Remington .45Colt / 225gr. semi-wadcutter (Opinions)

[Knuckles]

Hi' gang, Remington offers a 225grain semi-wadcutter that goes 960fps and hits just under 500ft-lbs.
My question is this; what type of bullet does Remington use?
Is it by chance the hard cast like the 255gr. Kieth bullet?
It feels like a pretty stout round in the hand... Opinions?

knuckles

 

[Enigma]

I'm sure it's a pure lead (or very nearly so) swaged bullet. You don't want a really hard bullet for mild velocities like that. A properly fitting, properly lubed swaged lead bullet can be driven much faster than that without leading.

Emphasis is on proper fit and lube.

 

[WESHOOT2]

Swaged.

Hard enough for deer.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

I guess your talking 45 colt.

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/default.aspx?productNumber=697960

Could be a good 300 yard deer round if you hold enough 'up'? At least according to a few people around here. :roll: :roll: :roll: :wink: :wink:

...Jimbo

 

[WESHOOT2]

Maybe better stated: "adequate"?

Hell, I can't even see 300 yds any more......

 

[B.Roberts]

It is a great round. Just about my favorite factory round for the .45.

 

[Knuckles]

It seems to be on par with all the 'standard pressure-heavy Colt' ammo that's out there ballistics wise.

As I burned up a box in my 4" Redhawk a while back, I was thinking that it had a pretty good push on the hand if you know what I mean... it ain't no weeny-cowboy round that's for sure.

Ain't no Magnum either!

 

[DGW1949]

Hi' gang, Remington offers a 225grain semi-wadcutter that goes 960fps and hits just under 500ft-lbs.
My question is this; what type of bullet does Remington use?
Is it by chance the hard cast like the 255gr. Kieth bullet?
It feels like a pretty stout round in the hand... Opinions?

knuckles

"Opinions?".... here's mine;
Personaly, I wouldn't give up 25-30 grains of bullet-weight just to get an (estimated)additional 90 FPS out of a 45LC revolver.
My reasons is;
The 45LC service load has allways performed much better for me than it's paper balistics suggest. I attribute that to the "ka-thump" provided by it's big/heavy bullet.
If Remington's slightly lighter/faster bullet serves a purpose at all, it must be as a SD round. For that though, one can fairly-easily get a 225 lead bullet up to 950 out of a full-size 1911, have 2 or 3 additional shots, and a much-faster reload.

That's all I know about that.

DGW

 

[WESHOOT2]

I can suggest a 252g LSWC can be launched from a couple of my 1911s at 980fps.



Yes, actual weight of my bullet is 252g, not a typo.

 

[J Miller]

WAY back in the late 60s a fellow by the name of Lee Juras came out with Super Vel ammo. His ammo used lighter bullets at higher than normal velocities. It's all his fault, he started the trend.

So around the mid to late 70s Winchester, Remington and Federal came out with the 225gr .45 Colt ammo. Prior to this all you could get was the W-W 255gr and R-P 250gr lead ammo.
Their lighter faster ammo was not the best answer to the question.
As as been stated above the 225gr bullets are nothing but a 45 ACP bullet stuck in the end of a Colt case and pushed at the same velocity. You don't really think these loads reach 960 FPS do you? Not hardly.

The R-P 225gr SWC and the F-C 225gr L-SWC-HP were and are solutions to non existent problems. Both would have been super had they weighed 250grs, but at 225grs they are a joke.

I've shot them all and the only load that gives any decent accuracy from my guns is the W-W STHP. And I'm not that impressed with it.

If W-W, R-P or F-C would come out with a 250-255gr SWC at 860fps I'd buy it in a heart beat.
That would be all you'd need for 97% of what you need a big bore revolver for.

Joe

 

[Knuckles]

WAY back in the late 60s a fellow by the name of Lee Juras came out with Super Vel ammo. His ammo used lighter bullets at higher than normal velocities. It's all his fault, he started the trend.

So around the mid to late 70s Winchester, Remington and Federal came out with the 225gr .45 Colt ammo. Prior to this all you could get was the W-W 255gr and R-P 250gr lead ammo.
Their lighter faster ammo was not the best answer to the question.
As as been stated above the 225gr bullets are nothing but a 45 ACP bullet stuck in the end of a Colt case and pushed at the same velocity. You don't really think these loads reach 960 FPS do you? Not hardly.

The R-P 225gr SWC and the F-C 225gr L-SWC-HP were and are solutions to non existent problems. Both would have been super had they weighed 250grs, but at 225grs they are a joke.

I've shot them all and the only load that gives any decent accuracy from my guns is the W-W STHP. And I'm not that impressed with it.

If W-W, R-P or F-C would come out with a 250-255gr SWC at 860fps I'd buy it in a heart beat.
That would be all you'd need for 97% of what you need a big bore revolver for.

Joe

Can you back up the statement I hi-lighted in red?

 

[J Miller]

Do I have to?

Just for a moment think about how the factories come up with their velocities.
They use SAAMI spec test barrels with SAAMI spec chambers in a Universal Receiver. Most of them in use today are vented. But 10 to 15 years ago they were solid test barrels and yet they still claimed the same velocity.
That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

OK, so lets say in that test barrel actually did reach 960 feet per second. So that's what they tell us.

But shoot that load in real genuine revolvers with all their tolerances and the velocities will almost always be lower.
I do not have a chronograph, but enough folks on the forums I'm on that do have chronographs have reported back to this effect that I take it as truth.

If your gun actually matches the claimed velocity then it's an unusual gun.

Joe

 

[DGW1949]

Then there's this;
Most usualy, the ammo makers base their velocity figures on testing done with a "test barrel" which is attached to a fixture/tool, which is often refered to as a "universal reciever".
Some published loads in some loading-manuals use a simular device, but some are actualy done by shooting ammo through a real gun. If that's the case, then the questions become....what barrel length did they use, what was that particular gun's BC-gap, throat specs, barrel specs, twist rate, and does it's forcing cone match the one in yours?
All of the above effects the velocity of any given load. That, and often you'll find that when it comes to factory-ammo, there's also been a bit of optimism thrown in for marketing purposes.

You might find it interesting that one of my manuals list the results of testing which was done to determine the actual velocity of 45LC factory ammo. Taking the Remington 250 RNL "service load" as an example, it was found that it's actual velocity varied by 35 FPS when fired from two different Rugers and one Colt. The advertised velocity that Remington claimed could not be duplicated in either of the two Rugers, even though one of those had the longest barrel (7-1/2") of the three test guns.
That same manual also has the results of other testing done with actual guns that involved about any caliber that you care to name...and all with simular findings.

What all that tells me is that what Joe Miller said (that is "highlighted in red") is probably a lot closer to being "right" than is the published figures of this or that factory ammo.

Just sayin'.

DGW

 

[Knuckles]

I wanted to learn what I could about the for-mentioned Remington load... not trying to insult anyone with my posts, if I came across in a negative way I apologize.

I'm always looking for the complete answer... so if I ask someone to expound on there info' it is not sarcasm.

We cool... J. Miller ? 8)

BYW... the emotional response surprises me regarding factory ammo, and I really DID think the factory ballistics were legit' (sucker?) :?

 

[TRanger]

Can you back up the statement I hi-lighted in red?

I chronographed a box of these Remington loads about fifteen years ago. Actual velocity was well below advertised speed. If I recall correctly at this late date, it was around 825 fps from a 5 1/2 inch Colt. Their 200 grain .44 Special, advertised at 1010 fps, was also about 200 fps below specs. Not unusual. Perhaps they shot it out of a very long barrel at the factory.

 

[Knuckles]

WELL!... so much for that rnd!

Thanks to all who posted, I'm convinced... I'll get my loader set up one of these days... but until then, I'll stick with Double Tap's 255/Kieth Standard load. :wink:

 

[TRanger]

To be fair, Knuckles; I've killed a couple of deer, that were targets of opportunity, with the standard Winchester 255 grain lead factory slug. It worked just fine. I suspect the 225 grain Remington bullet would have done the same.

 

[J Miller]

I wanted to learn what I could about the for-mentioned Remington load... not trying to insult anyone with my posts, if I came across in a negative way I apologize.

I'm always looking for the complete answer... so if I ask someone to expound on there info' it is not sarcasm.

We cool... J. Miller ? 8)

BYW... the emotional response surprises me regarding factory ammo, and I really DID think the factory ballistics were legit' (sucker?) :?

knuckles,

No problems at all.

I'd be thrilled if I could get the claimed velocities from factory ammo. But ..... well, there is just sooooooo many variables.

They go bang the bullet goes zip and the target / critter gets a hole in it. That's what really counts.

Joe

 

[A. Wayne]

I thank all who provided info on the bullet type as well as the velocity, truth in advertising. While I didn't pose any questions, I still learn much while reading. In the end I think this sums it up:

They go bang the bullet goes zip and the target / critter gets a hole in it. That's what really counts.

 

[Knuckles]

I thank all who provided info on the bullet type as well as the velocity, truth in advertising. While I didn't pose any questions, I still learn much while reading. In the end I think this sums it up:

They go bang the bullet goes zip and the target / critter gets a hole in it. That's what really counts.

Hey'... someone else liked my thread... that's good!