Test Loads for 9mm... Pressure Signs

[Sinjin]

Hello, everyone. First post. I just recently started casting boolits for my 9mm XDm, and this forum is a real find! I'm having some difficulties and am hoping that some of the experienced boolit casters here may be able to help.

I'm using a Lee TL356-124-TC mold, HP38 and mixed brass. I know mixed brass is not recommended, but I did measure and sort by case length. It was my hope that I could arrive at an OAL that would provide sufficient tolerance for some variation in case length.

I loaded and fired test rounds (hand fed) with charges ranging from 3.5 to 4.5, and started seeing flat primers, intermittently, at around 3.9 or 4.0, which was sooner that I expected. I presume I'm getting pressure spikes, and am trying to identify and eliminiate the cause. I read, in multiple places, that 9mm can be very sensitive to the depth that the bullet is seated, and am currently speculating that my boolits are seated too deeply. I don't think that I'm compressing the powder, but my measurements suggest that there is very little spare room in the case, especially for the larger test loads. The only thing I can think to do, at this point, is try a powder with a lower VMD, like HS-6 or WSF, to allow extra room in the case for case length tolerance and set back during feeding. Am I on the right track, here? Has anyone else shooting 124gr or bigger boolits in 9mm had trouble with HP38?

I had to seat the boolit so that the base of the cone was at, or even slightly below, the rim of the case in order to insure that the cartridge would chamber reliably in my XDm. Is this typical, or am I doing something wrong? I've read that pressure can spike if 9mm boolits are seated too deeply. I've also read that pressure can spike if boolits are seated too close to the rifling. Given the size of the charge I want to use, the density of my power, the restricted volume of the case, and my chambering issues, I feel like I'm falling short of having any spare room for adjustment. Is this a common dilemma when loading cast for 9mm, or, again, am I doing something wrong or missing something?

TIA,
Sinjin

[Ricochet]

OAL length measurements are only useful when comparing bullets of the same shape. The problem with pressure is the volume in the case, which is going to be determined by where the base of the bullet is inside the case. I use that boolit in 9mm, and I find it generally has to be seated right with the truncated cone ogive starting at the case mouth to let the cartridges chamber properly. Compare the outline of a rounded nose style 9mm bullet and this TC boolit and I think you'll see that the ogive of the round nose extends outside the outline of the truncated cone. That means more metal outside the case at a given OAL, thus more room inside the case. You may have to back off a bit on loads developed for the round nose to use them with the truncated cone.

[KYCaster]

"The only thing I can think to do, at this point, is try a powder with a lower VMD, like HS-6 or WSF, to allow extra room in the case for case length tolerance and set back during feeding. Am I on the right track, here?"



If you're getting ANY set back at all, it's too much. It doesn't make any difference what powder you use, set back during feeding will increase the preasure.

Crimping over the ogive will make the situation much harder to control since you're depending on bullet pull friction rather than the crimp to prevent the set back.

You may find that the problem is intermittent because of the difference in hardness and thickness among brands of brass. I'd load several dummy rounds in each brand of case you have and run them through the gun to see if that will shed any light on the problem.

Good luck and be careful.
Jerry

[mike in co]

first all pistols are different. second with no oal listed not too much help to offer. third even if you shoot mixed cases , do you intial testing with sorted cases. buy a cheap lee case trimmer.

this maybe a place where the lee factory crimp die would be of help.

mike in co

[Echo]

When you discuss seating deeply so the round will chamber, are you speaking of chambering from the magazine, or dismounting the barrel and chambering by hand? My experience is that semi-auto pistols will slam the round home even if the boolit makes contact with the leade, and that is not necessarily a bad thing - it reduces endplay, making ignition more reliable.

Anyway, flat primers tell you to back off...

[KCSO]

The only thing flat primers will tell you is that the primers are flattening. I would rather try and measure case head expansion and you can't do that with mixed brass and used brass. You need to develop maximuum loads with new or once fired brass of the same headstamp and preferably lot run. Primers can flatten from too loose a pocket as quick as anything else, hence unless you have cases with exactly the same primer pocket tension you have no basis for comparison. Case head expansion can be measured IF all your cases are the same, same make, same lot number and same number of firings, I also seat the primers with a hand tool to try and judge the tension in the primer pocked. I try to use a factory fired case of the same headstamp as a comparator and will shooot for no more expansion than that case. Say if I am working up a load in a federal case i will use a federal factory HP for comparison.

[Sinjin]

Thanks to everyone for the feedback.

Ricochet, that makes perfect sense. So, is it safe to say that it might be impossible to safely achieve the same velocities, with a TC, that can be achieved with an RN, due to the loss of case volume.

KYCaster, I hand fed the cartridges through the ejection port for this initial round of testing, just to temporarily eliminate setback as a variable. But I did load a magazine and run them through the action by racking the slide, and then re-measured the length. Almost every round measured one or two thousandths shorter. Perhaps I'm under or over crimping them? I have read other posts in which people opined that one should only crimp just enough to remove the flare. If that is, in fact, correct, then isn't friciton between the sides of the bullet and the inside of the case the only thing preventing setback? Your recommendation to sort my cases and attempt to correlate the problem to the brand sounds like a good one. I'll do that as my next experiment.

Mike, I have both of those tools, but I haven't used the case trimmer yet. Opinions seem to differ on how important it is to trim pistol brass.

Echo, I was referring to inserting the round into the chamber of the dismounted barrel. If I understand you correctly, having the bullet contact the rifling when it chambers is not a problem? Others have advised me to avoid this condition, indicating that it can cause the pressure to go up dangerously.

KCSO, thanks for the input. I did not know that loose primer pockets could result in flattened primers. Where do you measure case head expansion? Just above the extractor groove? If, by "factory fired", you mean a case that was fired by the manufacturer of the brass, where does one obtain such a thing? FWIW, I'm not interested, at this time, in developing a maximum load. I am perplexed by the fact that the primer flattening, which I, perhaps wrongly, assumed was due to overpressure, occured at much smaller powder charges than I expected. I don't have any new brass on hand. For that matter, I can't really know for sure that the brass I purchased, which was advertised as once-fired, is what it was advertised to be.

[mike in co]

you still did not list an oal ......

[Linstrum]

Case length is of paramount importance in the 9mm Parabellum and nearly all other straight-sided rimless cartridges because they headspace on the case mouth. If the case is too short it could prevent the firing pin from striking the primer hard enough to set it off, and if the case is too long it might crimp the projectile in harder or prevent the bolt from going into battery.

I use Blue Dot in 9mm, although it is temperature sensitive with low pressure in real cold weather. I have also used Unique with good results, too.


rl626

[Ricochet]

The 9mm isn't a straight case, though. It's quite tapered. I'm not sure if it really does headspace on the case mouth. I do the "trial fitting" in a barrel removed from the pistol, in any case.

[mike in co]

Case length is of paramount importance in the 9mm Parabellum and nearly all other straight-sided rimless cartridges because they headspace on the case mouth. If the case is too short it could prevent the firing pin from striking the primer hard enough to set it off, and if the case is too long it might crimp the projectile in harder or prevent the bolt from going into battery.

I use Blue Dot in 9mm, although it is temperature sensitive with low pressure in real cold weather. I have also used Unique with good results, too.


rl626
technically you are right, in reality most primers are ignited from the case being held back by the extractor.
the crimp variation caused by varing case length will have some affect, but as others have said, case neck tension is a bigger factor.

i will not argue the points.....i simply taper my cases back to about one thou below seated dia.

i do have an m59 s&w that was hand fir to space on the mouth, but no other gun and i got plenty.

mike in co

[HORNET]

Sinjin, One thing you might not know is that flat primers occasionally can happen with mild loads and rimless straight cases, especially if you're NOT headspacing on the boolit. The firing pin drives everything forward in the chamber, creating clearance between the case head and the breech. The primer then ignites and can be moved backwards from the bottom of the pocket. The powder then ignites and the pressure drives the case back to the breech, flattening the primer. This is especially evident if primer pockets are a little (or lot) loose as KCSO mentioned in post 6.
Seat them so the boolit contacts the rifling and establishes the headspace, give them light crimp, and retry. You ight want to check some of the .45 ACP threads: same principle, different caliber. Just make sure that they'll feed seated that long.

[Sinjin]

you still did not list an oal ......

mike,

The OAL was 1.050.

[Sinjin]

... Seat them so the boolit contacts the rifling and establishes the headspace, give them light crimp, and retry. You ight want to check some of the .45 ACP threads: same principle, different caliber. Just make sure that they'll feed seated that long.

HORNET,

I did not know that. I think that technique would also provide a degree of insensitivity to case length. Just to be entirely clear, having the bullet in contact with the rifling is not dangerous?

[jeff423]

I've found that 1.158 OAL has worked well for me in both 115 gr and 125 gr FMJ and LRN bullets.

Jeff

[KYCaster]

HORNET,

I did not know that. I think that technique would also provide a degree of insensitivity to case length. Just to be entirely clear, having the bullet in contact with the rifling is not dangerous?


As long as you're not working near max pressure. It takes very little pressure to engrave the rifleing.

Jerry

[NickSS]

I use a lot of those TC bullets in my 9mm's and do not have any trouble with any of them. I generally seat the bullet to just before the TC tapper begins and mostly use unique powder with them. I load them to around 1150 fps in my Ruger P89 which is what I chronographed my load in but they work in my Glock, Taurus PT99, Baby Eagle, and Browning HP just fine too.

[mike in co]

can someone tell me the length of this boolit ?

thanks
mike in co

[9.3X62AL]

I don't have that mould, Mike.

I think VERY highly of the Lee truncated cone autopistol boolit designs. I use the conventionally-grooved designs in 9mm, 40/10mm, and 45 ACP. In all these calibers, a sweet spot for overall length seems to be with about .020" of boolit sidewall extending outside the case mouth. This gives an OAL in the 9mm of about 1.125". In several 9mm pistols, this gives very reliable feeding and plenty of magazine column clearance. Your OAL of 1.05" strikes me as being quite short for a bullet of 122-125 grains in weight, and may account for an over-pressure situation in your pistol.

I have never used HP-38, but have used a LOT of WW-231 in the 9mm, and the latter is considered to be very close in performance per grain in a given caliber to HP-38. 1999 data I have on hand from Winchester ammunition gives a start load with 124 grain lead bullets using WW-231 at 3.3 grains for 910 FPS and 23,800 psi, and a max load of 4.0 grains giving 1035 FPS and 32,900 psi. No OAL or bullet nomenclature is given beyond "124 gr Lead RN". In my experience, these loads can be increased cautiously--once a given boolit's working overall length is established. The above loads will function most pistols, though.

Summed up--I think your powder weights are reasonable, but your overall length needs to be extended.

[mike in co]

I don't have that mould, Mike.

I think VERY highly of the Lee truncated cone autopistol boolit designs. I use the conventionally-grooved designs in 9mm, 40/10mm, and 45 ACP. In all these calibers, a sweet spot for overall length seems to be with about .020" of boolit sidewall extending outside the case mouth. This gives an OAL in the 9mm of about 1.125". In several 9mm pistols, this gives very reliable feeding and plenty of magazine column clearance. Your OAL of 1.05" strikes me as being quite short for a bullet of 122-125 grains in weight, and may account for an over-pressure situation in your pistol.

I have never used HP-38, but have used a LOT of WW-231 in the 9mm, and the latter is considered to be very close in performance per grain in a given caliber to HP-38. 1999 data I have on hand from Winchester ammunition gives a start load with 124 grain lead bullets using WW-231 at 3.3 grains for 910 FPS and 23,800 psi, and a max load of 4.0 grains giving 1035 FPS and 32,900 psi. No OAL or bullet nomenclature is given beyond "124 gr Lead RN". In my experience, these loads can be increased cautiously--once a given boolit's working overall length is established. The above loads will function most pistols, though.

Summed up--I think your powder weights are reasonable, but your overall length needs to be extended.
al,
this is why i asked...i get 54k psi......way over max....but with a generic 124....whixh is why i need the actual boolit length.

me thinks there is a reason why he is seeing flat peimers!
where did the oal of 1.050 for this boolit come from and where did the reccomendation for hp38 powder and loads come from ???

its only about 1200 fps...but WAY TOO MUCH PRESSURE.

MIKE IN CO

[fecmech]

I don't know if he is using the Lee 120 with the lube groove or the tumble lube version but with the lube groove version 1.050 is not unreasonable, let me explain. I'm going by data in the Lyman cast bullet handbook and measurements given to me by owners of the Lyman 356402.
The Lee 120 tc has the same weight and same caliber size bearing area as 356402 BUT it is not as long (read as "pointy"). The Lyman manual calls for an oal of 1.110" with their data. If the Lee 121 TC is loaded to 1.048 you have the same amount of bullet inside the case as the 356402 at 1.110" and the same weight. You should therfore in my estimation be pretty close pressure wize also.
I could load that bullet no longer than 1.065 without it jamming into the rifling of my Browning HP which would make it difficult to unload an unfired round. Using that bullet and 1.065 oal I never had any trouble with max loads of any number of different powders and I tried a bunch.
If he is talking about the Tumble lube version I don't have any measurements on that one, but it doesn't look a whole lot different from pictures.

[mike in co]

lee says the boolit is 0.580 long.
with an oal of 1.050 and
3.5 of hp38 est press/vel is :23.0kpsi/ 991 fps
4.0........................................:37.4kp si/1092 fps
4.5........................................:49.9kp si/1187 fps

as you can see a little powder makes a big diff....and yes at 4.0 you would be seeing pressure signs...lol and before.....

this is not a safe load....above 3.8 with this oal....generic data from quickload.

this is based on fairly soft lead, if these are water dropped and another 2kpsi......
STILL WONDER WHERE YOU CAME UP WITH THIS LOAD DATA

mike

[Sinjin]

9.3x62AL, thanks for the input. I was lead to believe that W231 and HP-38 were, in fact, the exact same powder.

mike, I measured the bullet's length at 0.590. The length of the cone is 0.290. FWIW, the bullet is seated just the way NickSS describes above, with the case mouth just below the base of the cone.

Sanity check: 0.750 (case) + 0.290 (cone) + 0.020 (9.3X62AL's recommendation) = 1.060. My cases were .005-.010 shorter than that, so my OAL should be just about right. I originally arrived at that OAL by using a bullet slip-fit into an empty case as a gauge to measure the max OAL of my actual chamber. I measured 1.079. My very first test loads were actually 1.060. I used 1.050 on the cartridges I most recently loaded, hence the figure in my previous post. I was trying 1.050 because i was speculating, at the time, that the pressure spikes were due to contact with the rifling.

9.3x62AL, I don't know if an OAL of 1.125 would feed in my pistol, with this bullet.

Additioal data:

data.hodgdon.com indicates, for a 125gr LCN at 1.125 OAL, a starting charge of 3.9gr of HP-38 yielding 25,700 CUP and 1009 fps, and a max charge of 4.4gr yielding 31,200 CUP and 1086 fps.

Hodgdon Basic Reloaders Manual 2008 indicates 4.8gr of HP-38/W231 under a 125gr FMJ for 28,800 CUP and 1088 fps.

Lyman 49th indicates, for a 124gr JHP at 1.075 OAL, starting of 3.9 of W231 for 933 fps and max of 4.4 for 1106 fps.

[fecmech]

mike--I wonder about your quickload program. Lyman data for 356402 (with the same amount of bullet in the case) show 4.4 grs of Bullseye for 32000 cup and 4.0 of 700X for 33000 cup. Both of those powders are faster than 231/hp38. What pressures do you get when you use Lymans loads with quickload?? BTW they are showing 1125 fps with BE and 1080 fps w/700X

[Sinjin]

mike,

Thanks for running the numbers. Quickload sounds like a very useful tool. What kind of pressures do you get for OAL of 1.060 and 1.070?

[mike in co]

1.060 34+kpsi...just over the limit


you need to understand that going from 1.125 down to 1.050 meant you cannot go anywhere near thier listed loads.

hodgdon's numbers are very close to mine FOR A 1.125 OAL......


the 9mm family is one of the most sensitive to COAL changes.


you cannot randomly recduce the coal and not reduce the powder at the same time.

you are lucky you did not blow up the gun


as far as burn rates...they do not necessarily relate to energy per pound.


quickload is only a tool, not a bible, BUT it is alot cheaper than a new gun or an emergency room visit.

mik ein co

[mike in co]

mike--I wonder about your quickload program. Lyman data for 356402 (with the same amount of bullet in the case) show 4.4 grs of Bullseye for 32000 cup and 4.0 of 700X for 33000 cup. Both of those powders are faster than 231/hp38. What pressures do you get when you use Lymans loads with quickload?? BTW they are showing 1125 fps with BE and 1080 fps w/700X


sorry that does not compute...give me an coal......cause the 124tc/tl is .580..the 402 is .790......that means an coal of 1.2 something...wont fit a 9x19 chamber


mike

[Sinjin]

Thanks to everyone for the insights and suggestions. I now have a better idea what may have been happening to my primers.

Mike, thanks again for running some numbers through QL on my behalf. That appears to be quite the useful tool. The price for QL is a little more than I can afford on the spot, but I'll acquire a copy when I can. Your pressure numbers sure are higher than I expected, but I don't know that I was on the verge of an explosion. My first batch was, in fact, loaded to 1.060 which, by your QL numbers, would not have exceeded +P pressures, and the hottest load I fired at 1.050 was 4.0gr, which was probably just a little beyond that. In addition, my spent cases appear to be reasonably healthy, with the exception of the flattened primers, with no ruptures or obvious distortions. Certainly too much pressure, in any event.

I'll proceed with the theory that my intermittent flat/not flat primers are due to a combination of higher than anticipated pressures, loose pockets and excessive headspace. I will start with some brand new cases, which will reduce the possibility of loose pockets, and will seat them at 1.070 to 1.080, with the presumption that being close to or on the rifling is less problematic than having too short an OAL, and repeat my bracket again.

Thanks again for everyone's input.

[fecmech]

sorry that does not compute...give me an coal......cause the 124tc/tl is .580..the 402 is .790......that means an coal of 1.2 something...wont fit a 9x19 chamber


mike

Mike--The 356402 that I measured was .625 long with the cone nose being .345 long. Lymans OAL was 1.110. Thanks Nick

[Sinjin]

al,
... where did the reccomendation for hp38 powder and loads come from ???


Mike,

I'm definitely interested in any powder recommendation you or anyone else may have. I need to make minor for IPSC, and would be keen to know what powder would allow me to do that with the minium possible peak pressure.

[Cherokee]

I found that a 1.05" OAL and 4 gr of 231 worked best with my 120 gr TC bullet for some of my 9MM because I am using 357 diam, not 356. I consider it the top end for my use but have not chrnographed it yet. Primers are somewhat flat but case heads are not expanded. Each gun is different so back off a little and try again.

[fecmech]

Sinjin--for the most speed with the least pressure it's hard to beat Blue Dot. It basically fills the case before it over pressures. Alliant lists 8.2 grs of BD with a 125 lead at only 29,200 psi and that load fills the case almost to the top. That load will get you up around 1200 fps + You should be able to reach minor with any of the popular powders such as Unique,Herco,AA5 etc.

[mike in co]

mike--I wonder about your quickload program. Lyman data for 356402 (with the same amount of bullet in the case) show 4.4 grs of Bullseye for 32000 cup and 4.0 of 700X for 33000 cup. Both of those powders are faster than 231/hp38. What pressures do you get when you use Lymans loads with quickload?? BTW they are showing 1125 fps with BE and 1080 fps w/700X


4.4 of be at 1.110 oal is 44kpsi and 1225 fps.....with hard lead, with soft,
is 1223 and 43.5 kpsi


note that 4.4 of be is 109% of case capacity....something is not right in this set of numbers. and ql says the boolit is .760 long.....i did use your .625 for calculations.
700x is not in my data base


mike in co

[fecmech]

4.4 of be at 1.110 oal is 44kpsi and 1225 fps.....with hard lead, with soft,
is 1223 and 43.5 kpsi


note that 4.4 of be is 109% of case capacity....something is not right in this set of numbers. and ql says the boolit is .760 long.....i did use your .625 for calculations.
700x is not in my data base


mike in co
I wonder if there may not be a problem with the Quickload Program. I assume Lyman shot their data as they were using the old cup data. Also Alliant shows 4.9 BE for both 125 lead and FMJ @32k psi. albeit at a longer oal. They even show 4.2 BE with an XTP 147 (oal 1.14) at 32.9K psi, that has to have as much bullet in the case as the Lee 124 with an additional 23 grs of bullet weight.

[Sinjin]

Sinjin--for the most speed with the least pressure it's hard to beat Blue Dot. It basically fills the case before it over pressures. Alliant lists 8.2 grs of BD with a 125 lead at only 29,200 psi and that load fills the case almost to the top. That load will get you up around 1200 fps + You should be able to reach minor with any of the popular powders such as Unique,Herco,AA5 etc.

Sounds like that has possibilities, although I'm wondering how big the jet of flame that follows the bullet out of the muzzle would be, with a powder that slow. If you catch the target on fire and then knock it over, how does it get scored? :shock:

[Windy City Kid]

Sinjin,

I use Winchester WSF powder with the Lyman 356402 mold, my boolits weigh 125gr. with my alloy. I have no problem making minor in IPSC. WSF is a slower burning powder and it is a very popular powder in IPSC. WSF doesn't have any muzzle flash and it is the best powder I have found for the 9mm. It is a pretty clean powder with low smoke. The accuracy is fantastic and it is a very soft shooting powder.

The only way you will make minor power factor in a 9mm with 120gr. lead boolit without leading, is with a slower burning powder.

Try WSF powder and you will like it in a 9mm.

This is my load I use in my Springfield XD9 Tactical for IPSC.

Lyman 356402 mold.

Lead alloy: WW water quenched.
Boolit sized to .358"
Boolit lube: Lar's Carnauba Red
OAL: 1.117"
WSF 4.4gr.
FPS: 1065
Power factor of 133.

I don't crimp, I just remove the bell.

[mike in co]

I wonder if there may not be a problem with the Quickload Program. I assume Lyman shot their data as they were using the old cup data. Also Alliant shows 4.9 BE for both 125 lead and FMJ @32k psi. albeit at a longer oal. They even show 4.2 BE with an XTP 147 (oal 1.14) at 32.9K psi, that has to have as much bullet in the case as the Lee 124 with an additional 23 grs of bullet weight.


with the 147 xtp, 4.2 of be makes 1084 fps/36.4kpsi which is +p 9mm.......how old is the alliant data.
remember ql is a tool, and is based on data collected from acutal shooting......powder lots vary, guns vary, primers vary........
i'd say the 147 data is close.....
i shoot and collect data, use that data to adjust ql settings for my gun, lot of powder, primer.

again if they used swaged lead 356 boolits and we shoot water dropped 357/358...we will see different results.
based on the opening statements of primers at 3.9/4.0 i'd say ql data is very close to what is happening in HIS CASE.

mike in co

[Sinjin]

Sinjin,
...
Lyman 356402 mold.
...
Boolit sized to .358"
...


WCK,

Thanks for the input. I haven't yet found a local supplier of WSF, but I'll keep looking. I presume you're bumping that bullet to get it to .358? If so, what top punch do you use?

[Windy City Kid]

Sinjin,

I have a Lyman four cavity mold that I have lapped the cavities to .3585". It took a little bit of work to lap the mold, but it was worth it.

The top punch is a Lyman 402.

I don't use a top punch anymore, because use a Star Sizer and I size nose first.

If I was you I would go with a heavier bullet in the 9mm for IPSC.

The Lyman 356637 mold, 9mm 147gr. FP BB bullet is very good for IPSC.

The 9mm 147gr. bullet is very easy to make minor power factor with very little recoil.

Winchester WSF powder is also an excellent powder for the 9mm 147gr. FP BB bullet.


This is my load with the Magma 9mm 147gr. FP BB bullet.

These are commercial cast bullets.

Sized to .3565"
WSF 3.8gr.
OAL: 1.135"
FPS is about 900.
Power factor 132.

Try some 9mm 147gr. FP BB commercial cast bullets to see if you like them first.

[happy7]

Sinjin,

I have an XDm in 40 s&w. On my 40, the chamber of the match barrel is so tight, that it will not reliably chamber my cast bullets when sized to .401, the normal size for 40 cal . But they chamber fine when sized to .400. I too, was using a TC bullet design from Lee, but then in a 40 cal. I had to seat the bullets with the edge of the cone below the rim, just like you, to get them to chamber reliably. But sizing at .400 I could seat them normally at .100 or so below the cone and they function just great.So you might just try sizing them a little smaller to get them to function reliably without being seated so deaply. It took me many trips to the range to figure out what the heck was the problem. I don't know if this applies to 9mm as well, but both being XDms, it could.

[Sinjin]

Sinjin,

... These are commercial cast bullets. ...



WCK, what hardness are the bullets you are buying?

[Sinjin]

... But sizing at .400 I could seat them normally ...



happy7,

Your experience sounds very similar to mine. My only worry about sizing down is leading. I'm already getting some now. I was actually consideing the possibility of trying a bigger boolit to solve that problem. If I can get the .356 to shoot without leading, I may consider sizing to .355 to see what happens.

[happy7]

I also had some leading initially when I used a fast powder. I ascribed this to the shallowness of the rifling in the XDm barrel. When I went to the slowest powder listed for a 40 and this dissapeared and did not return when I started sizing to 400. Just my experience. Again may not apply to the 9mm.

[Windy City Kid]

WCK, what hardness are the bullets you are buying?

Sinjin,

I never checked the hardness on those commercial cast 9mm 147gr. FP BB bullets. I would think they are about 16 or 18 bhn.

I got them from S&S Casting.

Here is a link to thier web site.

http://shop.snscasting.com/product.sc?productId=3&categoryId=1

[Sinjin]

I also had some leading initially when I used a fast powder. I ascribed this to the shallowness of the rifling in the XDm barrel. When I went to the slowest powder listed for a 40 and this dissapeared and did not return when I started sizing to 400. Just my experience. Again may not apply to the 9mm.

This gives me hope! I don't have a ready source of WSF or Blue Dot, but I do have some HS-6. Is that considered a relatively slow powder for pistol? 3N37 looks similar to WSF. Anyone here used 3N37 with cast boolits for 9mm?

[mike in co]

sorry to dissagree, but recoil is based on bullet weight( bullet weight squared x velocity.).....the lighter, the quicker is the second shot. so ideally go with a 115 and high velocity........as most cast are not light, do a 120/125 at 1100/1050. for nra action i do 124's at 1050, for club ipsc i do 135 jacket/135 cast at 1000 fps( casue i have a 9x21 that i shoot at 1200 with 135's).......i shoot alot more 124's than the 135's.


heavy means a slower second shot........and its accuracy AND speed that counts.

[Lee]

Shouldn't that be something like (bullet weight x velocity squared) ??
That's the gist of the atom bomb (e=mc2) and in the Lee handbook muzzle energy is velocity(fps) x velocity(fps) x bullet weight(grains) divided by 450436 = muzzle energy in foot lbs. I guess I would think that the muzzle energy going THAT way would be counteracted by the opposing recoil energy generated by the (weapon/hand/body weight x rearward velocity x rearward velocity) going the OPPOSITE way

Or am I missing a portion of the math/logic on this one??................

[mike in co]

Shouldn't that be something like (bullet weight x velocity squared) ??
That's the gist of the atom bomb (e=mc2) and in the Lee handbook muzzle energy is velocity(fps) x velocity(fps) x bullet weight(grains) divided by 450436 = muzzle energy in foot lbs. I guess I would think that the muzzle energy going THAT way would be counteracted by the opposing recoil energy generated by the (weapon/hand/body weight x rearward velocity x rearward velocity) going the OPPOSITE way

Or am I missing a portion of the math/logic on this one??................

i'll wait for someoen else on the formulae.

but i ran the numbers on a 135 pf on a 2lb gun for 115,125 and 147 bullet wieghts.....in a recoil tool.....( in quick load)

guess what......no significant difference......


ok and the funny part, i heard it in a gun rag long ago...and i shoot 135/124 and soon to be a 140hp.....

just goes to show ya...
i know in ealry ipsc...they use to smoke 115's.......oh well

mike in co

[Linstrum]

Lee has it, the basic physics formula that gives kinetic energy, which recoil is related to, is 1/2 Mass times Velocity squared or
Ek = 1/2MV^2.
The reason why the 1/2 doesn't appear in the bullet energy formula is because it has already been factored out mathematically but it is represented as part of the calculations that arrived at the "fudge factor" number 450436.

Like he said, Einstein's famous equation is related, ultimate energy of ALL matter is

E = MC^2, so if you remember that then it will help you to remember the other by adding 1/2 to the front of it. The "C" in Einstein's is also velocity, the velocity of light.


rl631

[HORNET]

Recoil is determined by momentum (mass X velocity). The principle is conservation of momentum: equal & opposite reactions per Isaac Newton. Note that, for direct comparison purposes, the conversion factors from weight to mass cancel out making the math easier.
Weight1 x V1 vs. Weight2 x V2...the units are a mess but they can be cancelled as well. Too early for this, need coffee.....

[Sinjin]

I seem to recall reading, somewhere, that the blast of propellant gases exiting the barrel, after the bullet, was a large component in 'felt' recoil (EDIT: which is to say that all of the ejecta exiting the muzzle contributes to the recoil, not just the bullet). If that is the case, then isn' it possible that two loads, using different powders and bullets, could have the same muzzle energy but different amounts of recoil?

EDIT 2: which leads one to hypothesize that recoil should be related to the total energy released by the burning powder, sans thermal, regardless of the weight or velocity of the bullet.

EDIT 3: leave it to good old Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recoil, according to which the key quantity relating to recoil is momentum, not energy.

[mike in co]

the tool in quickload actually does several calculations...bullet, gas, gun weight, etc.....
like i said in our cases there was no significant differences

[Linstrum]

Thanks Hornet, yeah, need coffee, too. It has been a long time since I had to do any calculations with forces acting on two different masses. Then there is a bit of the energy lost to bullet friction also. It is not simple at all.

rl633

[fecmech]

I think I read over on the Brian Enos forum that when using the .45 in IPSIC or IDPA he used a load of 3.5 Clays and a 230 gr bullet to make major that way as opposed to the 200 gr swc at the higher velocity. He claimed less shot to shot disturbance and quicker times than the "snappier" 200 gr load.

[Siggy226]

Sinjin, I have the exact same mold and I'm using W231, which is supposedly the same as HP38. I too am noticing flat primers starting at around 3.8-3.9. And it becomes flat at 4.0. But my slide on my P226 doesn't lock most of the time at 3.8-3.9. I think it'll lock most of the time at 4.0. Crimp is just enough to get rid of bell and a little more.

I found that the barrel doesn't like anything higher than 1.085-90 OAL. So I seat it behind the rifling at around 1.070-75". There's really not much room to play with but these bullets appear to be very accurate to me. But I don't know how bad these flat primers can be. American Eagles get flat primers when I fire them and I just notice flatting at around 3.9 with these cast bullets, plus the slide doesn't lock back all the time. Wouldn't hot loads be able to lock slide all the time!?

As for lead fouling, I'm getting some, but I don't know what is acceptable. I doubled lubed some bullets with Xlox and will try those out next. I'm noticing that the almost the first half of the barrel (from breach end) don't have much fouling and it begins after that. So maybe I need more lube. I can hardly see the lube with 1 coat unless I compare it with non-lubed bullet. NOting to compare with, but i think it's smokey enough already.

[Ricochet]

Recoil momentum of the gun = momentum of the bullet + momentum of the ejecta (powder gases and any unburned powder.) The unit of momentum in the English system is pound-seconds. (NOT "foot pound seconds," as Elmer Keith and others have used in the shooting literature.) A pound second of momentum is the result of pushing steadily with 1 pound of thrust for 1 second. Momentum of the ejecta is tricky to ascertain. Usually we use published estimates of average velocity of the powder gas and the mass of the powder charge, as it's generally a lot less than the momentum of the bullet and errors are fairly small.

Unfortunately, some clueless bozo many years ago decided it would be appropriate to express recoil in terms of foot pounds of energy, which differs with the weight of the gun. You have to use the momentum equation and the weight of the gun to determine the free recoil velocity of the gun, then use the 1/2mv2 formula to come up with the free recoil energy. That's meaningless anyway, because you're not normally letting a gun recoil freely, you're holding it and moving with it.

[StarMetal]

Sinjin, I have the exact same mold and I'm using W231, which is supposedly the same as HP38. I too am noticing flat primers starting at around 3.8-3.9. And it becomes flat at 4.0. But my slide on my P226 doesn't lock most of the time at 3.8-3.9. I think it'll lock most of the time at 4.0. Crimp is just enough to get rid of bell and a little more.

I found that the barrel doesn't like anything higher than 1.085-90 OAL. So I seat it behind the rifling at around 1.070-75". There's really not much room to play with but these bullets appear to be very accurate to me. But I don't know how bad these flat primers can be. American Eagles get flat primers when I fire them and I just notice flatting at around 3.9 with these cast bullets, plus the slide doesn't lock back all the time. Wouldn't hot loads be able to lock slide all the time!?

As for lead fouling, I'm getting some, but I don't know what is acceptable. I doubled lubed some bullets with Xlox and will try those out next. I'm noticing that the almost the first half of the barrel (from breach end) don't have much fouling and it begins after that. So maybe I need more lube. I can hardly see the lube with 1 coat unless I compare it with non-lubed bullet. NOting to compare with, but i think it's smokey enough already.

As for the leading....your accuracy will tell you when the leading is too much.

Primer flatness isn't always a perfect method to determine pressure. Many primers are soft and get flat easily. If you think the 231 is too hot to function the Sig then try a different powder.

Joe

[Siggy226]

As for the leading....your accuracy will tell you when the leading is too much.

Primer flatness isn't always a perfect method to determine pressure. Many primers are soft and get flat easily. If you think the 231 is too hot to function the Sig then try a different powder.

Joe

Hmmm... I'm still a little confused.

My slide doesn't lock back reliably, does that mean I'm not in the 'hot' zone yet? Is this an acceptable method to tell that my loads are not hot?

Factory ammo cycles my P226 reliably.

TIA!

[Ricochet]

Most semiauto pistols are recoil operated, so are dependent on the recoil momentum discussed above. If the pistol operates normally, the momentum of the load is sufficient. If it doesn't, the total momentum may be low, or the resistance to the recoil thrust may be low (i.e., held with a loose grip.) Doesn't tell you anything directly about pressure.

[Siggy226]

Ricochet: thanks for the input. I read your momentum topic above and I got a little lost. LOL!

FWIW, my Sig P226 only seen 700rds (of that, maybe 50rds were factory). Not sure what is going on except that it cycles perfectly fine with factory ammo.

[StarMetal]

Hmmm... I'm still a little confused.

My slide doesn't lock back reliably, does that mean I'm not in the 'hot' zone yet? Is this an acceptable method to tell that my loads are not hot?

Factory ammo cycles my P226 reliably.

TIA!

No...the only acceptable way to determine pressure is with pressure measuring devices. Some things that keep a slide from fully functioning are anemic loads, too light a bullet, and wrong powder choice. Fast burning powders give a real quick pressure peak. Slower powders reach the pressure peak more gradual. You can check with known good loading manuals to determine if your 231 load is too anemic.

You can also compare your loads to a jacketed bullet using the same powder. For example an old Speer book shows maximum of 4.5 grs of 230W with a 125 jacketed(this preceded the 231W and they are very close...and just using this as an example) which means that in most uses would be safe with a cast bullet of equal or less weight.

I don't put a pressure strain gauge on my guns, I use a chrono to compare mine velocities to known published loads, I look at the brass for excessively swelled webs...and the only time I really pay attention to the primer is if it's extremely flattened to where it looks like it was molten lead smoothed over or the firing indentation is puckers or pierced.

Joe

[Herb in Pa]

My jacketed subsonic loads in my SIG 228 use 3.2 grains of N320 which is a duplication load for the infamous Special K 147 subsonic load, Titegroup also works well. Again I'm using jacketed slugs and keeping velocity low for suppressor use.

[StarMetal]

I forgot to say if you want to shoot an anemic load, safe one of course, you can buy an extra recoil spring and cut some coils of fit. Colt shipped their Gold Cup 45 acp's with a weaker spring. If you choose this route, don't forget to put the full power spring back in for hot or jacketed loads.

Joe

[Siggy226]

I forgot to say if you want to shoot an anemic load, safe one of course, you can buy an extra recoil spring and cut some coils of fit. Colt shipped their Gold Cup 45 acp's with a weaker spring. If you choose this route, don't forget to put the full power spring back in for hot or jacketed loads.

Joe


That's right. I keep forgetting that.

I like my loads right now. Pretty accurate I think.

I can buy another spring and cut a few coils off it if all else fails!!!

I'm still thinking my loads are not hot at least haven't met factory loads yet. I dunno.. that's noob talking here. LOL... they still feel more or less 75-85% of American Eagles.

[MtGun44]

A side issue to this thread, but it has come up several times.

Absolute FACT: HP38 is exactly the same powder made to the exact same specs by
the exact same factory as W231. This is directly from Hodgdon who packages and
distributes BOTH brands of powder. Any difference seen are lot to lot variation alone.
Note in current Hodgdon online reloading data that I have looked at W296 and H110
(same powders) are reported with EXACTLY the same pressure and velocity numbers.

I had to laugh at a recent article on reloading in one of the std mags where the author
(loading expert, we are supposed to believe) decides that he will test only W296 and
H110 powder"s" - either not knowing or at least thinking WE didn't know that they
are both made by GD's St. Marks plant in Fla, so actually his "reloading report" consisted
of only one powder. Some test.

Another aside - I seriously doubt that any semiautos actually headspace on the extractor,
even though people continue to repeat something that they read somewhere. I have
disassembled several 1911s and sorted for the shortest .45 ACP case I could find and
the extractor was WAY far from engaging the rim when the case mouth was solidly against
the front of the chamber. I expect that most other semi-autos are the same. Unless you
have actually done this test, I suggest you not repeat this claim without any actual facts
to back it up. If you HAVE done it, please report how you tested it and what the dimensions
were so we can all learn from actual experimentation rather than old wife's tales. It is certainly
possible that some other calibers or designs do headspace on the extractor, but I doubt it -
however will keep an open mind for someone that actually tests it with their gun.

Bill

[Siggy226]

Update:

I got back from the range.

My lead cast. I used more Xlox for this batch of 100rds and now I know what very little lead fouling should look like. Barrel looks pratically clean. I'm using Lee TL-356-124-TC. 3.9 W231, 1.075 and 4.0 W231, 1.075. Slide locked 100%. It's not very reliable at 3.8. So 3.9-4.0gn it is. I am noticing some flat primers, but that's what my Sig likes in order to cycle 100%.

[mike in co]

Another aside - I seriously doubt that any semiautos actually headspace on the extractor,
even though people continue to repeat something that they read somewhere. I have
disassembled several 1911s and sorted for the shortest .45 ACP case I could find and
the extractor was WAY far from engaging the rim when the case mouth was solidly against
the front of the chamber. I expect that most other semi-autos are the same.

Bill

well looking at one(ancient) gun and claim everyone else is wrong..is not a good ASSumption.....

i'll give you one classic simple example of how easy and grossly correct the original statement is.
9 mm is actually 9x19.....an 9x21 is a 2mm longer case....so a chambered 9x21 is a chamber aprox 0.080 longer than a 9x19 chamber....the idea in europe..you could not shoot a 9x19(military ploice round) in a civilian (9x21) gun. every 9x19 i have chambered im my 9x21 guns has fired..every time.......cause the case hangs on the extractor, and firing pin set it off.....


so a i like most of your posts, and i'll admit i have not tried my 1911 in this test, but may check out my cz97b....non1911 45acp.

so its not personal, but your statement is not correct.

mike in co
ps:
test complete:
para ord 1911...will not fire....so my 1911 is same as his....not held back by the extractor.
cz 97b...............will fire........so the 97b fits in my catagory....the extractor will hold a case back close enough ignite the primer......