Anyone try a full case compressed load of 2400 for 9mm?

[turbo1889]

I am talking 115 to 135 grain cast boolits with plain or bevel base no GC of course. Slowest stuff I can find they use in the book loads is Blue Dot and it’s like a 90+% case fill load. As some of you might have already figured out I usually am not to fond empty space in any cartridge case and try to find a load that is full case compressed load if at all possible. Been using a full case lightly compressed load of Trail Boss and that works great for the little short barreled pistols but the longer barreled guns and the carbine especially might benefit from a heavier charge of denser slower burning powder. All the numbers look good to me and I'm thinking it will be easier on the naked base boolits but I thought I'd ask and see if anyone else had tried this before I proceed.

[Hardcast416taylor]

I knew a guy, once, that taugh himself to reload the .44 mag. He filled the case full of 2400 and jammed a 240 gr. JHP bullet on top. It took 3 shots of this load to cause the scope mount screws to all shear off and pin wheel the scope back over his wife`s head. The Ruger carbine had no damage, amazingly, from this episode. When we tore the remaining rounds down we could hardly budge the bullet since he had a gorilla crimp on it. The powder was so compressed we used a dental pick to break it free. Said he thought this was the load a magazine article mentioned!!! :shock: I have since taught him to reload safely and use a manual.Robert

[Larry Gibson]

9mm's are in semi or full autos with locked or blow back systems. The time/pressure/recoil impulse has to be correct for proper funtional reliability and to not damage the weapon. 2400 is way too slow burning....probably why it's not used or listed in any manual.

I use 4 gr of Bullseye under a 120 gr cast bullet. Quite frankly there just isn't a lot of "empty space" left. For +P loads Unique or herco work fine with 115 gr JHPs and both are slightly compressed loads. Hardcast416taylor was being PC but I'm be a little more direct.

Larry Gibson

[kawalekm]

In the 5th edition of ABC's, Dean Grennell talked about a 9mm Carbine load using H110. Velocity was actually lower I believe than more appropriate powders, but he was very impressed with the accuracy, which believe was 1 minute or better. That might be a good starting point for you.

[turbo1889]

Well I don't much like getting into a forum brawl. But I was asking an honest feeler question aimed at a peer crowd of experienced cast boolit loaders specifically addressing anyone else that might have tried this already, and I've run into this "Book God's" book thumper religion one too many times in the last few months so here goes:

Larry Gibson, your directness is based on knowledge and is informative; I don't mind your kind of post at all. PC is not what I would call, Hardcast416taylor's post. He is just another guy who hates anyone who even thinks about doing something outside of the book and doesn't examine the situation or facts as you have before he jumps in and starts blasting off his horn. I will simply say that I own pressure trace equipment and that I can confirm that some book loads are over pressure and potentially dangerous at the start load level much less the max load level and that there are good stable, safe load combinations that aren’t in any load manual out there. Although his caution is a necessary component in any reloading forum knee jerk responses that lack research and knowledge to back them up only serves as an annoyance and loose any cautionary value they might add due to the transparent prejudice and willful ignorance that they radiate. He believes in the book gods, it is a religion and a militant religion. I do not share his religious beliefs for I have confirmed with hard cold facts before my own eyes that on more then one occasion the book gods have been wrong - potentially deadly wrong. I’m not saying don’t use book loads, and I’m not saying don’t use them for reference, and I’m not saying just go throw something together when you don’t know what the heck you are doing. I’m saying the book is not GOD and I abhor anyone who is a militant believer in these false gods and goes around “thumping the book” like some Muslim with a Karan and believes that everything in the book is gospel truth and anything outside the book is 100% wrong 100% of the time. Most of the time I can contain myself and just ignore such individuals and "not feed the trolls" but I'm feeling really ornery this morning and I've already had to deal with several dozen of his kind over the last month. Some of whom were in face in person at the local range and objected to me having my gun rigged up with a pressure trace system and a lap-top computer attached to it. They seemed to think that their combination of guns and alcohol was somehow innocent and I was some kind of nut that was going to make a new crater lake simply because I don't trust the book gods and want to know what the real pressure of my loads are.

As everyone else who has posted so far seems to be aware of I am talking about using a powder slow enough for the cartridge under discussion that it is not a question of potentially making high pressure loads that have too much powder in them (which I am fully aware you can do with the 44-mag with this powder mainly due to its much higher case volume to bore size ratio) but rather a question of whether or not the load would have enough oomph to cycle the action reliably and have enough pressure to get a clean stable burn or not. In other words the worry is that the load might be too light not too hot as you have adequately pointed out.

Kawalekm, I hadn't thought of using H110 mainly because I tend to shy away from using that particular powder for anything outside the book due to the much more aggressive initial burn curve it has compared to 2400 but for the limited capacity 9mm case that might actually be a good thing.

[NVScouter]

So you lost me in your wordy response but let me ask this:

Your measurement of "A case full" Equals what in real weight measurement?

I ask because a 45LC and 2400 in the 25g mark is a magnum load for a 250g bullet. This is about 1/2 what the case can hold and in the 40,000cup range if I remember correctly.

So I imagine your talking 15-20g of 2400 behind a 113 bullet in an automatic with a .356 diameter. I would be really worried about weapon wear and case performance.


I dont have any load books at work so its by memory...actualy it somebody has a .357 Mag load with 2400 it would be a better comparison. I would bet a 357mag in the 40K cup range would be about the 15-20g of 2400 range. If your compressing that in a smaller case the pressure goes up more.

[x101airborne]

Slow down, Turbo. Hardcast was merely relating an experience and sharing a related story. Your "abhorance" of book thumpers is a little out of line. Those books are put out as a general guideline for us to follow. Just like the Bible, I am not going to stone any prostitutes or offer my son to God as a blood sacrafice. You can LIVE by the SPIRIT of the information, or SUFFER the CONSEQUENCES. I have loads that are over some of the books, and some that I cannot get to without dangerous conditions occuring. It is all individual. And if you feel like kicking a person for sharing, post somewhere else. NO PC INTENDED.

[Dennis Eugene]

Hmmm, wow. Dennis

[fecmech]

Turbo--Why did you go away from Blue Dot?? Alliant lists 8+ grains for most of it's loads up to 125 grs and IIRC that pretty much fills the case. Once you put a bullet in there has to be some compression. The 147 is max at 6.2 grs and I think once to put that longer bullet in you are compressed. The nice thing about all those loads is low pressure( at least according to Alliant) they all show 30K psi or less. Your idea with 2400 would no doubt work but I don't think you would be running much pressure, at least not enough to burn it clean. I used 2400 in the .38 spl behind the 358429 (10.5 grs.) and got 1030 fps but had lots of powder particles that got under the extractor star and tied the gun up. You might have the same problems in a 9MM semi with particles tying up the gun. IMO BD is a very good 9MM powder that does fill the case.

[wallenba]

That kind of experimenting is Ok if you are not sharing the shooting range with others. Personally I would like to know if the man next to me might be pushing the envelope TOO much. JMO.

[deltaenterprizes]

Have you tried AA #7? It is a slow burning powder and fills the case.

[qajaq59]

It looks like the only person, so far anyway, that has tried it was the one Hardcast spoke about. And I don't think I'd want to duplicate those results.

[Frosty Boolit]

I just loaded a nosler 115 gr. JHP with 8.0 gr. AA#7 and it was almost full. This is a book load and it tops out at 8.5 grains and i think it is still standard pressure. They were pretty accurate.

[autofix4u]

Ok, dont bash me. I have and do load 9mm and 9mm largo with "a full case of" AA5744. these loads are for carbine use in a HP 995 and spanish destoyer. I did use Blue dot and liked it. I ran out of BD and had 32lbs of 5744 in the powder locker so i tried it.
I does cycle the action on the High Point and I have an these loads through the pistols and it does cycle the action on my guns.
Velocity in the carbine is good and it groups as well or better than BD.
So to answer your question yes I load a full case but i dont use 2400.

[turbo1889]

Q ~ What exactly is a full case load of 2400 for the 9mm?

The maximum powder volume of the 9mm NATO case varies between about 0.60cc and 0.85cc depending on the depth at which the bullet is seated assuming hollow base bullets are not used with anything above about 0.75cc being a compressed load with all but the lightest weight, most shallow seated bullets.

With the volume/weight ratio of the powder taken into consideration those volume figures (0.60cc, 0.75cc, & 0.85cc) come out respectively too:

Bullseye Powder: 5.6 grains, 7.0 grains, & 8.0 grains (Also known as blow up your gun territory for this cartridge.)

Trail Boss Powder: 2.8 grains, 3.5 grains, & 3.9 grains (No safety problem, but performance is anemic especially in longer barrel guns.)

Blue Dot Powder: 6.9 grains, 8.7 grains, & 9.8 grains (A full case compressed load, could indeed put you over the max here depending on your bullet weight, not a whole lot over the max but still far enough over to probably get yourself into hot water.)

2400 Powder: 8.1 grains, 10.1 grains, & 11.5 grains (A powder that is quite a bit slower burning then Blue Dot and does have stable burn characteristics down to about 15-K pressure levels, would it be enough powder to produce at least a 15-K pressure burn? Don’t think it could be too much, but it is of course always good to be cautious. Here comes the part where I ask, “Has anyone already tried it or not?”)






Notable book load comparisons (Yes, I do look at load manuals but I don’t consider them to be GOD and don’t think that a combination not found in a book is not possible because its not in a book):

147 grain XTP bullet load for 38-super with 10.9 grains of 2400 at pressure of 33,600 PSI

125 grain jacketed bullet load for 357-mag. 17.6 grains of 2400 at pressure of 31,800 PSI this is a full case compressed load and is notated as such in the load book

158 grain jacketed bullet load for 357-mag. 15.2 grains of 2400 at pressure of 33,100 PSI

Those are all out of the Lee Second Edition (its what was handy).






Concerning the 44-mag. full case compressed load that was too hot using 2400 powder

The max book load for 2400 powder and a 240gr. jacketed bullet is listed as 18.7 grains at 34,800 PSI (same Lee manual)

The case capacity of the 44-mag allows for up to about a 24 grain charge with only modest compression of the powder with a 240 grain bullet. That is way, way too hot to attempt and I don’t doubt for a minute that it would result in some significant problems. The 9mm NATO has a little more then a third the case capacity of the 44-mag. depending of course on bullet seating depth for both cases. Combined with the fact that with a 125 grain jacketed bullet in the 357-mag you can fill the case up with a compressed load and it’s a lot bigger case and only a couple thousandths larger diameter bullet and the fact that the significantly faster burning powder Blue Dot is almost a full case fill for a max load leads me to believe that having too high of pressure on the load is probably less of a worry then having too low and not cycling the action or getting a stable and complete burn.

Thus before attempting such a load I chose to post a, “Anyone already tried this?” thread hoping someone else already had and I could get a little more info from first hand experience before proceeding.






Autofix4u, I’m not familiar with that powder but it sounds like it is probably even slower then 2400. I’m going to go Google it now, if it is indeed an even slower powder then 2400 that would alleviate some of my worries about 2400 not having enough oomph to get the job done even with a full case compressed load.

[Larry Gibson]

turbo1889

I'm sure anyone who has read me knows I am the 1st to say that manuals are not gospel, they are guidelines. My point in this case, as mentioned, the 9mm is 99.99999999% of the time used in a semi or full automatic if locked breach or blow back function. They are designed to operate within certain time/pressure/recoil impulse parameters. If you go outside those paramters then functional reliability can easily be compremized as well as safety. 2400 is not a good choice for the 9mm simply because it is too slow burning. Otherwise there probably would be some loading data for it as it is an old powder.

Now, I also have a Spanish Destroyer in .38 super (barrel was set back to headspace on that case) and what I load in that bolt action carbine in no way is reflective of what I load for 9mm handguns and subguns, even though I use the same bullet. BTW, I also have "pressure trace equipment", an Oehler M43. I don't think anyone here will accuse me of not going outside the "book" but when I do it is with a powder that fits the burning rate of for the cartridge AND the firearm. I do not load Lvl III 45-70 loads for my TDs for example. I stay within the parmeters of the cartridge for that rifle. I use 4831 for cast bullet '06 loads in M1s but will not use 4831 for full house jacketed bullet loads. I've used numerous powders in the 9mm and the 45 ACP that were not listed in manuals but were of the appropriate burning rate.

That is my caution, 2400 is not of the appropriate burning rate for the 9mm. This is probably why you're not getting any "first hand experience" because every one already knows 2400 is not an appropriate powder for the 9mm. Is it going to hurt anything? Probably not but it will probably be a pain cleaning all the unburned powder out of the action, that is if the action functions.

Larry Gibson

[Catshooter]

I haven't tried it.

But, back when I used to load for the 9mm I settled on Universal Clays and Remington's 115 JHP. The load I used was just slightly compressed with this powder.

My guess is that 2400, unless in a carbine won't give much in the way of ballistics.

But I haven't tried it.


Cat

[XWrench3]

i dont shoot a 9mm, so i cant help you there. but i am not against trying something that is not in a book. holy cow, how many bazillion recipoes can we come up with? who would ever have enough time to try ALL of them!? just try not jumping straight into a "case full" of something. that in itself is a DANGEROUS way of thinking. it is a lot safer to start low, and work up. nobody here, or your family, wants to see a paramedic digging metal peices out of your head!

[Shiloh]

I just checked four loadbooks. There is NO load listed for 2400 in either 9mm or .38 super with any cast or jacketed bullet. It is too slow and better suited for heavier boolits in revolver loads.

Shiloh

[shootingbuff]

Check AA9.

[grendelbane]

I have seen a couple of manuals list loads for 2400 in the .38 Super case. Never any in the 9mm, which is only slightly smaller than the .38S. So I don't doubt it would work. I do doubt it working well, however.

I have seen a couple of loads listed for H-110 in the .38 Super also. And even one for Lil Gun. I tried the one for H-110, and was some what disappointed. Velocity was no higher than some other more conventional powders, economy was lower, and accuracy was so-so, (though I admit I did not work with it a lot).

I don't see any thing wrong with trying it. Some people load 2400 in the .45 Auto-Rim. Maybe you will surprise me, and come up with a good load.

[x101airborne]

Spanish Destroyer, huh? I gotta look that one up. I have a mexican mauser that has been retrofitted to shoot 45 acp out of a 1911 mag. I love those carbines.

[RobS]

Check AA9.

AA#9 would probably work the best of all the slow burners. It can be used to push heavy 45 auto bullets at high end velocities without the excessive pressures. I've shot AA#9 in my 45 auto 5 inch barrels and surprisingly it was actually quite clean. AA#9 is used in Ruger 45 colt loads clear down to 18,000 psi so I can see potential with it being packed into a small 9mm case. I have not done it with the 9mm, but if you can put enough in the case to bring the pressures up to make it burn efficiently and function the intended firearm???? it could be a surprise.

[bohica2xo]

Turbo:

If you are going to experiment with this sort of thing, you need a copy of Load From A Disc.

A quick poke at LFAD shows 5.5gr 2400 behind a 147gr Hornady XTP as a place to start.

B.

[mpmarty]

+1 on AA9. I use it in my 10mm 200gr jhp loads and it is absolutely the cleanest burning powder I've ever used. Starting with new Starline brass the fired cases inside are absolutely as clean as the new ones. Amazing.

[turbo1889]

An Oehler M43 huh Mr. Gibson, looked at them but ended up buying an RSI system mainly because actually getting ones hands on the Oehler system proved to be easier said then done; or at least that was my experience.

I primarily use it for working up shotgun slug loads using my custom molds and use several NEF-USH firearms as test beds mainly due to the fact that others have hot rodded that particular firearm up to two and three times its normal operating pressures and lived to tell the tale due to the robust heavy construction of those guns. Thus although I build my loads to match the pressure levels of commercial loads and work them up from a light charge I like the extra margin of safety that using such a robust firearm as a test bed allows me to cover my not so lovely hide if I make a mistake.

However, on cartridges like the 9mm NATO it is very difficult to find a firearm to serve as an adequate test bed especially since the pressure trace sensor needs to be located directly over the cartridge within the chamber directly on the outside of the barrel metal. Not an available mounting position on many 9mm guns out there.

[lwknight]

Turbo, you might be some kind of exec in the habit of demanding a certain performance from your board but , we are not your board. And even if you are destined to go down in history as a great 9mm pioneer , you will never make a full power .357 magnum out of a 9mm luger case.

I have to agree that 2400 is entirely too slow for the tiny 9mm case. Lightly compressed it might work but , my money is on it being a slow and dirty load. With heavy compression , all bets are off. Things get radical and unpredictable. Best case scenario would be horrible accuracy.

Instead of rewriting everything I will link you to my thread a few weeks ago where some interesting discovery came to light.

Golden Saber Thread (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=93083&highlight=golden+saber)

I have not done any more work on the 9mm since that thread but I intend to work with it to try to get as a minimum , equal energy from 147 grain bullets to that of the 124 grain bullets. It seems plauseable and may not work just because the 9mm luger IS A TEENY TINY ITTY BITTY CARTRIDGE!!
The powders that I intend to work with are :
Ramshot True Blue
3n38
and AA7
And hope to find out if it is possible to get a 9mm heavy bullet to have the same energy as the lighter 124 grain bullets. There is a reason that there are larger case cartridges out there. Its because you need more capacity to use a slow powder and get it up to pressure to maximize the long barrel and heavy bullet potential.

[NVScouter]

An Oehler M43 huh Mr. Gibson, looked at them but ended up buying an RSI system mainly because actually getting ones hands on the Oehler system proved to be easier said then done; or at least that was my experience.

I primarily use it for working up shotgun slug loads using my custom molds and use several NEF-USH firearms as test beds mainly due to the fact that others have hot rodded that particular firearm up to two and three times its normal operating pressures and lived to tell the tale due to the robust heavy construction of those guns. Thus although I build my loads to match the pressure levels of commercial loads and work them up from a light charge I like the extra margin of safety that using such a robust firearm as a test bed allows me to cover my not so lovely hide if I make a mistake.

However, on cartridges like the 9mm NATO it is very difficult to find a firearm to serve as an adequate test bed especially since the pressure trace sensor needs to be located directly over the cartridge within the chamber directly on the outside of the barrel metal. Not an available mounting position on many 9mm guns out there.

Sounds like you need a T/C in 9mm for testing. This would show what the chamber will take, but not the firearm. Just like the old M9's that blew slides off when they used MP5 ammo that was hotter. Berretta had to add an extra slide stop to Navy-proof those. I also have seen many 9mms that are built to the SAMMI standard so they will not take repeated +P+ loads ruining the frames. A bolt gun or AR-15 conversion would be fine however.

[9.3X62AL]

No usage of 2400 in the 9mm here.

I recently had a local shooter tell me that it was DANGEROUS to fire my 223 and 243 with cast boolits, after which he moved to the far end of the range facility to sight in his Weatherby something-or-other. Much to his surprise, my rifles and I survived the atrocity in good order.

I too try to avoid such oracles whenever possible. So I understand your disgust at the self-anointed Speedbumps On The Autobahn.

HC Taylor is not among them, however.

[bohica2xo]

Turbo:

The way I use a strain gauge for 9mm ammo is to use a Beretta 92. Right on top of the barrel.

For the 1911, I use a modified safety to lock the slide closed, and put the gauge on top of the barrel in the slide port. You have to be very careful, but the barrel does drop far enough on most 1911's to move the slide back for loading.

If you can lock the slide on most any tipping barrel pistol, it should work.

B.

[Larry Gibson]

turbo1889

An Oehler M43 huh Mr. Gibson, looked at them but ended up buying an RSI system mainly because actually getting ones hands on the Oehler system proved to be easier said then done; or at least that was my experience.

When the M43 was available I didn't have any problems getting one at all. It was the RSI that was unavailable at the time.

I primarily use it for working up shotgun slug loads using my custom molds and use several NEF-USH firearms as test beds mainly due to the fact that others have hot rodded that particular firearm up to two and three times its normal operating pressures and lived to tell the tale due to the robust heavy construction of those guns. Thus although I build my loads to match the pressure levels of commercial loads and work them up from a light charge I like the extra margin of safety that using such a robust firearm as a test bed allows me to cover my not so lovely hide if I make a mistake.

I use bolt action rifles where possible (when the strain gauge can indeed be mounted on the barrel over the combustion part of the chamber, preferably mid chamber. I also use a number of Contender barrels for shorter cartridges, mostly handgun. Currently I can run pressure tests on 18 cartridges in 23 different barrels.

However, on cartridges like the 9mm NATO it is very difficult to find a firearm to serve as an adequate test bed especially since the pressure trace sensor needs to be located directly over the cartridge within the chamber directly on the outside of the barrel metal. Not an available mounting position on many 9mm guns out there.

That is the problem with the short cartridges meant for mostly semi or full autos. I currently do not have a 9mm barrel to test pressures with, never said I did nor indicate that. Since I don't it is another very good reason that I recommend staying with powders that fit the burning rates of those powders listed in manuals for the 9mm. If one is going to go "outside the box" one at least needs to do it with some modem of intelligence, for safety's sake at least. Just my opinion and you, of course, are free to do what you will.

I watch a couple forums for used Contender barrel sales but have not seen a 9mm barrel. I'm not interested in spending the $s for a custom barrel as there is too much useful 9mm data available by those who have tested it (manuals) and I've not had the need to experiment outside those parameters.

It would be intersting to get a comparison of the M43 and the RSI instrument using both on the same barrel measuring the same cartridge's pressure. How would seem to be the obstacle. Where in Montana do you live?

Larry Gibson

[runfiverun]

been watching this for a bit.
anyways the 2400 is a flexible powder however i don't think it's that flexible.
something in the aa-7/9,800x range would probably work somewhat better.
i'd look in that direction.

[Doby45]

You will put your eye out!

[.357]

Never tried 2400 in my 9 when i owned one. **** call me a book thumper I don't **** blowing up in my face so i'll stick to the many books that i own.

[rintinglen]

Well, just to answer the question originally asked, I DID TRY 2400 in a 9 MM. I had a bunch of it, no money to buy other powder with, even if a gun shop had been open in Town on a Sunday, so I loaded up 50 rounds with cast 120 grain RN. Shot like ****, dirtied up the gun, but in 1977 I didnt have the dough for store bought. I do not have the records from my shooting then, so I can't tell what load I actually used, but I do recall "interpolating" the load from 38 Special data. I later went to load other, more typical powders,Herco being favorite. You can try it, it didn't blow up my gun, but I was not happy with it.

[lwknight]

It appears that the jury has reached a verdict:
2400 is not good for a 9mm luger.
How else can we say it?

[turbo1889]

I would like to thank all of you who made a contribution to this thread and what you put forth was based on a factual, technical, or honest concern basis rather then puffing nothing more than smoke or worse. Not all of you were nice about it but I can accept that and it doesn’t get under my skin if what your saying is based on a factual, technical, or honest concern basis. The others that just dropped in to pull a mugging on the guy who even thinks about doing something that is outside the book (and even proceeds careful as well and asks if anyone else has every tried anything like it first before he actually tries it himself) ~ well how about I just leave it at that and bite my tongue and not say anything further.

An extra special thanks to autofix4u & rintinglen both of whom had the courage to brave a storm to kindly provide me with the kind of 1st person information I was looking for.

Larry Gibson although critical offered advise with a solid knowledge base behind it and the key of course is how he goes about doing it. No horror story scare tactics from him about a very different cartridge that doesn’t even use the same range of book load powders for “regular” loads ~ just solid pointers based in factual statements.

And bohica2xo gave me some good info on how to get a strain gage on a 9mm ~ the exposed top end of a classic Berretta. Almost makes me jealous I didn’t think of it myself, such a simple solution.

Now I just need to find myself a good old solid Berretta that has been work used enough that I can pick it up for a reasonable price but it is still plenty good enough to serve as a test bed. A note for the future and when I do find one to fill that notch I just might see what can be done with Accurate #9. Faster burning then 2400 and yet still slower the Blue Dot and others apparently have used it with success in 45-ACP which is at least a cartridge that has a similar powder volume to bore cross sectional area ratio and pushes a bullet with a similar sectional density.

[Doby45]

Dang it what about my contribution? You gonna put your eye out!

[Hardcast416taylor]

Turbo, Obviously you completely missed the sentence in my narration of an actual happening and what lead to it happening. The fellow read a magazine article and thinking the load mentioned was gospel used it. Never mind the possability of a mis-print at the publisher happening. What I`m saying is to not believe anything that is printed by a magazine publication. Since I`m old and infirm, according to alot of people, I don`t recognise the abbreviation of yours refering to me as PC. Don`t know what it means and don`t really care what you folks in Montana think it means. If you don`t wish to read of an accident that happened, fine go read the comic papers left over from Sunday.Robert

[waksupi]

Robert, I have to believe this is a young guy who still has some things to learn in life.

[Hardcast416taylor]

Thanks Waksupi, now I won`t have to drop that nitro pill on myself today.Robert

[runfiverun]

taurus makes a 9mm with the exposed bbl too.
wish i'd known you were looking for something like that i was doing some heavy boolit [158 gr]work with one a bit ago and got rid of it recently.

[bobthenailer]

ive loaded surplus ww 820 and lilgun in the 38 super with good results for full power loads! and according to hodgens manual reguarding lilgun, with less chamber pressure than other powders

[looseprojectile]

Long ago and far away I did some testing with 2400 and H240 in the .357 magnum. Lots of testing. Did not shoot my eye out and still have all my fingers. I do have a severe hearing loss though.
I may not be right but I determined that 2400 was too slow to cause any damage to the very strong four and five eights inch barreled Ruger flat top single action.
Kinda like self limiting. It won't all burn.
This was with compressed loads. I had to apply a heavy crimp to keep the boolit from oozing out of the case due to the pressure of the powder. Filled em to the mouth. Most 9mm guns are pretty tinny and weak compared to a strong single action and I have been successful in staying away from pushing the envelope with such guns.
I would explore some of the revolvers in 9mm to pressure test with. A strong Ruger single action can be had in 9mm. You would also like the 9mm Largo and 38 super.

Life is good

[fredj338]

I doubt you could get enough 2400 under a 124gr bullet to get decent vel, just too slow. I have tried 2400 in the 10mm, larger cap, still too slow. Maybe AA#9, only because being a ball powder, you can get more into the small case, but still doubt vel will be impressive. BlueDot works well, as does Longshot for compressed +P loads. When I am looking for max effort +P loads, BD often gets th nod. You might also give HS6 a try, it seems to give the highest vel in most manuals.

[robertbank]

Robert, I have to believe this is a young guy who still has some things to learn in life.

He will learn pretty quickly if he thinks reloading books aren't worth referencing or can be disregarded if you don't find a load/powder combo you want to use. The 9MM cartridge can be heck on wheels if you start running the wrong bullet/powder combinations.

A new reloader at our club started this summer with the .45acp case and was loading without a scale. Just eye balling the case using Bullseye. You should have seen the primers. After one case came apart he asked some of the guys what they thought might have gone wrong....

Take Care

Bob

[turbo1889]

Turbo, Obviously you completely missed the sentence in my narration of an actual happening and what lead to it happening. The fellow read a magazine article and thinking the load mentioned was gospel used it. Never mind the possability of a mis-print at the publisher happening. What I`m saying is to not believe anything that is printed by a magazine publication. Since I`m old and infirm, according to alot of people, I don`t recognise the abbreviation of yours refering to me as PC. Don`t know what it means and don`t really care what you folks in Montana think it means. If you don`t wish to read of an accident that happened, fine go read the comic papers left over from Sunday.Robert

Yes, you are correct that what was communicated to me by your post was entirely different then "The fellow read a magazine article and thinking the load mentioned was gospel used it. Never mind the possability of a mis-print at the publisher happening. What I`m saying is to not believe anything that is printed by a magazine publication".

I took your post as a slight variation of the standard, off the shelf "friend of a friend story" that is used an attack platform by the "Thou shalt not think outside the box" wolf pack crowd.

Yes, I may be younger then some of you and everyone still has some lessons left to learn and I am no exception. The moment you stop learning is the moment you die and if this occurs before your physical death then you are the definition of a walking dead man.

More likely then not though the reason that I got so hot under the collar and came down like a bag of hammers after reading your post which I honestly took as a flanking style attack pattern is the fact that your posted story was about someone using the same powder I was talking about, emphasized the use of compressed loads, and the “I have since taught him to reload safely and use a manual” concluding statement of your post in question combined with the good possibility that my computer screen is tinted to a certain color by what some might call a "Persecution Complex". But it is, also, true that you’re not paranoid if they are really out to get you and I have been the subject of more wolf pack style online attacks for daring to think outside the box then I can count both on forums and via private e-mail.

The absolute worst of all was when I published full detail blue-prints for a 410 slug swaging die that I had had designed and had cut for my by a machinist on this board so that I have the ability to make my own 410 slugs and was trying to be nice and share the blueprints so that any others out there who might also wish to make their own 410 slugs benefit.

Following getting those blueprints published on www.fourten.org.uk I got some of the most vicious e-mails from all over the world I have ever seen and can only be described as hate e-mail including profanity in multiple languages. And most of them were not from anti-gun people most were from gun people who hated my guts because I dared think outside the box.

I am an unapologetic tinkerer. I will never fit in any box. I am not, however, a velocity nut, a hot rodder nut, or an overloader. In fact I usually settle for a little less velocity with cast boolits with a load that produces a low pressure long burn which I have found works very well for me with non gas checked cast boolits.

In this particular case I wanted to use more of a slower burning powder to reduce the pressure of the load and lengthen the powder burn time to produce a load that would shoot plain and bevel base cast boolits of only moderate hardness and produce adequate velocity performance at the muzzle of longer barreled 9mm carbine guns. I like loads that use a powder that is either slow enough burning or fluffy enough that you can’t physically get enough powder inside the case to produce a “hot” load. I already have a load that works great for shorter barrel pistols. IMR Trail Boss is fluffy enough that you can’t get too much inside the case, but since it is a small charge of fast burning powder I get less then 1,000fps. from a carbine. I consider that unacceptably low performance for a carbine in this caliber. Sub-sonic velocity is fine but when you get the same velocity for a carbine length barrel as from a 4” pistol barrel or even slightly less . . . well time to think about a different load for the carbine. No book loads were found in my search for a load that used a slower burning powder then normal to produce a low pressure long burn time type load that also qualified as a powder slow enough that you can’t physically get enough powder inside the case to produce a “hot” load. At that point I did start thinking outside the box and I did make the mistake of posting my original question on this forum thinking this was a safe place to do so since I have had very minimal wolf pack attacks on this particular forum. My mental shields were down and I expected knowledgeable and helpful responses and was not expecting the wolves to start circling.

Then on the second post of the thread, that is the first response, the post that in almost all threads in the most influential post and is the domino that falls and determines the course of thread by the direction it falls I get a post that to me appeared to be a classic flanking style attack of a pack leader. Thus why I blew my lid and came down as hard as I did.

Since that apparently was not what you were doing – well you deserve an explanation.

[robertbank]

I mentioned 800X above. The powder is very hard to meter out of a regular powder measure. I use my RCBS digital dispenser . I have found you get approx. 150- 250 fps gain using the 16" barrel of the storm vs my 4.25" - 5" 9mm pistols. The gain is higher with slower powders than with those one would consider fast. While 800X was terrible in my handguns it works just fine in the Storm. 5 gr of 800X gives me 1241 fps out of the Storm with a SD of 8 vs 1093 fps with a SD of 22 using my CZ 85 Combat. All the powder is consumed in the barrel in the Storm vs the CZ 85 where there are powder flakes littering the shooting bench.

Like I said earlier I won't be buying anymore 800X once the last of what I have is consumed. I can get similar results using 231/Unique with loads that work well in my pistols and don't have to deal with the metering issues 800X brings with it.

Take Care

Bob

[lwknight]

In this particular case I wanted to use more of a slower burning powder to reduce the pressure of the load and lengthen the powder burn time to produce a load that would shoot
Everyone else just lengthened the brass and chamber.
I think that Turbo is trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip.

So turbo , instead of telling people how they should think to match your criteria , why don't you just do your own experimenting ( the same ay that the nay sayers have done) and you will understand.

What do you want ? A blessing? You have criticized almost everyone that answered you. I don't know why we bother? We gave a lot of experienced opinions that are founded in solid logic and sometines in personal experience and you're still P.O.ed.
If you want the glory , do your own proving and publish the results.
Thats what I do.


There are not that many book thumpers here but , some things are simply known to not be a likely combination.

[mpmarty]

I've got at least half a dozen "books" and they all have recipes that are tested by powder or bullet makers and are clearly stated to be followed with due diligence. As long as my loads are somewhere near what the books claim is OK I don't worry much about safety. That said the newer books seem to be listing far smaller loads of the same powders as their earlier versions. Is the powder getting faster or are the product liability folks editing the books?

[lwknight]

The newer books are watered down lawered up overly cautious and wimp.

[runfiverun]

part of it is the psi vs cup issue.
the loads are a bit lower but are safer in the long run.
i am definately not one to criticize anyone not following the book strictly.
all you would have to do is look in MY load book vs's what is published to see that.
however it's a case of finding what does or doesn't work.[aa-2230 in the 357 max,or the 25-20 does] 158 swc's in the 9mm with fast powders kinda does [sorta] and some things don't
[mag primers in a 30-30 with a max load of aa-2230 [shows pressure right now]
and going off the chart too far one way or the other usually don't work well.
do some research,think, and go slow.

[Recluse]

In this particular case I wanted to use more of a slower burning powder to reduce the pressure of the load and lengthen the powder burn time to produce a load that would shoot plain and bevel base cast boolits

:shock: :veryconfu

OK, in forty years of reloading, the first ten of which were at my daddy's side with his critical and precise eye guarding me and the last thirty-plus years somehow surviving on my own. . . I think I'm missing something here. . .

:coffee:

[alamogunr]

This is somewhat OT, but last week I loaded 100+ rounds of 9mm with Unique. I used a range from 4 gr. to 5.5 gr and boolets from 105 gr to 120 gr. The 5.5 gr load would have been slightly compressed at normal seating depth so I seated the boolets out a little. These particular boolets were spec'd for .38 Spec. so they ended up being seated at the lower edge of the crimp groove.

These 5.5 gr loads were not noticeably hotter than the lighter loads but they didn't shoot noticeably better either, so I will probably back off to about 5.0 gr and seat normally.

I guess I should get to the point. More than one manual gave max. loads in excess of 5.5 gr. These would have ended up being compressed if the boolet was seated normally. I was surprised at how full the case was at 5.5 gr. of Unique.

John
W.TN

[Shiloh]

Never tried 2400 in my 9 when i owned one. **** call me a book thumper I don't **** blowing up in my face so i'll stick to the many books that i own.

Me too.

There is high degree of research and testing that goes into load data books. The powder ranges are within a certain pressure and range.

There is no data for a lot of rifle boolits with fast pistol powders, but the loads are consistent from gun board to gun board, as well as obviously mild.

Shiloh

[Shiloh]

The newer books are watered down lawered up overly cautious and wimp.

Maybe so, but the operating pressures are close to cartridge recommendation.
I have shot with folks who thought the same thing many years ago. Fortunately, they have all there body parts intact. Of those former whipper snappers now loadd in the midrange of published data.

Shiloh

[Doby45]

You are going to put your eye out!!

[ironhead7544]

I consider every handloaded cartridge an experiment. As such, it may fail in some way. I have had start loads tie up a firearm. You are taking a risk loading your own ammo.
I also take some risks off the books. I use a 160 gr cast bullet for my stock Glocks in 9mm and have been for many years. Have to use the Lee FCD as some cases bulge a little. Found some data for older powder but had to come up with my own for later ones.
I also load for the 5.45x39. There is a little data available but not much. My loads are light, just makes the rifle function. The rifle is an early Century Tantal with a Green Mountain barrel that slugs at .224. This allows me to use the match .224 bullets and results are good so far.
Concerning the 9mm with slow powder, years ago Dean Grennel wrote an article on the Marlin carbine using some loads that worked well in the rifle but did not work in the pistol. I dont remember the powder types but I think I have that article around here somewhere. I will see if I can find it.

[Recluse]

I consider every handloaded cartridge an experiment. As such, it may fail in some way. I have had start loads tie up a firearm. You are taking a risk loading your own ammo.

While I understand the nature of your caution, my view is that I take a bigger risk shooting factory ammo than I do my own reloaded/handloaded ammo.

I've had far more failure to fire incidents in factory ammo than I ever have with my own reloads. I shot a LOT of ammo up during my time in LE, and it was those experiences that placed me solidly in the "I trust my own reloads more than I trust factory" camp.

Also, I consider factory loads a constant experiment. I have no idea what powder they are using, what primer, nature of the components, etc etc. I know which lot numbers my primers and powder come from, I know the alloy composition of my boolits, I know how many times the brass has been fired and how it was cleaned, sized and whether it has been annealed or not.

That's just a few thoughts coming from my oft illogical mind. :)

You have some interesting calibers you load for--bet you'd have a hard time finding some of those in factory loads, especially for a decent, affordable price!

:coffee:

[.357]

"I trust my own reloads more than I trust factory" camp.


Me too!

[Misskimo]

Yeh. I tried it last night. Way up here in Alaska. Powder in remote town cost about 80 a lb
reason why my test
my brain started thinking when seeing Blue Dot
also I use 2400 for 357 and 454 mild loads
loaded rem used brass
mag primer
145 g cast bullet
7 g of 2400
shots seam good and right in line with accuracy with other loads
no pressures what so ever and cases was clean burned like my unique loads
loaded 2 clips today to test.
This is for plinking. My bear loads are in my 454

[Outpost75]

This whole thread belongs in the, "Hold my beer and watch THIS!" category.

145079

[Misskimo]

Yep, No pistol powder in Alaska sucks . My nearest walmart is 500 miles by jet

[Misskimo]

Hey. Went and tested 37 rounds today with Crony. (No speed record). Average 530 fps
with 7 gr. its pretty full. Every round cycled. Compared to a factory round. Its dirty but just as clean as my unique powder rounds.
Works. With only a half lb of unique left. And dont know when Alaska can get pistol powder
At least I can still throw some lead out there

[Catshooter]

MIsskimo,

That's interesting, thanks for the info. I've never tried 2400 in anything smaller than the 45 ACP. What primer did you use?

It's threads like this one that show you that most "reloaders" really don't understand what they are doing doesn't it. 2400 dangerous in the 9? That's funny right there.

I once traded 200 rounds of surplus 7.62 x 54r ammo for 20+ pounds of a rifle powder. An unknown, unlabeled powder. I was foolish enough to ask here about how to identify and use it. Oh my! The wailing and knashing of teeth! I was gunna die, dogs and cats would start living together and the earth would cease to rotate.

So I thought about it, figured out how to test it safely and did so.

Sheesh. What a society of cowards.


Cat

[Frank V]

turbo1889

I have never used 2400 in any case smaller than the .38 Special, but I'm staying tuned to see actual results.
If nothing else it'd prevent bullet setback when chambering & then unloading an unfired 9mm?
Thanks.

[Misskimo]

Mag primers and .358 145 g lead bullets.

[Misskimo]

Haha Cat. Thats whats wrong with usa now. Abunch of idiots out forsure

[onceabull]

This thread went dead way back in the fall, 2010, any seen a post from "Turbo"lately ?????????? Onceabull

[Misskimo]

Yeh. But it went live again in july 2015.

[Catshooter]

They can come back to life, sure enough.

I wondered if you were using mag primers. Didn't know if they'd make a difference or not. 2400 is an easy to ignite powder.

Only 530 fps with 145 grains. Huh. But it cycled the pistol? How interesting, I wouldn't have guessed that. What pistol are you using? I wonder what a 158 grain boolit would do?

I've got lots of 2400 and now you're making me think . . . :)


Cat

[Misskimo]

Yeh. Mag primer. Thats all I have. Untill a few more days,
yeh it shoots. Speed was inconsistent though. 19 shots Ruffly 75% was in the 500s
15% less than 500. 10% above 600fps.
Springfield xdm
what supprised me was it was somewhat clean. My 357 colt loads ended up dirty black suet Around the cylinder .
i will see if more powder can go it

[Misskimo]

I think its the .358 357 bullets. Mag primers that somewhat made this work.

[Ole Joe Clarke]

This thread would be funny if reloading was not such a serious subject.

The Pastor said just last night: "You have the ability to change our lives for better or worse, but you can't change the consequences of your actions." So in this case we all have to ability to try any load we wish, (God help us), but we can't change the outcome if we make the wrong choice.

[robertbank]

Haha Cat. Thats whats wrong with usa now. A bunch of idiots out for sure

Odd where you find the truth in statements, fortunately the truth of such statements only relates to a few. The challenge is which group you reside in.

Take Care

Bob

[Frank V]

Yeh. But it went live again in july 2015.


:grin::grin:

I'm staying tuned, might find another application for 2400, it is actually a pretty good powder!

[Misskimo]

Interesting day today
loaded up 8 rounds to test with
7.5 g of 2400
125 gr lead .358
mag primer
an average speed of 650fps

4 test rounds of
8g of 2400
125 gr .357
mag primer
a average speed of 1100fps

once shot HRTRS
1.07 lenth
any thing longer than that would
hang up since theses were made for the 38 or 357,

[Catshooter]

Wow, 1,100 feet. I wonder what the peak pressure is. Twenty, twenty five? I wonder what Quik Load would say. It can't be much, but that velocity would make 2400 a viable 9mm powder.

Good testing man.


Cat

[Misskimo]

Yeh Cat. Looking at the burn rate. 2400 is #54. And AA #7 is 50. Which is listed as a powder to use in the 9
Max load for it with a jacked bullet is 7.8 g Speed 1119 fps. Pressure 31600
when shooting the first 8 loads with 7.5 it didnt kick
the 4 (8 g) loads came to life. Made me smile.
Im going to test it with 125 g 9 mm lead bullets tomorrow and this powder

[Misskimo]

Loaded up 10 with 9mm cast 125g lead bullets .356.
Half was between 900 to 1100 fps
the other half. 750 to 890.
So it looks like it dont like the 9mm bullets
plus the groups were wide. Like 5" at 10 yards
it seams to like 357 bullets best. My guess since .002 bigger. Has time to create the right ammount of pressure to get consistent

[Frank V]

Magnum primers have been used by several. I'm going to throw this out there realizing the cartridges are way different, but Elmer Keith used a LOT of 2400 in the .357, .44 Special, & later the .44 Mag. He ALWAYS said he used standard primers. I've shot a lot of it in the .38 Special & up, too never using mag. primers & with very good results.
Not wanting to start an argument, just offering what I've read & done.

[Misskimo]

Hey. Tested 10 loads today with 357 bullets 125g
8 g of 2400. Mag primer. They all shot in the 1100 range. Realy supprized me how close they were, 10 times better than the stock off the shelf PMC junk.
1162, 1141, 1127, 1123, 1072 , 1146, 1139 , 808 ?? 1067 and 1156

yeh. 2400 realy dont need mag primers. Easy to ignite . Ill try a ( just got them today ) fed match primers and 4 lbs of HS-6.

Which I loaded a batch recipe up with that.

[Catshooter]

What does your bore measure?


Cat

[Misskimo]

Springfield stock 9 mm. I dont have anything to measure it.

[Frank V]

Hey. Tested 10 loads today with 357 bullets 125g
8 g of 2400. Mag primer. They all shot in the 1100 range. Realy supprized me how close they were, 10 times better than the stock off the shelf PMC junk.
1162, 1141, 1127, 1123, 1072 , 1146, 1139 , 808 ?? 1067 and 1156

yeh. 2400 realy dont need mag primers. Easy to ignite . Ill try a ( just got them today ) fed match primers and 4 lbs of HS-6.

Which I loaded a batch recipe up with that.

Pretty nice low extreem spreads except for the one, that does happen now & then with no apparent reason.
Was your load compressed, if so about how much? Did you shoot any for accuracy?
Thanks

[Misskimo]

About 85% to the top. So I would think its compress just a bit
yeh. somewhat. Will use bench table tonight.

[Frank V]

About 85% to the top. So I would think its compress just a bit
yeh. somewhat. Will use bench table tonight.

I'll like to know how well they shoot.
Thanks.

[Misskimo]

I'll like to know how well they shoot.
Thanks.
hey. Heres the groups. Ones on the left are PMC ammo on the shelf
only 18 shots on the PMC. (Flyer)
this was at 20 yards on a bench rest


The black dot on bottom of target was what I was aiming at

[Misskimo]

Loade another batch tonight. 6 of each
8.2. 8.4 and 8.6g of 2400. 125g Colorado cast bullet
will check those out tomorrow FPS and accuracy to see if its maxed out yet.
Might can get 9 g in there. But small steps right now

[Misskimo]

Tested 18 loads today
8.2 g. =. 1159, 1128, 1079, 1146, 1172 and 965
8.4 g.=1148, 1124, 1133, 1110, 1171, 1118
8.6 g.= 1136, 1142, 1138, 1173, 1156, & 1133

looks like you can fill it up as much as you want
Accuracy Depends on your recipe that you like
8 g was good. Shot around 3" high.
8.6 shot at bullseye for my gun.
It's all about the harmonics of your gun on this load

[Catshooter]

I had thought that you might be able to just fill the case. Twenty four hundred is pretty slow for a pistol, especially a 9. That's great to see it done though.

Cool. Thanks for the data.


Cat

[Misskimo]

[smilie=w:. Okay.

[GoodAlloy]

If you are bent on 2400. I would run a small pistol mag primer and a compressed load of 2400. It will cycle. It will also give you a wide velocity deviation and mediocre accuracy with unburnt kernels in your action. I know as I have already went there. Now in the 10mm with cast 2400 actually works pretty good with the heavies. Please keep in mind that the 9mm load was tested in a G19

[Misskimo]

Hey. Goodalloy. I can tell you didnt read back when I started .

[Frank V]

Misskimo

It sounds like you are on the right track I think 1125 is about standard velocity for a 125gr bullet in the 9mm.
I think I'd pick the load that shot closest to point of aim.
I'm staying tuned.