Is Richard Lee correct? wrt Pistol

[orangeusa]

I have read Lees book (and others) a few times. Okay I couldn't find anything else to read...

In the 2nd edition he says that higher velocity, lighter bullets will give better accuracy. Yet later he says to use minimum loads as these will give better accuracy.

I don't bench rest and don't chrono.

BOTTOM LINE:
But have you found much difference in pistol ammo wrt accuracy? I have seen some, but seems to be second order compared to the shooter.

.

[MR_X]

I have read that some competitors use lighter bullets because they have flatter trajectories when loaded in open guns which makes sense.

[J-cat]

People who claim that flatter trajectory of lighter/faster bullets improves their accuracy in competition are full of cow dung.

[MR_X]

People who claim that flatter trajectory of lighter/faster bullets improves their accuracy in competition are full of cow dung.

Never tried it. I was just posting from some reading I have done. I do get better accuracy out of my 1911s with 185s and 200s than 230 but that could be a number of other factors. To me to be honest it all depends on the gun, load and shooter.

[Jimi Jah]

Lighter bullets are more affected by wind.

[orangeusa]

Lighter bullets are more affected by wind.

Not at 15 yards I kept this with respect to pistol only. Rifle is very different and with my eyes, not my thing..

I just couldn't figure out what Lee was trying to say.

My experience wrt semi-auto and revolvers is that there might be a small difference (using published loads) but grouping off hand shooting is pretty much the same.

My gut feel is that lighter loads recoil less and the shooter has less of a flinch.

.

[orangeusa]

People who claim that flatter trajectory of lighter/faster bullets improves their accuracy in competition are full of cow dung.

Tell us how you really feel. Lolz.

[J-cat]

Lighter faster is only better, in terms of trajectory, when you're competing with a 9mm carbine at 100 yards.

[klewan]

He's trying to dissuade you from starting at the maximum load and going up from there. You know, the magnum guys and their need for the biggest bang.

The magnum guys will never figure out the mid level loads tend to be more accurate than the almost blow up the gun loads.

[orangeusa]

He's trying to dissuade you from starting at the maximum load and going up from there. You know, the magnum guys and their need for the biggest bang.

The magnum guys will never figure out the mid level loads tend to be more accurate than the almost blow up the gun loads.

Yeah I think you are right. And I typically go in between max and starting and stay there.
My opinion is if you want a bigger bang - get a different caliber.

BTW - 44mag WILL cure a flinch. I'm not kidding.

.

[8mmFMJ]

there is a line in the sand. on one side is lighter bullet weight/less recoil/instability, on the other side is heavy bullet/heavier recoil/stability. many points in between for you to choose loads.

in 15 yard match shooting, lighter recoil allows for faster re-acquisition of targets. in 15 yard shooting bullet weight is not needed to reach out and wind is not much of an issue.

this is fast match shooting, not loading for home defense....so in choosing a load first decide your target distance and purpose for the round.

[TomReloaded]

In the same gun with 2 barrels (m&p 9 and 40) my most accurate and lowest recoil loads are 180gr in 40, loaded under min.

9mm stovepipes with 124s with more recoil than a 180gr 40.

Hot 135gr in 40 is uselessly inaccurate. Any 9 load is middle ground.

Thats just for my gun, but what lee said does not apply at all in this case.

[sofbak]

As far as accuracy goes, it boils down to tuning the load to the vibration of the gun/barrel. You want the load to "time" the vibration such that the gun/barrel is in the "neutral" position when the bullet exits the muzzle. Pretty simple.

WRT to recoil, I have read (nad verified empirically) that to reduce recoil go to a heavier bullet and a faster burning powder and/or smaller powder charge.

Most people erroneously assume that the bullet weight has a significant influence on recoil. It doesn't.. The most significant influence on recoil is the volume of hot gas escaping from the barrel behind the bullet.

And with a heavier bullet and smaller charge, the amount of hot gas is less. Additionally, with a faster burning powder, the acceleration of the bullet and the gas behind it will be just a small bit less when the bullet leaves the muzzle. thus less recoil.

Think of it like a jet engine. The less gas being pushed out the back, the less thrust.

TL's observations below, support this:

In the same gun with 2 barrels (m&p 9 and 40) my most accurate and lowest recoil loads are 180gr in 40, loaded under min.

9mm stovepipes with 124s with more recoil than a 180gr 40.

Hot 135gr in 40 is uselessly inaccurate. Any 9 load is middle ground.

Thats just for my gun, but what lee said does not apply at all in this case.

[klewan]

I've read energy= mass times velocity squared. So the speed increase is the big recoil producer, which takes more gas to push the bullet. And you include the powder weight with the bullet to do the formula.

[Cowboy T]

Well, for .45 ACP, I don't do competition (yet), but I can sure easily shoot my 200gr cast boolit load pretty quickly in both a 1911 and a Glock 21. Oh, and actually hit the target, too. :-) My load happens to be right at max in the Lyman book for Titegroup powder.

Revolvers, I find that it's a bit more true about starting loads due to there not being a slide-action to absorb some of that recoil. So, for practice, I'll shoot a light .38 Special load, and it seems to transfer pretty well to shooting the heavier .357M loads.

It also matters how well you deal with recoil. Can't get around the laws of physics, not suggesting otherwise, but some people simply do handle it better than others.