358429 HP in the 9mm - Inconsistencies with Keith's "Sixguns"?

[Bigslug]

So, results, of a sort.

The 1.8 grain charge yielded about 680 feet per second; the 2.0 grain charge about 720-730.

Neither charge was sufficient to reliably cycle the slide of a 5" Springfield 1911 with the 10 or 11# recoil spring they're installing as stock.

There is sufficient pressure in both loads to flatten a Winchester primer pretty significantly - not to the point of turning the "inny" firing pin strike impression into an "outy", or to completely wipe out the radius at the outside of the pocket, but nearly so.

The jacketed range scrap + tin, 10 (ish) BHN bullet did not expand in my water jug test, and took seven jugs to stop. The nose was slightly compressed, but no outward mushrooming. Maybe taking it closer to dead soft, but as it's basically a .38 S&W at this point, probably not.

I think if you have the hollow BASE version of this mold that would allow something close to the reported 3 grains of Bullseye, this concept may be worth exploring. It's a gentle load, and the informal slaughter of cans and bottles indicates it may have pretty good accuracy chops as well, but as for it being a 9mm version of the .38+P FBI load, no dice.

But we've explored the ancient texts of Elmer. Flight of tinkering fancy accomplished. Will probably stick with my 135gr Ranch Dogs until the hollow point bug strikes me again.

[JHeath]

"Inconsistencies with Keith's "Sixguns"?"

Such heresy.........

Elmer had a ranch in Durkee OR before he got run off to Idaho. Wasn't that your neck of the woods? Or were you closer to Heppner?

"Inconsistent" is not a word I have heard applied to EK. I recall hearing that his drafts were especially rough, like a lot of things about him, and gave the editor some work. I think you have a few years on me, but I caught the end of the era with Elmer, Col. Askins, Bill Jordan, Jack O'Connor. I don't know that anybody today is comparable.

[Fluxed]

I've shot heavy boollits in 9mm - just remember to seat it out long. Its pretty standard for folks shooting 9mm in competition to seat long with long throat to match. It helps 9mm 1911s feed better. As for any possibility of a mistake by Elmer, well shut your dirty little mouth!

[Larry Gibson]

I found out a long time ago, for a heavy bullet in the 9mm, the Lyman 358477 at 150 gr was a much better bullet to use than the 358429. Even the 358156 at 160 gr was better than the 358429 in the 9mm.

[tejano]

Larry, is there one particular firearm where Lyman 358477 has worked really well for you?

[walnut1704]

In a strange coincidence, the rash of 38 Special wadcutters blowing up guns happened just as the handloading market was flooded with new progressive reloading machines.

It's not a coincidence at all. Because it's false. I keep seeing this same sentiment repeated over and over.

They were blowing up guns in the 50's and 60's, long before progressives became widely used by hobbyist reloaders. Dillon introduced the RL450 around 1980 and that affordable machine invented the market for affordable progressives. I got mine in 1982. I still have it. Well, sort of. So many parts have been replaced there's not much of the original machine left.

There are many like me that have been using progressives for well over 40 years and have never blown up a gun. There are many single stage users who refuse to accept them, for whatever reason (fear?), and insist (with no experience or evidence) that progressives are less safe. I can only assume it's confirmation bias in their own decisions. Or their inability to safely operate a progressive, which is fine. Some just don't have the aptitude for it.

I have an unfounded claim of my own: Progressives are safer. It's safe to assume that progressive users load and fire a lot more ammo than single stage users by a huge margin. As a percentage of failures the progressive is probably lower than the single stage. I know several progressive users that are well into a six-figure round count (myself included) and never had a problem.

It's not the equipment, it's the human doing the reloading. A single stage won't make you safer. It's dangerous to think so. It's called complacency. The only two KABOOMs that I personally know of were from single stage presses.

[hoodat]

"It's not the equipment, it's the human doing the reloading. A single stage won't make you safer. It's dangerous to think so. It's called complacency. The only two KABOOMs that I personally know of were from single stage presses."

I'll believe you and primarily agree with your statement. Another statement that I've heard and primarily agree with is --

"Most reloaders who use a progressive press, will never blow up a firearm, but most reloaders who blow up a firearm load with a progressive press."

That statement absolutely does not prove a correlation, but MIGHT indicate a tendency.

It should also be noted that some progressive systems are much better than others as is also the case with guys who reload. jd

[steve urquell]

I have has several instances of double charging cases in my progressive press.

Since I always visually inspect each charged case before seating a bullet, I have never had a problem. If someone isn't doing that then they should change their method.

When changing to a new powder I will single charge a case and then double charge one to note the differences so I am certain of how a double charge will look in the case.