Thanks again for the comments. To minimize confusion, I'm not looking for "heavy" loads as in heavy bullets, but rather "higher-pressure" loads which could apply to heavy or lightweight bullets. The example given for the W231 data I posted was from published data for 45 Colt for T/C and was all that I could find for the 185gr. Again, I prefer the slower powders, too. My hope is that someone here can point me to articles like the Lee Martin article like Tim did above. (It just didn't have what I was looking for.). There probably aren't many articles published on this topic, so I wasn't sure how builders were arriving at their data and if they share it. The questions posed as to whether they were using rifle data or pistol data that's +10% over (for 30,000psi) for slow powders, or... I'm just trying to understand. Flattened primers, web stretch, chronograph result plots, and sticky extractions are just some tale-tell signs, but equally important is which primer to use for the starting point. Everyone thinks magnum primers only, but then I learn that standard primers also work but dramatically lowers the pressure, too. Anyway, thanks for the advice.
The idea for me is to create a flat-shooting setup that's accurate over a fairly long range that requires minimal rear sight elevation adjustment. I've been there and done that with several setups and cartridges in IHMSA, but since I got out, I was wanting to do something similar with a 45 Colt but in a gun with the flexibility that only a 45 Colt brings. I already have this in 44 Mag, but then I thought,... why not a 45 Colt?! Didn't one of the Kennedy brothers say something along those lines? So the beauty is that, if I can pull this off, it won't be a FA or a custom T/C or an XP, but would be a Ruger sporting a 10" in five-cylinder 45 Colt. A screaming 185gr JHP just sounds so much better. If this works and I get bullet pull, then I'd go up to 200gr with a crimp groove or hard cast. I mean, what's left to do with revolvers?