THR Group Project - PISTOL - Advanced Reloading Concepts and Discussions

- POWDER CHARGE DROP VARIANCE

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9949060#post9949060

otisrush said:

How Frequently Check The Powder Measure?

Click to expand...

I am using C-H 502, Dillon, Lee Perfect Powder Measure (PPM) and Pro Auto Disk (PAD)

As others posted, I allow the powder measure to settle powder in the hopper and drop charges until consistent on my Ohaus 10-10 scale.

Frequency of checking powder charges on C-H/Dillon/PPM for "drifting" of powder drops will vary depending on the powder but typically once every 10 to 50 drops.

But not for PAD as once drops are verified consistent within .1 gr for most popular pistol powders, I never have to recheck for "drifting" of powder drops as it uses fixed volumetric disks that cannot drift.

- EVALUATING PISTOL LOADS
- BARREL GROOVE-TO-GROOVE DIAMETER

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9953199#post9953199

egd said:

kirk37r said:

Extreme plated 124 gr rn ... BE-86 ... 4.6, 4.9 and 5.2 all at 1.160 COL

Shield was not happy at all
P226 not bad and SP2022 ok

Seemed like A lot of Soot on casings.

Thoughts??

Click to expand...

I've been following this thread since the beginning too. The one thing that seems odd to me is a somewhat discrepancy in loads.

For 9mm,124 bullets ... it seems one or more of you were getting more accurate loads down around 4.5 to 4.7 gr. While another were doing ... at around 5.4 to 5.6 gr. with comparable oals. That seems like a big difference. I know every gun is different

Click to expand...

Yes, every gun is different as groove-to-groove diameter can range from .355" to .358"+ with varying lengths of leade/free bore.

Even with the same gun and powder charge at the same OAL/COL, different bullets can significantly affect accuracy as bullet nose profile (ogive)/diameter/softness of core/ability to deform base and seal with the barrel/etc.

With 124 gr RMR HM RN bullet (11-12 BHN), I used 5.2 gr of BE-86 and 1.160" OAL (.377" taper crimp) With Glock 22 but used KKM/Lone Wolf aftermarket barrels with .355"-.356" groove diameters - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9655361#post9655361



These combinations produced sub 2" shot groups at 25 yards (with hands resting on top of a small ice chest) but many 9mm factory barrels are oversized and if your groove diameter slugs more than .356", you will need to increase the powder charge or you will get inefficient powder burn/sooty cases and poor accuracy. Since Dudedog provided good data with lower charges down to 4.6 gr, I intend to repeat my accuracy testing and work down from 5.2 gr.

Maybe need to work the COL down some.

Click to expand...

I would suggest you slug the barrels and if groove diameter is more than .356", I would try incrementally higher powder charges (.1-.2 gr) at the same OAL and watch the accuracy trends.

Shot at 10 yds, Elbows rested on bench.

Click to expand...

At 10 yards, typical 9mm semi auto compacts/subcompacts should produce 2-3" shot groups using average factory loads (I use 1" at 7 yards, 2" at 10 yds and 3" at 15 yds as my factory ammo reference while my known accurate reloads will produce sub 1.5"-2" with compacts/subcompacts at 15 yards).

Also, instead of resting your elbows on the bench, use a small box/sand bags/even small ice chest to rest your hands. Resting the hands (vs elbows) should provide greater stabilization for accuracy testing. If you want greater accuracy testing, rest the dust cover portion of the pistol on a "V" notch of a pistol rest.

- USING LONGER THAN SAAMI MAX LENGTH

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9955394#post9955394
re

Ky Larry said:

I need C.O.A.L for .40 S&W. Bullets are 165gr plated RNFP

Click to expand...

1.125" - 1.135" is more the norm for 165/180 gr TCFP bullets and my barrels reliably fed/chambered up to 1.143" for TCFP bullets.

If your barrel allows longer lengths, you may be able to squeeze out more accuracy by loading longer - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=506678

With RMR HM RNFP, due to nose profile, my Glock/Lone Wolf barrels fed/chambered lengths up to 1.155" - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9639622#post9639622

Due to the nose profile/ogive of the bullet, Glock magazine max length of 1.165" dropped in the Lone Wolf and Glock 40S&W chambers freely with a "plonk" and spun without hitting the start of rifling. Taper crimp used was .421". However, 1.165" dummy rounds got stuck in the magazine tube when I loaded 3 rounds. While 1.160" dummy rounds fed and chambered from the magazine even in tight chambered Lone Wolf barrels, 1.155" was decided as the final working OAL to compensate for variations in resized mixed range brass lengths.

Click to expand...

180 gr RMR HM RNFP loaded to 1.135" compared to 1.155"



By loading longer than SAAMI max of 1.135", accuracy improved with these two powders:

- BULLET DESIGN
- SEATING DEPTH - OAL/COL

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9957401#post9957401

egd said:

longdayjake said:

Can I ask you guys a question? Why is there so much love for the flat point over the round nose? I shoot the flat nose simply because we don't sell it as much so I don't have to worry about taking bullets that others would be buying. But is there any other reason to prefer a FP over a RN?

Click to expand...

I'm curious about that also. I like the RN, just bought 3000. I have been loading those to ~1.135 oal, how does this compare to the 1.10 FN length you guys are using?

Click to expand...

+1 to what 9mmepiphany posted.

Compared to Round Nose bullet, Flat Nose bullet with same weight :

- Produces longer bullet base and longer the bearing surface that rides the rifling, greater rotational stability in flight

- Shift center of gravity back more towards the bullet base resulting in less wobble (picture taller spinning top vs flatter spinning top of same weight)

- Shorter OAL/COL with same bearing surface-to-start of rifling distance that seats the bullet base deeper for greater neck tension and more consistent chamber pressures

- Allow use of few tenths of grains less powder charge to produce same chamber pressures

- POWDER WORK UP

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9960430#post9960430

JBrady555 said:

How do you work up pistol loads?

Click to expand...

http://www.thghroad.org/showthread.php?p=8864541#post8864541

1. Determine max OAL/COL using the barrel

2. Determine working OAL that reliably feed/chamber from the magazine (Adjust/compensate length for mixed range brass)

3. Determine max case fill for bullet seating depth with powder used (to not compress powder charges)

4. Conduct powder workup with lowest published start charge

5. Determine the powder charge that reliably cycles the slide and extract/eject spent cases

6. Determine powder charges that produce best accuracy (accuracy nodes) as you work up towards max charge

- LEAD BULLETS IN GLOCK BARRELS

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9979739#post9979739

bullseyebob47 said:

your opinion on glock 19 and reloads ... 124 gr lead cast 9mm bullets ... would you shoot those rounds in a glock 19?

Click to expand...

Shooting reloads/lead bullets in factory Glock barrels - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9451186#post9451186

As to shooting lead reloads in Glock barrels, there are several more considerations. These are considerations for shooting lead bullets in any barrel:

- Commercial lead bullets come in different hardness ranging from softer 10 BHN to harder 24 BHN.
- Lead bullets come sized .001" larger than jacketed bullets and can be obtained sized .002"+ larger.
- Proper hardness/bullet to barrel fit/sufficient powder charge need to be used to properly deform the bullet base to seal the high pressure gas as gas leakage/gas cutting leads to increased leading.



There are issues specific to Glock barrels (see picture above):

- Glock barrels have longer leade (space the bullet jumps from the case neck/chamber to the start of rifling) which increases high pressure gas leakage.
- Glock barrels have very smooth start of rifling with rounded rifling which allow the lead bullet to slide deeper into the barrel before sufficient chamber pressure starts to develop which further increase high pressure gas leakage.

These Glock barrel features allow more high pressure gas leakage around the bullet which results in more of the following:

- High pressure gas leakage around the bullet blows liquefied lube from the bullet and down the barrel which may increase fouling/leading build up, especially near the chamber end of the barrel.
- If high enough powder charge is not used, powder burn may be inefficient and insufficient/inconsistent chamber pressures may not deform the bullet base to allow the bullet to "skid" down the barrel and increase fouling/leading build up.

Unless you use the proper hardness/sizing of lead bullet for the powder/charge used that produce sufficient chamber pressures to minimize fouling/leading build up, it is a good idea to inspect the Glock barrel more frequently for fouling/leading build up. So more careful load development/powder workup may be required. rcmodel usually recommends inspecting the Glock barrel around 200-300 lead rounds and I found this to be a good interval as loads that produce fouling will start to decrease accuracy above 300 round count. If your lead loads produce fouling/leading at lower round count, inspect the barrel more often and clean as necessary. If you develop lead loads that work well with Glock barrels to minimize/prevent fouling/leading, that's great.

- SEATING DEPTH - OAL/COL

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9998303#post9998303

glennv said:

9mm ... round nose ... OAL of 1.135 ... switch to ... hollow point ... all failed

1.105 ... now chamber fine. Is this way to short for 9mm?

Click to expand...

No.

Most FP, RNFP and HP bullets will seat deeper than RN bullets of same weight due to shorter nose and longer body. While most RN bullets are designed to be loaded up to 1.169" (with exceptions), FP/RNFP/HP bullets need to be loaded shorter around 1.100" or the shoulders will hit the start of rifling.

Some RN bullets (like MBC, Dardas, etc. without stepped nose) have shorter/rounder nose with longer body and need to be loaded shorter than 1.080"-1.100" to work in barrels with quicker start of rifling.

To avoid compressing the powder charge (which significantly increases chamber pressure), when I am loading with bullets that get seated deeper, I will first determine the max/working OAL then calculate the bullet seating depth by subtracting the bullet length from the working OAL. I will then fill the case with powder to bullet seating depth and weigh the powder charge to determine max case fill for that powder/bullet seating depth to reference with load data.

- OAL/COL VARIATION

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10015764#post10015764

Furncliff said:

9mm ... LNL AP ... I'm getting 1.129 on the long end and 1.120 on the short end

Click to expand...

If your OAL/COL variation is due to bullet nose variation or tilting of bullet during seating, proper (flat vs round) or custom seating stem will help.

If your OAL/COL variation is due to shell plate tilt/deflection, using separately resized brass will help as effort needed to flare case mouth, seat bullet and crimp case will cause less shell plate tilt/deflection.

As others posted, variation of a few thousands is OK for me but I would look into why I have more significant OAL variation.

For me, I am more interested in neck tension and whether chambered rounds will experience bullet setback and will measure OAL before and after I chamber dummy rounds (no powder/no primer) from the magazine. If I measure OAL reduction of more than a few thousandths, I will investigate why.

- Bullet OAL/Seating Depth

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10033476#post10033476

9mmepiphany said:

JDGray said:

Powder position in the case makes a huge difference, way more then oal.

Click to expand...

I never thought there was enough room in this case to make much difference. Granted, I use pretty fluffy powders...I can't even get an intentional double charge without overflowing the case

What has been your experience with 9x19mm cases in this regard?

Click to expand...

With small case volume and powder charges/OAL we typically use, I don't think we would end up with charges small enough to expose the primer when firing.

But I am more concerned about compressing powder charges when using short OAL at high-to-near max load data with certain powders as compressing the powder charge would spike chamber pressures. Due to this reason, once I determine the max/working OAL, I now always determine the max case fill at that bullet seating depth when referencing load data/conducting load development to avoid compressing powder charges with certain powders.

- LEADING ISSUES WITH 9MM

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10039355#post10039355

Chetc said:

Ruger SR9C ... lead 120 gr tcbb with 4.7gr Unique with a COL of 1.040 ... barrel was leaded, had a tough time cleaning it, since i normally dont deal with leaded barrels.

Click to expand...

I would slug the barrel and see what the groove-to-groove diameter is. If the barrel is oversized, using more powder may not address the leading issue, especially if the bullet diameter is undersized for the barrel and/or the bullet alloy too hard for the velocity/pressures used.

Another member had leading issues with a new SR9 pistol using harder alloy bullets and I sent an assortment of MBC lead bullets sized .356" and .357" (BHN 18) and while the leading decreased, it did not entirely eliminate the problem as the barrel was oversized (I believe .357"+). I even suggested squishing the bullet down with a vise to size the bullets to .358" to see if that would help but leading continued.

Many suggested the member simply use larger sized bullets than groove diameter but the problem is larger .358" sized bullets would not always chamber in all factory barrels as chamber dimensions vary.

I ultimately suggested the member contact Ruger to see if a barrel swap was an option and after some fuss with customer service/technical department, in the end the member received a replacement barrel with .355"-.356" groove diameter and leading problem went away using typical .356" sized bullets.

BTW, all of my KKM/Lone Wolf barrels' groove diameters range .355"-.356" and I do not get leading with various powders and bullets (MBC 18 BHN, Dardas 16 BHN, ZCast 14-16 BHN) and even with lighter charges.

FYI, Glen Fryxell has an excellent free ebook on issues related to leading (definition/detection/location/prevention/removal) and chapter 7 is a wealth of information that should be referenced when working with lead bullets - http://www.lasc.us/Fryxell_Book_Chapter_7_Leading.htm

- MAX CASE FILL

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10045806#post10045806

Dudedog said:

I have also used 4.4 and 4.7 of BE86 with the 125gr lead cones. 4.7 shot a bit better for me. If you use BE86 I would start at 4.4 ( about 1000fps for me) and work up. I think Alliants data for that powder in 9mm runs on the hot side. (at least in my pistols) They list 5.7 as a MAX charge so 5.7 =- 10% to start is 5.2gr. For me 4.7gr was giving about 1050-1060 with a 125gr lead bullet so I wouldn't want to start at 5.2.

Click to expand...

I would agree. When I did my load development with RMR 124 gr HM RN, 5.2 gr was max case fill using longer 1.160" OAL - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9655361#post9655361

I ended up using working OAL of 1.160" with RMR HM RN bullets to prevent powder compression and the load worked well to produce accuracy. But for lead RN, I typically use 1.125" working OAL for stepped RN (for my barrels with quicker start of rifling) and would work up from lower powder charges like 4.4 gr to max case fill for deeper bullet seating depth to prevent powder compression.

You can determine the max case fill by:

1) Subtract bullet length from OAL to determine bullet seating depth
2) Subtract bullet seating depth from average resized case length (I use shorter lengths) and measure this distance from top of the case mouth down using the end of the calipers.
3) Mark inside the case and fill powder to this mark
4) Weigh powder charge

- DIFFERENCES IN PUBLISHED LOAD DATA

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10069552#post10069552

1KPerDay said:

Help me understand this large discrepancy in .45 ACP data

Hornady and Lyman: 185 JSWC with same SD, same BC, same OAL.

Lyman says for 231 start 4.1 max 6.1; Hornady ... says START 5.9 max 7.2.

Click to expand...

Keep in mind that not all test barrels have the same groove diameter, leade/freebore and barrel lengths, start of rifling angle, etc. along with different load data using different headstamp cases and primers which all affect chamber pressures.

So even when the same bullet was used at the same OAL with the same lot # powder, chamber pressure produced could be significantly different as primer flash and duration can differ and different amount of high pressure gas can leak around the bullet before average/peak chamber pressures are measured.

Sometimes published load data differ in start/max charges with different pressures measured (PSI/CUP) using similar components which could mean that one load data simply tested to higher chamber pressures and thus used more powder and recorded higher muzzle velocities.

- POWDERS FOR 9MM

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10077097

Chetc said:

have been having excellent results with power pistol powder and the coated 9mm 115gr bullets in my Glock, Power Pistol is getting scarce around here, has anyone tried any other powders that were good in the 115 coated bullets

Click to expand...

I have had good results with BE-86. I consider it modern Unique with comparable burn rate that meters like Bullseye/PowerPistol.

Along with Bullseye/WST/Titegroup, BE-86 has produced very accurate 9mm loads - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9924922#post9924922

Chetc said:

I have plenty of WSF, but never could find a powder charge for the 115, i figured the WSF was better for the heavier bullets.

Click to expand...

WSF has been my preferred powder for full power loads (but will be doing comparison chrono/accuracy tests with BE-86 one of these days to see which loads are more accurate).

115 gr FMJ WSF .355" OAL 1.169" Start 4.9 gr (1,060 fps) 24,200 PSI - Max 5.7 gr (1,195 fps) 31,900 PSI

124 gr LEAD RN WSF .355" OAL 1.169" Start 4.0 gr (945 gr) 22,200 PSI - Max 4.7 gr (1,055 gr) 27,300 PSI

Click to expand...

For your coated 115 gr lead bullets, you can reference 124 gr lead RN load data for your 115 gr load development. Since Winchester/Hodgdon used .355" sized lead bullet, if your coated bullet is sized .356", you should be fine starting at 4.0 gr even if your working OAL is shorter than 1.169" - http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol

I would work up the powder charge until you have reliable slide cycling and spent case extraction/ejection then work up in .1 gr increment while monitoring accuracy trends.

For 9mm, especially for lighter 115 gr bullet that typically must be pushed near max load data to reliably cycle the slides of my Glocks (particularly compact/subcompact Glocks with stiffer recoil springs), I would readily recommend Bullseye/Titegroup/WST/Red Dot/Promo/Green Dot/BE-86/N320/W231/HP-38/Universal/BE-86/PowerPistol/WSF and even Herco which have worked well for me and produced accurate to very accurate loads.

BTW, for those interested, I did my Herco work up for 9mm with jacketed/plated/lead bullets on this thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=745656

I never gave Herco much thought after getting so so performance for 45 Colt (compared to Red Dot/Promo/W231/HP-38) but during the powder shortage, found Herco to be very accurate in 40S&W and very clean burning - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=743416

Toprudder said:

bds said:

Keep in mind that not all test barrels have the same groove diameter, leade/freebore and barrel lengths, start of rifling angle, etc. along with different load data using different headstamp cases and primers which all affect chamber pressures.

Click to expand...

But then that begs the question - what about factory ammo?

They obviously test it in something for pressure, but they have to know it will be shot in unknown guns. Do they download from max for safety?

Click to expand...

Sorry for the late reply Toprudder. I just noticed your post when I posted "Powders for 9mm".

What I noticed with various factory 45ACP ammunition (caliber in question of OP discussion) is that choice of FMJ/RN bullets used tends to have nose profile that accommodates barrels with even short/almost no leade. If you look at the comparison pictures below of factory PMC and CCI 230 gr FMJ, you'll notice different ogive that results in different OAL (Berry's 185 gr HBRN requires 1.250" OAL to fit my Sig 1911 barrel with almost no leade but 1.260" will fit most other 1911 and M&P45 barrels).

So if factory ammunition was developed for test barrels with .451" groove diameter and short leade, then factory barrels with short leade (or almost no leade like my Sig 1911 barrel) with same groove diameter barrels will reproduce similar chamber pressures but shooting the same ammunition in barrels with longer leade/larger groove diameter would produce lower chamber pressures and I think this explains why some people cannot achieve the muzzle velocities specified on the factory ammunition boxes.

- MATCH LOAD VS RANGE PRACTICE/PLINKING LOAD

Continued from post #77 - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9892617#post9892617

Match loads:

- Montana Gold/Winchester FMJ/JHP bullets
- Sorted brass / headstamp
- Separately resized and hand primed cases
- Primer pocket checked/cleaned
- CCI/Winchester primers
- Specific powder that metered with less than .1 gr variance
- Tighter finished round dimension QC criteria

Range practice/plinking loads:

- Cheapest plated/lead bullets
- Mixed range brass / headstamp
- Resized and press primed cases in progressive mode
- Primer pocket not checked or cleaned
- Cheapest primers
- Cheapest available powders, even with up to .2+ gr variance like Promo
- Less finished round dimension QC criteria

Click to expand...

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10077960#post10077960

I was taught to reload on Dillon 550 and Lee Pro 1000 by a bullseye match shooting mentor. When rounds loaded on both presses shot equally well for my USPSA match loads, I decided to go with Pro 1000 due to auto index feature that reduced the chance of a double charge and Pro Auto Disk with fixed volumetric disks that would not drift over hundreds & thousands of cycles.

For the past 25 years, I have mainly used several Pro 1000s to load over 400,000+ of 380/38Spl/9mm/40S&W/45ACP/45Colt rounds successfully. Although I currently have Dillon 650 with case feeder, C-H "H" type presses, Lee Classic Turret and single stage presses, Pro 1000s set up for dedicated calibers (9mm/40S&W/45ACP) are the presses I mainly use for most of my pistol loads.

All the various load development and accuracy test loads and shot groups I posted pictures of were loaded on Pro 1000s - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9924922#post9924922

For those in disbelief of my shotgroups, Dudedog verified my actual shooting of shot groups in person and met the range staff who verified my other shot groups - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9646469#post9646469

Is Pro 1000 for everyone? No

Does Pro 1000 require understanding of progressive reloading and some work to keep it running smoothly and reliably? Sure, like any other progressive press. I have taught many reloaders and helped set up their Pro 1000 presses but recommended they first master the reloading principles on "O" ring type single stage press (and this applies to any other progressive press reloading).

On the THR Pro 1000 support thread, solutions to most common problems users run into are well documented and illustrated - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=7877744#post7877744

Does Pro 1000 require regular cleaning and lubrication? Yes, like any other progressive press.

ljnowell said:

No tinkering involved for me. Still none.

I have a thread or two, one documenting unboxing all the way through ammo production

Click to expand...

When ljnowell PM'ed me to showcase unboxing of Pro 1000 by a new user to the press, step by step problem identification and resolution to help other users were outlined in this thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=761231

ljnowell is a bullseye match shooting THR member who should know what it takes to win matches (yes, he uses Pro 1000 for his match loads) - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=784210

ljnowell also shoots PPC matches - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=781052

ljnowell placed first place in bullseye league - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=780168

Bullseye match shooting posts - http://www.thehighroad.org/search.php?searchid=13926979

Believe me, bullseye match shooting requires consistent match loads and Pro 1000 is capable of producing match winning reloads.

To me, Pro 1000 is simply a versatile tool that can be used to produce consistent reloads. I think it got a bad rap because many new reloaders new to reloading/progressive reloading made mistakes and learned on the press with frustrations but it may have been due to "user error".

When I help setup a reloaders on Pro 1000, I point out the common issues illustrated on the support thread and when they follow the step by step checklist and QC checks, they are able to avoid the common problems posted on various forums as to why Pro 1000 is "finicky" and "requires tinkering" - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9614898#post9614898

- DIGITAL SCALE ACCURACY

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10085256#post10085256

Reloadron said:

We have had several threads where things like scale resolution and scale accuracy were really picked apart in detail. Regardless of choice pay attention to those two parameters, resolution and accuracy.

Check weights are also good to have and they should be good check weights. Most digital scales afford one or two check weights for calibration. However, it is best to have a good set including some of the lighter weights.

Click to expand...

+1. What I have noticed about digital scale threads/posts was that there was a lot of claims that where contradictory with no consistent consensus to help the OP asking for definite questions as to accuracy/repeatability/durability/quality and we did our myth busting of digital scales on this thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=759750

What we found were:

- 1/10th of grain (.1 gr) resolution is good enough for reloading (.1 gr resolution beam scales such as Ohaus/RCBS 10-10 scales have been used by precision bench rest shooters to win matches like 1000 yard Palma for decades)

- Digital scales with .02 gr resolution is more accurate than .1 gr resolution scales but will read in .02 gr increments (.02/.04/.06 gr etc.) and .1 gr resolution scales will read in .1 gr increments (.1/.2/.3 gr etc.)

- Digital scales are more susceptible to temperature variations (most have operational range of 60-95F/essentially room temperature and will behave erratic/inconsistent outside of operational temp range), require calibration using manufacturer supplied calibration weights, more affected by shock/vibrations and less consistent/careless weighing practices and air movements for higher resolution (.02 gr) scales

- Calibration weight that comes with digital scales is too heavy to check accuracy of reloading powder charge weights and should use check weights at least OIML M2/ASTM 6 or higher class check weights in the same powder charge range (3-5 grains for pistol loads) - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9593052#post9593052

You can get OIML M2 class aluminum check weight down to 1 mg/.015 gr (1 mg check weight not listed on ad but included with my sets) for $10 - http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003STEJAC/ref=pdp_new_dp_review

I prefer the ASTM Class 6 stainless steel check weight set by Ohaus (down to 1 mg/.015 gr) with a nice case for $53 (free shipping over $50/Zoro is part of Grainger) - http://www.zoro.com/ohaus-calibration-weight-set-500-to-1mg-80850110/i/G0843236/

- While some posted digital scales were affected by fluorescent light balasts and require long warm up time, even cheaper Frankford Arsenal DS-750 (.1 gr resolution) and Gemini-20 (.02 gr resolution) digital scales were not affected by compact fluorescent bench lights and read consistently without long warm up time

- 1/4"x1/4" copy paper (20 lb weight) weighs around .05 gr and 2 pieces should register .1 gr to check the accuracy of digital scales. Higher resolution .02 gr digital scales will read .06 gr for 1 piece of paper (due to .02 gr resolution) and lower resolution .1 gr digital scales may not register .1 gr until 2-3 pieces. My two Ohaus 10-10 scales will detect 1 piece of paper and read slightly over .1 gr with 2 pieces consistently.

- Although Gemini-20 digital scale has higher resolution, I keep it well protected in a separate storage area and instead use FA DS-750 on the bench for quick verification of powder weights, sorting bullets by weight, etc. as it seems to be more durable and less affected by bench vibration. Check weight verification down to 1 gr is spot on with +/- .1 gr accuracy variation but good enough for 4-6 gr powder charge range I use it for but I always use Ohaus 10-10 for initial powder charge verifications.

So get yourself a set of M2/Class 6 check weights or use 1/4"x1/4" 20 lb copy paper to verify the accuracy of your scale. Regardless of brand/price, if it consistently read within .1 gr (within operating temperatures), it should be accurate enough for most reloading purposes (to remove affect of air movement, you can use a clear bowl over the scale while weighing .1-.5 gr range or 2-3 pieces of paper).

Follow up post - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10092130#post10092130

Dudedog said:

Both my digitals are less than $100 I trust them because they seem to weigh the check weights correctly. (and agree with my other scales)

Just because a scale is more expensive does not mean it is more accurate or more consistent.

Click to expand...

That was the primary objective of the "digital scale myth busting" thread - to determine whether cheap $20 digital scales were accurate enough for reloading.

Thanks to the participation of THR members and their honesty instead of hype, we not only busted the myth that "cheap digital scales cannot be trusted" but proved that $20 Gemini-20 digital scale was more accurate than the old bench rest standby of Ohaus/RCBS 10-10 and other digital scales costing much more.

Just because a digital scale is brand X and costs hundreds of dollars more does not mean it will read more accurately or more consistently.

I believe ultimately it's the check weights in the powder charge range used that will prove whether any scale is accurate and consistent - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9596742#post9596742

UPDATE:

The Gemini-20 digital scale, Ohaus check weight set and the American Weigh Scales check weight sets were delivered today.

To my surprise, the American Weigh Scales check weight sets included 1 mg (.015 gr) weight when it was advertised that 10 mg (.15 gr) weight was the lowest weight. As many suggested, I ditched the batteries that came with the scale and inserted two fresh AAA Duracell batteries. After calibrating with two 10 gram calibration weights that came with the scale, I was ready to do some weighing.

To eliminate the influence of air movement, air conditioning was turned off, reloading room door closed and bench leveled. All readings were taken with the cover applied over the pan. I also only handled the check weights and pan with the supplied twizzers.

- The 10 mg (.15 gr) check weight showed .010 g consistently but when I changed the mode from gram to grains, it showed .14 gr to .16 gr (was the scale expressing its .02 gr accuracy?).

- 1/4"x1/4" pieces of 20 lb copy paper showed .06 gr consistently and 2 pieces showed .12 gr.

- The 1 mg (.015 gr) weight would not register no matter what. I finally gave up and accepted defeat that the scale was not going to detect the .015 gr check weight.

I really was hoping the scale would read the 1 mg check weight so I recalibrated the scale a few times with no success, the 1 mg check weight would not register. At least, 1/4"x1/4" pieces of paper weighed consistently.

Then I weighed the 10 mg (.15 gr) check weight on the Ohaus 10-10 scale. It consistently showed slightly higher than .1 gr. When I placed one piece of 1/4"x1/4" paper, it detected and showed between two .1 gr lines. Two pieces showed around 1 gr with the pointer never below the .1 gr line.

Summary:

Pros:
- Low price ($20)
- Lower [higher] resolution than Ohaus 10-10
- Convenient pan cover

Cons:
- Small pan (holds about 35 gr of W231/HP-38 and 30 gr of Unique)
- Small round platform (slightly less than 3/4") will not accomodate a regular pan from 10-10/5-0-5 due to ridged ring around the platform
- Gap between round platform and the scale top will allow debri to fall in


Conclusion - It's always nice to have check weights. Since the scale read the .15 gr check weight between .14 - .16 gr, I would say reading of .06 gr for 1/4"x1/4" pieces of 20 lb copy paper may be close enough to express that two pieces of paper should weigh at or more than .1 gr. So if your digital scale cannot detect two pieces of 1/4"x1/4" copy paper and you want to load max charge loads, I would likely suggest you get a beam scale that can consistently weigh .1 gr.

I will keep the Gemini-20 digital scale in my reloading room but away from the bench so it can be stored without batteries in a location that is free from shock and vibration of bench work. I will continue to keep the Ohaus 10-10 on the bench at eye level and use it to verify powder measure charges. I will also keep my FA DS-750 with flat square platform that will readily accommodate the 10-10 pan to do quick spot verification of charges and weighing of bullets/rifle cases.

Why was I concerned with .1 gr accuracy when my typical pistol charges run 3.5 - 6.0 gr? Because I load near-max/max loads with WSF. I have always trusted beam scales and check weights down to .5 gr but being able to verify accuracy down to .15 gr with check weights puts my heart more at ease.

I thank all those who participated and contributed to this thread. It allowed me to satisfy one nagging aspect of reloading that digital scales (even cheaper ones) can be accurate enough for reloading, but they need to be verified with known weights like check weights.

Click to expand...

- INSPECTING/CLEANING PRIMER POCKETS

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10092877#post10092877

BGD said:

Is it ok to not clean primer pockets for 9mm?

Click to expand...

I used to separately resize and hand prime match pistol brass for greater consistency. I inspected each primer pocket and cleaned as necessary.

I don't clean primer pockets of range practice/plinking pistol loads.

To see if cleaned primer pockets made a difference in accuracy, I did some comparison range tests and my pistols in 9mm/40S&W/45ACP could not tell the difference between two loads.

When I conduct load development for pistol loads, I don't clean primer pockets.

For rifle loads, I inspect and clean primer pockets.

- POWDER TYPES (Shape/Burn rate/Coating)

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10094169#post10094169

Jarhead66 said:

What's what in powders

9mm ... Is there a good all around 1 stop reference site that would give the ups and downs, pros and cons of the powders on the market.

My dilemma is why should I get Hodgdon over IMR over alliant and so on and does a certain powder have a benefit over another.

Click to expand...

Welcome to THR.

Below is a compilation of pistol powders by relative burn rate grouping - http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=9906849&postcount=113

Faster burning pistol powders:

E3 - Competition - Nitro 100 - N310 - Ba10

No. 2 - Bullseye - Clays - WST - Red Dot/Promo - 700X - TiteGroup - Solo 1000 - Am. Select - International - Trail Boss - PB - N320 - Ba9 1/2

No. 5 - W231/HP-38 - Zip - Green Dot - SR7625 - N32C - A1

Slower burning pistol powders:

Unique - Universal - BE-86 - Power Pistol - WSF - N330 - Ba9

HS6 - AutoComp - CFE Pistol - Long Shot - Herco - 800X - True Blue - N340 - 3N37 - A0

No. 7 - SR4756 - Blue Dot - N350 - Ba7 1/2

No. 9 - Enforcer - W296/H110 - 2400 - Steel - SR4759 - H4227 - Lil'Gun - 3N38 - Ba6 1/2

Click to expand...

What I found with faster burning than Unique/Universal/BE-86 powders is that faster powders tend to produce more snappy recoil while slower burning powders produce less snappy recoil.

Slower burning powders tend to produce consistent chamber pressures (and more efficient powder burn) at high to near max load data and produce greater velocities. You need consistent chamber pressures for consistent muzzle velocities which translates to smaller shot groups/accuracy. Faster burning powders can produce consistent enough chamber pressures at mid to high range load data for accuracy but will produce lower velocities. For these reasons, slower powders are used for full-power loads while faster powders are used for lighter recoil target loads.

Moderately fast burning W231/HP-38 (they are same exact powder) and Zip/No. 5 are often recommended for new reloaders as they provide flexibility between fast/slower burn rate powders with excellent metering qualities (+/- .1 grain or less variance) in most powder measures.

Powder granule type and size is another consideration. Powders such as No. 2/No. 5 are "ball" powders while W231/HP-38/WSF/AutoComp are "flattened ball" powders. They meter very well with +/- .1 grain or less variance. Powders such as Bullseye/BE-86/Power Pistol are "small flake" powders and also meter very well with +/- .1 grain or less variance. Red Dot/Promo/Unique are bulky "large flake" powders and won't meter very well often with +/- .2 gr+ variance.

Although large flake powders like Unique won't meter well, it is popular with reloaders as most pistol charges will spill over the case with a double charge while more denser powders like W231/HP-38 will not spill over even with a double or triple charge of powder.

I have used Bullseye/Clays/WST/Red Dot/Promo/Titegroup/N320/W231/HP-38/Green Dot/Unique/Universal/BE-86/Power Pistol/WSF/HS-6/AutoComp/Herco for 9mm and found Bullseye/Titegroup/WST/BE-86 to produce more accurate loads than W231/HP-38 - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9924922#post9924922

I like Red Dot/Promo for general purpose/plinking loads as even though they don't meter well, they produce accurate enough economical loads for range practice (Promo is lowest priced pistol powder at around $110/8 lbs).


Here are some more detailed characteristics and pictures of popular pistol powders compared to W231/HP-38 - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9890280#post9890280


Alliant Bullseye, Winchester 231/Hodgdon HP-38 and Alliant Power Pistol



W231 and HP-38 are coated flattened ball powders. They are the same exact powder sold by Winchester and licensed to Hodgdon in 2006 and W231 load data can be interchanged with HP-38 if your W231 was manufactured after 2006. Because of small size and smooth coating, W231/HP-38 meters very consistently and drops powder charges from Pro Auto Disk with less than .1 gr variance. The coating helps lubricate Pro Auto Disk surfaces and is my powder of choice for breaking-in new Pro Auto Disk. I use W231/HP-38 for all pistol calibers I load for as it produces accurate mid-range lower pressure target loads that produce milder recoil and is a good powder for new reloaders just starting out, especially if using Pro Auto Disk powder measure. It produces 9mm like recoil in 40S&W with start/low charges and moderate recoil with mid range charges. Because of small size and smooth flowing characteristics, I use it for 380Auto loads requiring small powder charges of 2.6-3.0 gr [successfully tested down to 2.0 gr] (below smallest Auto Disk hole) using this modification to my Auto Disk - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9318202

Bullseye is a small flake powder and meters with less than .1 gr variance. Bullseye can produce very accurate target loads (more accurate than W231/HP-38) but because it is faster burning than W231/HP-38, felt recoil generated is more snappy but manageable in 9mm and less comfortable in 40S&W. Bullseye downloads well (shoots accurate down to start charge) and is a popular powder with Bullseye match shooters (hence the name). Same Auto Disk mod works well with Bullseye to drop 1.8-2.6 gr [successfully tested down to 1.5 gr] - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9318360#post9318360

Power Pistol is a small flake powder and meters with less than .1 gr variance. Power Pistol is slower burning than W231/HP-38 and tends to produce larger than typical muzzle flash in some loads and is popular for 40S&W and other calibers for full-power loads.


Alliant Red Dot, W231/HP-38 and Alliant Promo



Red Dot is a large flake powder and meters with up to .2+ gr variance. If you look at Red Dot closely, you'll see occasional red flakes. Red Dot is a faster burning powder than W231/HP-38 (I think on par with Bullseye) and well suited for various pistol calibers. Despite the larger metering variance, it produces accurate enough loads for range practice/plinking rounds. If you find current load data from Alliant limited, you can find more FMJ/lead loads in 2004 Alliant load data - http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=182147&d=1364769070

Promo is a large flake powder and meters with up to .2+ gr variance. Promo burn rate is comparable to Red Dot and Alliant says to use Red Dot load data by weight as Promo is more dense. It is my favorite powder for lead 9mm and 45ACP practice/plinking loads as the same 4.0 gr charge is used for 9mm 124/125 gr RN bullets and 45ACP 200 gr SWC bullets. (Promo thread for 9mm/40S&W range test and 45ACP range test).

Although Red Dot/Promo can be used for 40S&W, like Bullseye, they tend to produce more snappy recoil than W231/HP-38 and slower burning powders with the exception of Green Dot.


W231/HP-38, Vihtavuori N320 and Winchester Super Target (WST)



N320 is cut extruded powder (like most rifle powder) that meters with .1 gr variance. N320 is a fast burning powder and many match shooters consider it to be the best 9mm match powder that burns clean and shoots accurate.

WST is flattened ball powder without the black coating. It is a fast burn rate powder that meters with less than .1 gr variance. [Although Hodgdon does not publish load data for 9mm, many match shooters use it. With 124/125 gr bullet pushed to beyond 125 power factor velocities, powder charge may be compressed to varying degree so anticipate spiking of pressure with higher than 4.0 gr charge with FMJ/RN loaded to 1.160" OAL/COL. Many seasoned match shooters told me WST was spiky at the top]


Hodgdon Clays, W231/HP-38 and Hodgdon Titegroup



Clays is a very clean burning fast burn rate powder that meters with .1 gr variance. It is capable of producing accurate light target loads.

Reloaders have either love or hate relationship with Titegroup. Titegroup meters with less than .1 gr variance and is a fast burning powder that burns hot and violent (spiky chamber pressure build up) at near max load data with very narrow load range for many loads (some may consider the start charge to be already near max ). It is a powder that I do not recommend to new reloaders, particularly with lead bullets. However, it is a popular powder with many match shooters as match loads that meet velocity/power factor requirements are less temperature sensitive than W231/HP-38.


Alliant Green Dot, W231/HP-38 and Alliant Herco



Green Dot is sized between Bullseye and Red Dot/Unique and has green flakes. It meters with .1 gr variance and I consider it Alliant's closest powder to W231/HP-38. I found I needed to use .2-.3 gr more powder than my W231/HP-38 loads and produces slightly less accurate loads but if you can't find W231/HP-38 or Ramshot Zip, Green Dot is a good alternative. It is particularly good powder for 40S&W as it produces lower pressure target loads with lighter recoil.

Herco is a flake powder sized comparable to Green Dot and meters with .1 gr variance. It's burn rate is listed between Power Pistol and WSF. This thread covers Herco load development with 9mm jacketed/plated/lead bullets - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=745656


Hodgdon Universal, W231/HP-38 and Alliant Unique



Unique is popular with many reloaders as it is versatile for most pistol calibers at high to full power loads. It meters with .2+ gr variance and while I tried to like it, since most of my loads are lighter mid-to-high range load data target loads, I prefer to use W231/HP-38 and faster burning powders that are able to produce accuracy at below high-to-near max load data. However, even if Unique was the only powder I had to reload pistol calibers, I would not complain.

Many claim Universal is Hodgdon's version of Unique as it too is versatile for most pistol calibers yet it meters better with .1 gr variance.


Winchester Super Field (WSF), W231/HP-38 and Winchester AutoComp



WSF is the powder I prefer to load full power loads, especially for practice/backup/near duplicate factory JHP rounds using bulk Speer Gold Dot HP and Remington Golden Saber JHP bullets for higher velocities it can produce. Walkalong suggested I try N340 for higher velocity loads and I am planning to do a comparison with WSF, N340 and CFE Pistol as soon as I get some. Like W231/HP-38, WSF is also coated flattened ball powder that meters with less than .1 gr variance.

Some suggested Auto Comp is WSF with flash suppressant but as you can see from the close up comparison picture, the granules are smaller and meters with less than .1 gr variance. I like AutoComp for 9mm/40S&W full power loads."

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10117874#post10117874

I have known W231/HP-38 to be more temperature sensitive than Titegroup and WSF to be reverse temp sensitive but did some digging and found the following: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=102744 http://www.thefirearmsforum.com/threads/temperature-effect-on-chrono-and-pf.130949/

Standard/Temperature sensitive powders (produces higher velocities at higher temps):
- Clays
- Titegroup
- W231/HP-38
- Power Pistol

Reverse/inverse temperature sensitive powders (produces higher velocities at lower temps):
- Competition
- WST
- Solo 1000
- N320 (but some claim reverse temp sensitivity)
- SR7625
- Universal
- WSF
- Silhouette

While temperature sensitivity may not matter much to most reloaders, it is very significant for match shooters needing to meet minor/major power factor requirements.

I had planned to do some chrono testing of my loads but it's been raining all week. I can add temperature testing as well to verify temperature sensitivity with chrono data and update the powder type/burn rate/characteristic post - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10094185#post10094185

- CASE WALL FAILURE/RUPTURE - BULLET SETBACK/POWDER COMPRESSION

Repost from another thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10121067#post10121067

rcmodel said:

mwsenoj said:

Glock 22 (40 S&W) with 5.0gr bullseye in front of a home cast 175 TC and got one that blew smoke and soot and spit brass. I found the piece of brass, and it had a chunk missing at the base or near the web and there was a hairline crack near the case mouth

Click to expand...

Older Alliant data says 4.5 is Max with a cast 180.

Click to expand...

2004 Alliant load data lists 4.5 gr as max charge for 180 gr lead bullet loaded to 1.125" OAL - http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=182147&d=1364769070

Whether powder charge (over-charge) was the cause, it looks like case wall failure/rupture.

With mixed range brass, it is for this reason why I prefer not to load at near max/max load data.

Cases fired with hot loads then resized multiple times (especially overly expanded cases push-through resized with U-die or FCD) can experience thinning of case wall at the base or become brittle (less malleable) from work hardening which can result in case wall failure/rupture.

Another factor to consider is bullet setback.

We often give much consideration to "finished" OAL/COL but not necessarily to "chambered" OAL/bullet setback. Even if you are using below max load data, if the bullet seats deeper when chambered from the magazine, chamber pressure increase can go way past max pressures and add to the case wall failure/rupture, especially if the case wall has been thinned/weakened/work hardened.

While with mixed range brass, we may not be able to test "chambered" OAL/bullet setback of every round, we can measure samples of different head stamp rounds for case wall thickness and see if there is significant bullet setback with any particular head stamp cases as I found case wall thickness varies based on head stamp and can affect neck tension/bullet setback.

If significant bullet setback occurs, additional factor to consider is compression of powder charge.

Many have posted results of chamber pressures exponentially increasing with deeper seated bullets. I think the exponential increase in chamber pressure (instead of linear) could be contributed by powder charge compression, especially if you are using max charge. So I would check to see if the working OAL/bullet seating depth compresses the powder charge and use longer OAL. Besides, most 40S&W TCFP nose profile bullets can be loaded longer than SAAMI max of 1.135" to produce greater accuracy - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9362819#post9362819

So with mixed range brass with unknown reload history, consider not using max powder charge, using longer OAL and checking bullet setback (when fed/chambered from the magazine) for some buffer.

Follow up post - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10122352#post10122352

mwsenoj said:

All I have ever used in 40 is Bullseye from two 8# kegs my dad gave me from when he used to shoot a bunch and load back in the early/mid 90s.

I've been considering going with a different powder but all of the usual suspects (231, aa2, hs6, autocomp, hp-38) are out of stock where I have checked. Anyone want to recommend a decent powder for 40s&w

Click to expand...

Disclaimer: Following post lists loads that are not currently published or not published so use them at your own risk.

Another factor to consider in regards to KaBooms is temperature sensitivity of powders. Many powders increase chamber pressure as powder/ambient temperature rise. As you shoot, barrel temperature can increase to over several hundred degrees, and longer a chambered round stays in the hot barrel, the hotter the powder charge will get and subsequently increase chamber pressure when the powder is ignited.

These powders are reported to have standard/temperature sensitivity vs reverse/inverse temperature sensitivity - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10117881#post10117881

Standard/Temperature sensitive powders (produces higher velocities at higher temps):
- Clays
- Titegroup
- N320 (but some claim reverse temp sensitivity)
- W231/HP-38
- Power Pistol

Reverse/inverse temperature sensitive powders (produces higher velocities at lower temps):
- Competition
- WST
- Solo 1000
- SR7625
- Universal
- WSF
- Silhouette

Click to expand...

If you are going to load at max, I guess you could consider reverse temperature sensitive powders like Universal, WSF, etc. for 40S&W but if powder availability is an issue, I would think using below max charges would be a better option to guard against KaBooms with mixed range brass.

Besides, why do you need to use Bullseye at max charge? If you simply need to punch holes in paper, you can lower the powder charge until your pistol reliably cycles the slide, extract/eject spent cases and still maintain accuracy. If you need higher velocities, you can obtain higher velocities with slower burning powders. While I have used W231/HP-38 for target loads over the years, I used WSF for full-power loads with higher velocities.


I have loaded 40S&W with Bullseye/Clays/WST/Red Dot/Promo/Titegroup/Green Dot/W231/HP-38/Unique/Universal/BE-86/Power Pistol/WSF/Herco/HS-6/AutoComp/CFE Pistol.

Since 40S&W is a higher pressure caliber with particularly "snappy recoil" many complain about, I usually recommend powders slower burning than W231/HP-38 (with the exception of Green Dot) to those new to 40S&W as slower powders tend to produce less snappy recoil (more of a push than snap).

When using W231/HP-38 and faster burning powders for 40S&W, I prefer to stay below near max/max loads and tend to load at mid-to-high range load data which also produces milder more comfortable recoil and LOWER CHAMBER PRESSURES which I believe is paramount when using mixed range brass that's been reloaded several times.

Can you load 40S&W with Bullseye? Sure you can as there are published load data for it, but it's a powder that I don't recommend for 40S&W at near max/max loads same as I don't recommend Titegroup for 40S&W to new reloaders as it burns hot and violent with very narrow load range (start charge is already near max charge for many loads).

Here's a listing of powders grouped by relative burn rates you could use for 40S&W (no published load data for 40S&W with some of the powders) - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10094185#post10094185

Faster burning pistol powders:

No. 2 - Bullseye - Clays - WST - Red Dot/Promo - 700X - TiteGroup - Solo 1000 - Am. Select - International - Trail Boss - PB - N320

No. 5 - W231/HP-38 - Zip - Green Dot - SR7625

Slower burning pistol powders:

Unique - Universal - BE-86 - Power Pistol - WSF - N330

HS6 - AutoComp - CFE Pistol - Long Shot - Herco - 800X - True Blue - N340

Click to expand...

If you want to load higher velocity loads, I would suggest Unique and slower burn rate powders. If you just want to load practice rounds to punch holes in paper, I would suggest around W231/HP-38 burn rate or faster but loaded at lower powder charges.

FYI, I did my load development for 40S&W with Promo (using Red Dot load data) in this thread but for 180 gr lead bullet, I would suggest 4.0 gr powder charge - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=6509911#post6509911

If you are looking for accuracy, I got very good accuracy with Herco in this thread using plated/lead bullets - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=743416

And I highly recommend BE-86 for 40S&W (my new favorite powder for 40S&W) - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=9644303#post9644303