone tried one of these? I am picking up a Dan Wesson CBOB Saturday and plan to have it fitted. I hear they are a bit pickier re: feeding and lockup, etc and I would expect a drop in velocities reached Vs 5" but, if the gun functions well it will only be .75" longer than my gov't model. What about having a spare slide set up just like we do with the .22 conversions? Simplify point of impact variations between the .45acp barrel and the .460, yes? Is it a bad idea to use two steel slides on one frame?
Blake

stlgreg
1st October 2008, 22:04
I don’t find fitting a slide to a frame as easy as the two pin pop in the AR platform. I decided on another frame for the 460 for that reason. I have another slide should the one I fit to the Springfield frame not work on the new Caspian frame. Slides, while expensive, are a little easier to get than a frame for the average me. The 24 pound recoil spring that comes with the Clark conversion is almost enough to make you want to just leave the conversion installed.
Craig (the Rowland junky), have you had any experience with the Sprinco recoil system and the 460? I could slingshot it, but don’t really plan to do so while using it for hunting. My trial conversion fed perfectly through a 10 round McCormick powermag, and eleven combined shots is the extent of legality in MO. for hunting. If I need more, and forgot where I put my rifle, I’ll throw rocks or just go home. Also, is the -6 link standard with the Clark?

Hunter
1st October 2008, 23:07
The 325gr lead FP stabilize well in the Wilson Combat out to 75 feet I know for sure. I am not sure of the twist rate yet but I believe it is the neighborhood of 1 in 16 twist.
I am becoming a fan of the 460 Rowland, I see that caliber in my future.

Bearbait in NM
2nd October 2008, 00:29
Stl,

Nope, I have only used the Clark two piece guide rod. Right now I am using a 20lb ISMI spring, and the CP buffs. I am also running an EGW fps that is barely radiused, and a 25# main spring. I am a lot skittish about the 24# recoil spring, due to possible bullet setback. I had one that blew a case with a 28# spring, and at 20#'s with a buff, things work very well. I had extensive conversations with the head honcho at ISMI, and at his request I did some checking. His springs do take less set than a Wolff, and the closing pressure stays higher, longer. I have had 6 Rowlands from Clark, and only the last 3 had the -6 link. My older barrels did not, but Clark says the -6 is all that they use. I would heartly encourage you to check your lock-up and barrel fit with a -6. For me, going from -6 to a standard link increased my lug engagement measurement (using techniques on this site) from about 0.045ish to 0.050. I think, based on input from folks here, is that more upper lug engagement will help for the long run. But, it all needs to be checked.

Hunter,

I do hope that you will be including some of your reloading exploits with the heavier bullets in your review. I have a slew of heavy lead bullets that always seem to call to me when I break out my Rowland reloading stuff. I have 265's to 365, with various nose profiles. I think if I can get some of these nose profiles to clear the slide stop, I can get them to chamber. I just do not have a clue about which powder to start with. The other problem with the Clark and compensator is that the lead (and fouling) tends to accumulate in the comp. It really builds up at the bottom, where the threading ends. It almost takes mechanical removal, and that is pretty close to the crown.

A 300ish class bullet in the 900 fps range is a very interesting concept. I would be willing to bet that when Johnny Rowland started this project, one of his goals was to get some very fast numbers on the page. Fast is where a lot of folks take note. But, a heavy bullet with a decent meplate of proper construction would be a nice critter getter, even at subsonic velocities.

If you do want to share some of your heavy loading recipes, I will gladly jump in and do some testing.

Craig

Hunter
2nd October 2008, 00:37
Craig I did include my recipes for the 200gr LSWC and 325gr LFP in the review.
Johnny Rowland also gave me some good powders and charges to use for his caliber.
I will post Johnny's advice here for us to share.
I liked Unique for the 200gr and 325gr bullets in .460 Rowland.
I got better than 800 fps with the 325gr with very little recoil.
You are right about Johnny wanting some high numbers with the 185 gr bullet and that is a great idea but the heavy slower bullets have a place in that round.

Bearbait in NM
2nd October 2008, 01:11
Cool, and thanks again for doing this. There is so little info out there on this cartridge, that anything would be great. Having numbers from Johnny Rowland is that much better. I look forward to your article.

Craig

stlgreg
2nd October 2008, 09:30
Craig, I am getting a perfect lockup with my barrel and slide until I mount them in the frame. Firing pin impact is then just about .051 high of dead center in the primer pocket. The fitting I have done with modeling clay in the lugs shows basically the same. I was guessing that Clark uses the -6 link due to the variables found in the manufactures specs and the 39,000 pressure exposure. I don’t want to re-link until I get the frame and fit my Franken gun properly. I have yet to have any severe bullet set back with my bullets. I use a Lee taper crimp die as a separate stage. I go to a public range here for testing, and at first, I would load a magazine, fire one round, clear the gun and magazine, and then measure every round. All that worked perfectly with the ranges “minimum three seconds between each shot” rule. The loads I did not crimp started to slip so I now crimp every round. I have not used any cast bullets to date. I have bunches for my 45 Colt dealings but did not want to guess at starting loads for the Rowland.


I was wondering if this thread should be renamed to designate the 460 Rowland?

Bearbait in NM
2nd October 2008, 12:17
Stl,

When I go to the longer (standard) link in two of my Colts, I actually get a slightly low primer strike, kinda confirming that I am getting more upper lug engagement. To be honest, I kind of got the impression from Clark that the -6 is used not for any reason other than this is what works in their Kimber fitting gun. This bugs me a bit, as with the pressures involved I would think that they could spring for a gun/fitting process that puts the parts more to mid-spec. A short link that wants to be a standard link is likley to cause earlier opening, and this could be problematic with the pressures involved.

I am pleased that you are checking for bullet setback. This is one area that cannot be ignored with the Rowland. These days the only time I even experience this is when playing with 45 Colt bullets with bullet shapes that deviate from acp bullet profiles. Just keep in mind that you can actually over crimp, as brass will spring back a bit. Lead may not.

And for any of the other folks reading this, DISREGARD all of the 45 Super threads where the posters say more (higher)recoil spring rate is better. The 460 Rowland is gonna beat the gun up more than an ACP round. accept this and work with the other ways to mitigate.

As to the concern about "guessing" loads, in my work with Longshot and Power Pistol, I have found very uniform results with increasing and decreasing powder amounts. No wild swings in velocity and apparent pressure. With the 250 grain loads, I usually take the starting 230 grain recipes, back off a grain, and start. No problems to date. Right now Hunter has me scratching my head with his heavy loads, using Unique. I would have guessed that using a faster powder, albiet in smaller amounts, would have created more pressure problems. I am really looking forward to his write-up.

Craig

Hunter
2nd October 2008, 13:31
I used 5.6gr of Unique with the 325gr bullet and average velocity was 817 fps and recoil was mild (about +P 230gr 45 Auto recoil).
I talked with Johnny about going to Bullseye with the heavy bullet but as of yet I have not gone that route.
The spent cases showed no signs of over pressure or primer problems and leading was nil.

Jitterbug
2nd October 2008, 13:54
Stl,

And for any of the other folks reading this, DISREGARD all of the 45 Super threads where the posters say more (higher)recoil spring rate is better. The 460 Rowland is gonna beat the gun up more than an ACP round. accept this and work with the other ways to mitigate.

Craig

Makes me wonder about the same things being said for 10mm 1911's, "increase recoil spring rate"

Bearbait in NM
2nd October 2008, 17:40
Hunter,

Thanks for the tip on the powder. I am not sure I have Unique, but I will try and play with the heavy weight bullets. I have a lot of Tight Group, which is pretty close to the two you listed, but I might try picking up some Unique. I have three varieties of Cast performance bullets to try, the 265, a 300 and a 335. I cannot fathom a 360 fitting in the case, but I may try and see if it will without crowding the case web. One of the benefits of reloading for the 454 Casull, I guess. I keep a stuck bullet rod in my gun bag, something tells me I may end up needing it.

Jitterbug,

I think with any of the high pressure 1911 rounds, folks need to really pay attention to the folks who really know what they are talking about (there are quite a few here) have to say about "fixes". A properly functioning 1911 can handle these, it is just when the gun is misbehaving that things could get interesting. It has been frustrating with the Rowland, as there is just so little info out there on it, but I know it is being used, a lot.

Craig

stlgreg
10th October 2008, 10:31
The Sprinco system seems to work well with the higher pressure loads in the 1911. I can definitely feel the difference with the 460 when I am using it. The recoil is definitely “softer”. I decided to swap the slides just one more time and am now using the Sprinco along with a Wolf 22 pound variable power spring. I have yet to change the link on the Clark conversion. I will wait until the back ordered, much anticipated Caspian frame arrives and I fit the dedicated build.

Bearbait in NM
10th October 2008, 14:40
Stl,

Glad that you are testing Sprinco. I am trying a 20# ISMI spring and buffer. I do not use buffers in any other gun, but the 460 is certainly a candidate for experimentation. Right now I am seeing a occasional nose dive feed with really squared off nose profiles, that could be related to a bit less slide travel, but I have also just fit a new Wilson extractor that needed a bit of polishing. The buffers are really taking a beating, but I can live with that. They are cheap.

I am hoping Hunter's article will generate a bit of conversation from 460 users. And perhaps add a bit of credibility to the platform. What I have found is that it is hard to get honest conversation, as the mere mention of the 460 and pressures makes a lot of folks jump in and add "junk" to the threads. Yes, we know it is high pressure. Yes, we know buffers are "junk" in many's opinion. Yes we know the gun is getting beat pretty hard. Yes we know it is not equivalent to a Ruger 44 mag with 300 grain loads. Yes, we know that it may not kill deader than a 10mm or 45 Super. And yes, it is a specialty caliber, not likley to be found stuffed in CCW's belts, or on the firing line at Gunsight, so we do not need input from folks about changes or mods to guns that might be CCW'd or used in "combat". Still, it is a 1911, and pretty dang useful, in my opinion.

Craig (still checking a couple of times a day for the E-zine article)

Jitterbug
10th October 2008, 15:16
Good post Craig

Hunter
10th October 2008, 17:21
I have the corrected draft back now.
I have to take just a few more pictures and I will send everything into John.
I know Wilson Combat is ready for the article also and I did take a little longer on this one as I normally do (reviewing 2 pistols and all) and I tried to do a real good job.
I have invited Johnny Rowland to join the forum and I plan on asking him for a .460 Rowland conversion kit for one of us to test for the ezine.

Craig I totally see where you are coming from. I would like to see the 460 gain some popularity also.
With the added pressure I think a buffer is a good idea in this pistol (and I have carried the 460 in the Wilson Combat Hunter a few times as my ccw just to see how it carried).

Bearbait in NM
10th October 2008, 19:14
Hunter,

Thanks for the update. I actually carry mine concealed when I head up to the ranch for R&R. I built a Sharkskin high rise paddle holster for mine, and it actually conceals rather easily. My point (which I know you understand) is that if say for example I started a thread entitled "Buffers in a 460 Rowland?". Between the 45 Super folks and anti-buffer folks the thread would trainwreck in short order. Of course you guys do run a pretty tight ship here......

I am right in the middle of getting ready for an early November big game hunt, so I do not have time to play with the heavy weight bullets, but I am really looking forward to some experimentation this late fall/winter.

Craig

grendelbane
10th October 2008, 19:46
I need to drag out my old .460 Rowland barrel. About the time I started working with it, I got into some other adventures.

Not real sure what I will use it for, but it is fun, anyway.

Hunter
10th October 2008, 21:19
I believe the shock buff is not needed in a .45 auto pistol but I really believe they help in the high pressure rounds.
After about 500 rounds through the 460 the shock buff has begun to show wear.
Experimentation with the 460 is a lot of fun. It seems to be a forgiving cartridge.

horse 91-A1
10th October 2008, 22:55
This is a great thread that is going to make a mess of my checking account. :) Anyone running a special on .460 Rowland brass??? :appld:

Bob

Mike1951
10th October 2008, 23:33
Graf & Sons with a C&R or FFL discount:

STARLINE BRASS 460 ROW- LAND UNPRIMED PER 100
Item Number: SU460R · Availability: In stock
Quantity: 100 $22.99
500 $109.20
1000 $206.91
2000 $400.03

stlgreg
11th October 2008, 09:49
The Sprinco uses a “graduated secondary spring” that really seems to work better than a recoil buffer. The stainless rod is polished enough to look like hard chrome. The “Cor-Bon” model I am using, along with a 22 lb Wolf spring, will not eject a standard or +P round in my pistol. I am not much of one to headspace on the extractor, so that testing was limited to ten rounds each.
I started with this project because I wanted a 1911 for deer hunting. I have taken deer with just about every legal method, including a Ruger Old Army revolver, but never with a pistol. Here in Missouri, it is legal to hunt deer with any center fire cartridge. Legal and ethical are not inter-changeable for me. I could have taken the Delta Elite out of the safe, but I would rather not. The ballistics of the Rowland are perfect for what I have in mind, and this is more fun!

stlgreg
29th October 2008, 07:14
Has anyone else tried Power Pistol powder with the 460? I am sticking to 200 grn bullets and everything seems to be working well. I also use the same powder with .45+p loads and standard 45 loads as well. I have read that Power Pistol was the powder used in the development of the 40 S&W.

Bearbait in NM
29th October 2008, 14:25
STL,

I have gone through about a pound of Power Pistol. For the bullet weights I tried, the charge weights matched up pretty closely to what is published in the Woa Mamma series. It does seem to meter a little better than LS in my Dillon, but I have opted to throw all of my 460 rounds with a bench rest thrower. So, I kind of switched back to LS, as it is working well enough for me. I have enough PP left to try a little in some heavy load testing, later.

Hunter,

if you are out there, great job on the article. I was hoping for a bit more reloading data, but I truely understand that your "job" was to evaluate the pistol, and secondarily the round. Beautiful pic's of a lovely gun, that is probably out of my price range. I do think that the ramped barrel alone makes the Wilson gun something to seriously consider. Once I am finished with my hunting season, upon me in a couple of days, I hope to start some heavey weight bullet work with my Rowland, and perhaps we can start a new thread to explore a bit more of the reloading. The question I have is how on earth do you send such a nice pistol back, when it is wearing your name, quite literally. That's gotta be a tough call.

Craig

Hunter
29th October 2008, 14:31
Craig I do try to keep the reloading data down as to not dilute the review too bad but PM me and I will be glad to try to elaborate more and include any other data I have.
I have contacted Jim at Clark Custom Guns about reviewing a 460 Rowland conversion kit also.
I have not sent the pistols back yet. I MAY wind up with one of them if I can afford it.
Thanks so much for the kind words.
I would love to continue to explore heavy bullets in the .45 caliber. I have had some great results with the .45 Colt in a New Model Blackhawk.

Jitterbug
29th October 2008, 14:44
stlgreg

I notice you mention you have a Delta in the safe. What are your thoughts on using the Sprinco system with the 1911 10mm? Can you elaborate a bit more about it, pro's con's?

I just visited the Sprinco website and see they recommend the system for hot 10mm, but I don't see anything specifically for a 4.25" Dan Wesson 10mm, although the site does say to call for Colt Commander 4.25" clones. I suppose I should.

I've increased the recoil spring weight to 22 and 24#, using Wolff springs, but I'm still concerned about battering the gun with heavy loads and have pretty much quit them. Another suggestion I've seen is replacing the firing pin stop with an EGW square bottomed one, but I'm not sure if that hasn't already been done on the DW.

I'm a 1911 noob...it's a work in progress. But nonetheless love the platform and the venerable .45acp, but would like to get up into the Rowland range with a 1911. Without breaking me or the gun.

Great thread and I'm checking the site everyday waiting for John to release the next E-zine with Hunters article. Huh...I just went to check the spelling on E-zine and noticed it was there...later.

Jitterbug
29th October 2008, 15:24
Nice job Hunter!

I don't know if I'd be too keen on the Laser grips, I did like the grips and black frame on the 10mm and I noticed the front site was tritium, adjustable night sites would work just fine for me.

That 325 flat point is interesting in the Rowland and it makes me wonder what could be done with a similar bullet from 250-300 grain. Increasing velocity and working towards penetration for a good woods load. Say a 250-275 grain doing around 1100-1200 fps or so.

Thanks for the review! Very nice guns and write up. Even though my name is on them too, this is probably about as close as I'll get to one...at least for now.

Hunter
29th October 2008, 15:34
Thank you for the kind words.
I believe the 250gr .452 bullet would work great in the 460 Rowland but I did not have that mold on hand to try.
I am with you on the laser grips, I prefer the Starburst stocks to be sure.

Jitterbug
29th October 2008, 15:52
Your welcome.

Yes the Starburst's look very sharp.

I think FMJ Flat point bullet could work good too, if leading was a problem but I'm not sure if any one makes one in that weight range. I do know Double tap has a 230 grain FMJ-Flat point in it's lineup, but I've never tried it.

Bearbait in NM
29th October 2008, 19:59
Hunter,

I won't pester you with PM's about loads until I have had a chance to work some up, with what you posted. I may even play with PP and LS with heavier bullets.

Jitter,

I am currently running 250 .452 XTP's as my go to load right now. At 1050 to 1100 fps, I am not seeing any problems, yet. Even at 1100 fps, things seem easier on the gun than 230's at 1350. But, 1100 seems to me to be the top end with the 250 XTP. I don't think 1200 is possible with the 250 or 275's. With lead bullets you can get a little more horse power, so your mileage may vary.

I actually have a nice recipe with the Winchester 230 JFP (I think they call it fully encapsulated) and I too think that it looks like a pretty good bullet for the platform. Last time I ordered bullets from Midway, I could not find them in stock. So I have not had a chance to test them in medium, but they do "look" like they might perform well. The bullet does have a reasonable meplat area, not quite an LBT style lead bullet, but certainly better than a FMJ. But, I think this bullet style needs medium testing. The same with .452 Colt bullets, as they may not be designed for Rowland velocities. The 250 XTP, non-mag does penetrate better than the 230 XTP's that I have tested, but I can still get the jacket to seperate.

When I get some time after my hunt next week (where my Rowland will be with me), I have some Cast Performance 265, 300 and 335's that I want to test. I think I have a few Beartooth 255's, as well. Hunter has my interest here. I know what the bullets can do in a hot 45 Colt or 454, I will be curious as to feeding and functioning in the 1911. I also want to check to see how badly the comp gets leaded, and how drastic the sight adjustments become. I did play with some lead 255's with an earlier Clark Conversion, but that was quite a few years ago, and I think I want to revisit with some of what I have learned in that same time frame.

Craig

Jitterbug
30th October 2008, 10:35
Bearbait

Thanks for the info. A 230 grain at 1350 generates some very impressive energy figures, of course the other side of that coin as you point out is how the bullet holds up in medium testing. If you can get that kind of velocity it makes me wonder what could be done with a hardcast of the same weight. Then again feed and function if such a bullet exists. I know Beartooth and other's make some reportedly fine cast bullets so something along those lines might possibly be available.

If and when I can go with the Rowland my goal is to get something that will outperform the 10mm 200 grain in a 1911 platform for a trail/woods gun out here in the west.

stlgreg
31st October 2008, 10:17
Hunter, the article is great! I certainly hope Wilson sells many of the 460 Rowland pistols. Does Wilson provide any information on not using a comp? Also, did you measure the barrel link?

Jitterbug, the Delta has never been fired. I don’t even have any 10mm ammo as a deterrent to ever firing the pistol. The Sprinco definitely softens “felt recoil” with the 460. The only issue I have had with the Sprinco and the Clark conversion was assembly and disassembly. The Sprinco is not a two piece rod. Tolerances are fairly tight between the comp and the guide rod. Manipulating the bushing, barrel, and guide the first couple of times with the 24 lb recoil spring was a test of grit. The 22lb spring has made life 2 pounds easier, as has experience. I have put my Rowland barrel, slide, and Sprinco aside until my frame arrives.

Hunter
31st October 2008, 11:56
Thanks.
Wilson did not give me any information on shooting the .460 Rowland without a comp but Johnny Rowland told me it is similar to .45 Automatic recoil.
I did not measure the link but I can get the specs for you.

I spoke with Wilson and it is a standard link they start with. Since each pistol is hand built that could change (as some other measurments) to get the correct overall fit.

Jitterbug
31st October 2008, 12:24
stlgreg

Thanks for the additional info on the Sprinco.

Wow and unfired Delta! I can understand that, but doubt I'd have that kind of discipline.

Good luck with your build. And please keep us posted when you get back to work on the Rowland.

Bearbait in NM
31st October 2008, 12:49
Hunter's statement about being hand built is something that you need to consider as an important component here. The drop in kits work, and all that I have had have worked, but I can guarantee that any drop-in whatever is never gonna be optimized. The folks at Clark told me all kits are fitted to a single Kimber frame, that they have in house. Something to consider. Man, I wise I had 3k laying around. I'm off to chase critters for a week, my 460 at my side........

Craig

stlgreg
11th March 2009, 13:42
My Caspian frame arrived about two months after the end of deer season here in Missouri. I now have a fully dedicated and fitted Franken 460 Rowland. I used Ed Brown, Sprinco, Cylinder and Slide, and Wilson internals. I have achieved a consistent trigger pull of 4.0 pounds. I have tried Unique, AA#7, and Power Pistol for my load development and think I will stick with the Power Pistol and Hornady XTP 200 grain bullets. Some of the people at the range are showing some interest in the Rowland. Now I need to honestly shoot better. I am getting 2-3.25 inch groups at 25 yards but the pistol is capable of better than I am at this point. A friend and a Ransom rest proved this. I can think of many more unpleasant way to pass time other than shooting!