New Sport Pistol powder in 45acp.

Toprudder

Be vewy vewy qwiet.
Life Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Joined
Jan 16, 2017
Messages
4,007
Location
Raleigh
Rating - 100%
81   0   0
Decided to try out the new Sport Pistol powder from Alliant, in 45acp.

I went through my normal process of working up loads, using plated 200gn and 230gn RN bullets. With the 200gn bullets (seated to 1.245") I had a charge range of 5.4 to 6.2, and with the 230gn bullets (seated to 1.260") a range of 4.8 to 5.6. For my initial loads, I used large primer brass and Winchester WLP primers. Nothing out of the ordinary during the testing, except I noticed the standard deviation was not as good as I was hoping, anywhere from 24.0 to 48.3.

Then I moved to further testing, to compare results with various primer types. The first batches were 200gn bullets and 6.2gn powder, using Winchester WLP and CCI-300 large primers, along with Winchester WSP, Winchester WSPM, CCI-500, and CCI-550 primers. The results were not what I expected. There was a very large difference in velocity between the WLP and WSP primers, nearly 200fps. Also, the CCI-550 small magnums were actually slower than the CCI-500 small regular primers. I thought I must have made a mistake when I labeled the rounds, and got them mixed up. So, I made yet another batch and was careful to check drop weights and properly label/mark the primers. I also loaded two different lots of CCI-550 primers. Here is what I got:

RMR 200gn RN bullets, seated to 1.245", 6.2gn Sport Pistol powder. 10 rounds each. Measured with a Labradar, outdoor range with target at 25 yards.

Winchester WLP, 797fps, 40.2sd, 132.7es.
Winchester WSP, 545.2fps, 66.6sd, 224es. (first round did not eject).
Winchester WSPM, 839.8fps, 49.9sd, 146.7es.
CCI-500, 746.0fps, 63.8sd, 206.1es.
CCI-550 Lot# E01V22, 682.8fps, 65.6sd, 219.5es.
CCI-550 Lot# H07V42, 731.3fps, 76.1sd, 247.8es.
Rem 6.5, 713.1fps, 52.7sd, 163.8es. (Remington small rifle primers)

Clearly, this powder is sensitive to primer types, more than any other powder I have tried. But I have to believe that the large extreme spreads may possibly be from case position sensitivity, as the powder does not completely fill the empty space in the case when the bullet is seated. I will do more testing in 38spl to see if this is the case, doing my usual powder-forward test (hold the gun barrel-down before bringing it up on target).

I initially tested the loads at an indoor range with a Labradar, and thought that the ceiling baffles may have been causing problems with the signal reflecting back from the bullets. So, I tested with my Caldwell optical chrono at the outdoor range, along with the Labradar for the final measurements listed above.

Since I was initially having doubts about the validity of the chrono readings, I have decided that in the future I will have a known load that I will use as a control group, to verify the test setup, before I test any unknown loads.
 
Last edited:
So it falls somewhere around Ramshot Silhouette between TG and WST.........that's not a bad gap to fill for Alliant but I don't like powders with case positional or primer sensitivity at all. That's one thing I liked about IMR target over TG - similar speeds, much less case positional sensitivity and it just works.
 
So it falls somewhere around Ramshot Silhouette between TG and WST.........that's not a bad gap to fill for Alliant but I don't like powders with case positional or primer sensitivity at all. That's one thing I liked about IMR target over TG - similar speeds, much less case positional sensitivity and it just works.
I have a pound of IMR Target that I have not tried yet. How well does it measure?

I noticed in Alliant’s information that Sport Pistol is compatible with coated bullets - it isn’t supposed to react with the coating (like Titegroup is known to do).
 
I have a pound of IMR Target that I have not tried yet. How well does it measure?

I noticed in Alliant’s information that Sport Pistol is compatible with coated bullets - it isn’t supposed to react with the coating (like Titegroup is known to do).

I use mine in a Lee PPM and the AutoDisk and it works just like any other good pistol powder - one of the "features" is that it meters easily although i have read stuff to the contrary online I have only experienced accurate metering.
 
Sport pistol is fairly close to VV N320 in burn speed and for loading purposes uses very similar charge weights. Its pretty popular for competitive shooters with 9mm looking for a powder as good as N320 without the cost of N320. Maybe .45 isn't its strong suit. I burned through a pound of it a year or so ago, didn't love it or hate it, but it worked fine and I didn't notice any wild swings over the chrono, but that was only with 9mm.


I have a pound of IMR Target that I have not tried yet. How well does it measure?

I got a lb or Target the same time I got the sport pistol and I liked it enough to buy another lb so Im sure I liked it as much if not more than sport pistol. Very consistent metering and loads.
 
I’ll have to try it out in 9mm and see how it does. I will also add that it was very dirty, but I suspect that may have to do with the slower velocity rounds not having enough pressure to expand the brass and form a gas seal.

It was interesting that I eventually got to the point that I could feel the recoil from each shot and have a good guess on the velocity, before it registered on the chrono. I was usually within 30fps.
 
I was able to make it to the range to do some more testing with Sport Pistol.

I made up some 45acp test rounds, all using 6.2gn powder, 200gn plated bullets, and WLP primers. I used my Chargemaster to dispense the powder, so the loads were reasonably uniform. I shot 10 rounds, the first 5 were “powder forward”, I held the gun barrel-down before shooting. The last 5 were powder rear.

The overall stats for all 10 shots were 828.9 avg, 74.0sd, 204.8es.

The first 5, powder forward: 761.6 avg, 23.8sd, 63.0es.

The last 5, powder rear: 895.8 avg, 22.9sd, 59.0es.

Difference between forward/rear = 134.2 fps.

If not for the case-position sensitivity, the stats are acceptable, but overall they are not, IMHO.

I also made some test loads in 357 mag, were I saw an average of about 85 fps difference between forward/rear. I’ve seen a lot worse powders. I suspect the heavy roll crimp helped mitigate the position sensitivity.
 
I made up some more test loads. This time, I ran 230gn bullets instead of 200, thinking that with the bullet seated deeper in the case, the neck tension would be greater and might help the results. I made up a batch with Winchester large primers, and another with Win small primers. This time, I used all Speer brass, for both size primers.

At the same time, I made up a batch each of my two favorite powders for 45acp - Clays, and BE86, using 200gn plated RMR bullets. Both using Speer large primer brass and Win large primers.

I made 15 rounds of each batch, and when I tested them, I ran 5 shots from a level position, then I ran 5 powder forward (starting with the barrel down) and the last 5 were powder rear (starting with the barrel up).

Sport Pistol 5.4gn, Xtreme 230 plated bullets, seated to 1.260".
Win WLP primers
All 15 shots - 768.6avg, 53.7sd, 178.8es
Level - 768.8avg, 27.5sd, 70.0es
Forward - 712.0avg, 35.8sd, 100.0es
Rear - 824.8avg, 11.4sd, 31.0es

Sport Pistol and WLP primers, forward/rear difference - 112.8fps

Sport Pistol 5.4gn, Xtreme 230 plated bullets, seated to 1.260".
Win WSP primers
All 15 shots - 683.0avg, 71.1sd, 224.0es
Level - 676.8avg, 18.7sd, 44.0es
Forward - 620.8avg, 46.8sd, 123.0es
Rear - 751.6avg, 66.1sd, 155es

Sport Pistol and WSP primers, forward/rear difference - 130.8fps

Average velocity difference between large/small primers
Powder level - 92.0fps
Powder Forward - 91.2fps
Powder Rear - 73.2fps

Conclusion is that the heavier 230gn bullets showed less, but still significant, velocity differences than the lighter 200gn bullets.
The extreme spreads were better with the heavier bullets.
Overall, large primers showed better extreme spreads than the small primers.

For comparison, I ran two other powders with the 200gn bullets.

BE86 6.7gn, RMR 200 RN plated, seated to 1.245"
Win LP primers
All 15 shots - 831.8avg, 21.0sd, 67.8es (not bad for powder forward/rear test).
Level - 820.8avg, 4.9sd, 12.0es
Forward - 818.4avg, 18.9sd, 42.0es
Rear - 856.2avg, 6.1sd, 16.0es.

BE86 Powder foward/rear difference - 37.8fps

Clays 4.6gn, RMR 200 RN plated, seated to 1.245"
Win LP primers
Overall - 759.5avg, 28.0sd, 93.3es
Level - 760.0avg, 12.8sd, 33.0es
Forward - 725.5avg, 17.1sd, 40.0es
Rear - 786.4avg, 11.4sd, 28.0es

Clays Powder forward/rear difference - 60.9fps


Before I shot any of the above, I ran my control group loads of 40 S&W, and was within 4 fps of the last time I shot them. Today was about 10 degrees warmer, which may account for the difference. Unseasonable weather here, 72F in the middle of the afternoon.

I'm just not liking the Sport Pistol powder for 45acp. I think I will move on to 9mm and 40S&W to see how it performs with those calibers. I think the higher pressure and smaller case volumes will improve things.
 
A little more information on Sport Pistol, but this time in 9mm for comparison.

RMR 115 RN Plated, Winchester small pistol primers, seated to 1.145”. Shot from Witness Elite 4.75” barrel. 10 shots each.

4.3gn, 1075fps, 35.0sd, 94.3es
4.5gn, 1113fps, 18.3sd, 65.0es
4.7gn, 1154fps, 14.0sd, 46.3es
4.8gn, 1177fps, 9.2sd, 22.5es.

It looks like Sport Pistol is much happier at the higher pressure.

Just for my own curiosity, I made a total of 20 rounds of the 4.5gn charge. The 10 above were all shot from level, as normal. The other 10 I used to do a powder forward test, below are the results. (5 powder forward, 5 powder rear)

Forward: 1099fps, 18.0sd, 46.0es
Rear: 1153fps, 8.3sd, 22.0es.

So, there is some position sensitivity, but not enough to raise any concern. Looks like I will be using up the rest in 9mm.
 
Good info on testing primers and loads. With the comments regarding larger than expected Standard Deviation an/or extreme (Observed) spread, there is another factor to consider. The other factor is ambient temperatures In Precision long long range rifle, some powders are marked as "Extreme" ( I think) which is code for temperature stabilized , summer to winter.
I have not reading anything about how temperature sensitive pistol powders are, but it may be a factor. I notice on my Chronograph software and other ballistics calculators, they always list temperature in the formulas.
 
Good info on testing primers and loads. With the comments regarding larger than expected Standard Deviation an/or extreme (Observed) spread, there is another factor to consider. The other factor is ambient temperatures In Precision long long range rifle, some powders are marked as "Extreme" ( I think) which is code for temperature stabilized , summer to winter.
I have not reading anything about how temperature sensitive pistol powders are, but it may be a factor. I notice on my Chronograph software and other ballistics calculators, they always list temperature in the formulas.
Good point about the temp, but in my case they were all fired under the same conditions. The only way I believe the temperature could have affected the results was by the chamber getting hot and heating up the cartridge, but I don’t believe the chamber got that hot, or the cartridge was in the chamber long enough, for that to have been a factor.

Temperature is in the ballistics equations because it affects air density, and therefore aerodynamic drag.
 
Back
Top Bottom