THR Group Project - PISTOL - Advanced Reloading Concepts and Discussions

bds said:
When I get inconsistent results from expected, I question if some reloading variables are overshadowing others.

That's why I systematically approached reloading variables and isolated each to determine most consistent reloading practice in post #217 - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...s-and-discussions.778197/page-9#post-10940381
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say there was inconsistency here just a difference between powders. The one seems to have better results running hot and the other much lower
 
PhillySoldier said:
With CFE I got best results with a charge weight of 5.0g and a velocity around 1080 fps. (testing was with 115g projectiles)
Click to expand...
My experience with CFE Pistol/AutoComp has been they produce optimal accuracy at higher powder charges. 5.0 gr with 115 gr bullet around 1080 fps is essentially start charge.

Slightly faster burning powders like BE-86/WSF can still produce good accuracy at mid range load data but not at start charges.
 
Last edited:
Again nothing inconsistent about it. Ive run 6 full testing days of it. Im consistently getting best results with it at 5g.

Im averaging 0.9" 10 round groups w the hap's/xtps and 0.1" groups with the fmj.
 
Haaa I was just thinking about this thread. My ransom rest testing is at 25 yards. For each test I load 20 rounds of each charge weight and shoot two 10 round shot groups. I load all in 0.1g increments though will test shoot in 0.2g increments till I narrow down whats working best.

Going through my logs I think I should make some clarifications. With CFE Ive tested Hornady 115g FMJ's, HAP's and XTP's; each multiple times. All seemed to work best for me at 5.0g. The 1080 fps velocity though was for the FMJ's. The HAP/XTP's had a slightly smaller OAL and velocities a little higher at 1140 fps.

Secondly I wanted to point out that its not that I disagree that they run well hot. Above 5.0g the groups for me start widening. At 5.8 and above they start tightening up again. At 1300 fps Im matching the group sizes at 5.0g. Its possible if I continue to test higher ranges that it may out do both but I cut things off once I start getting above 1,300 fps. Considering Im getting equal results from both; I'll take the lower charge weight.
 

Attachments

  • Reload Testing.jpg
    Reload Testing.jpg
    203.7 KB · Views: 21
Philly, what are your actual group sizes at the different charges? I ask because group sizes can vary 2, 3, 4-fold even when shooting the same ammo.
 
PhillySoldier said:
Hornady 115g FMJ's, HAP's and XTP's ... at 5.0g. The 1080 fps velocity though was for the FMJ's. The HAP/XTP's had a slightly smaller OAL and velocities a little higher at 1140 fps.

At 5.8 and above they start tightening up again. At 1300 fps
Click to expand...
1300 fps? What are you shooting with?

BTW, this is from Hodgdon - http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol
115 gr Gold Dot HP CFE Pistol COL 1.125" Start 5.3 gr (1,059 fps) 23,200 PSI - Max 5.9 gr (1,185 fps) 31,800 PSI
Click to expand...
 
As an example my three tests of the fmj;s at 5.0g

Test 1
Group 1 - 1.2
Group 2 - 1.0
Tst1 Avg- 1.1

Test 2
Group 1 - 0.9
Group 2 - 0.9
Tst2 Avg- 0.9

Test 3
Group 1 - 1.2
Group 2 - 1.1
Tst2 Avg- 1.2

Overall Average: 1"

I agree that there is some variance to be expected between charge weights and even within the same charge weight. The above shows an 0.3 ES between six different shot groups of the same charge weight. However i am looking at the overall from 5 different full testings (three for fmjs, and one full for each for the haps and xtps) and the groups sizes consistently slightly widened between 5.1 to 5.6g charges for me; groups widened as far 0.6" with the fmj's. Above that its starts to decrease again.
 
bds said:
PhillySoldier said:
Im averaging ... 0.1" groups with the fmj.
Click to expand...
What distance are you testing?
Click to expand...
PhillySoldier said:
My ransom rest testing is at 25 yards.
Click to expand...
PhillySoldier said:
As an example my three tests of the fmj;s at 5.0g

Test 1 ... Group 1 - 1.2, Group 2 - 1.0 ... Avg- 1.1 Test 2 ... Group 1 - 0.9, Group 2 - 0.9 ... Avg- 0.9 Test 3 ... Group 1 - 1.2, Group 2 - 1.1 ... Avg- 1.2 Overall Average: 1"
Click to expand...
OK. I was wondering about your 0.1" groups ... 1" is more believable at 25 yards :)
 
- DRY TUMBLING MEDIA -

Many reloaders use walnut or corn cob blasting media for tumbling and they come in fine to coarse grit. For me, walnut with sharp hard edges tends to clean black fouling better while corn cob polishes better. Some mix walnut and corn cob 50/50 for fast cleaning and polishing.

Adding liquid polish such as NuFinish improves polishing and I found residual NuFinish on surface of brass prevents tarnishing for months (and years if stored in tightly sealed containers). Residual polish also seems to help with resizing of pistol brass. When adding polish to tumbling media, run the tumbler long enough so clumps disappear (Using a stick to stir the tumbling media de-clumps faster).

I use Harbor Freight fine grit walnut and media size is small enough to not get stuck in flash holes. HF walnut media is clean out of the box with less issue of dust.

Walnut media:
Corn cob media:
 
- POWDER TYPES (Shape/Burn rate/Coating)

Adding W244 and updating "relative" burn rate split from faster to slower based on Hodgdon's latest powder burn rate chart - https://www.hodgdon.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/burn-rate-color.pdf

I will be buying some W244 to test it against W231/HP-38 and Sport Pistol.

Faster burning pistol powders:

E3 - Competition - Nitro 100 - N310 - Norma R1

Red Dot/Promo - IMR Red - Clays - 700X - Bullseye - Vectan Ba 10 - IMR Target - TiteGroup - Vectan AS - Am. Select - Solo 1000 - WST - International - Trail Boss - N320 - Vectan Ba 9.5 - No. 2 - Clean Shot/Lovex D032.03

W231/HP-38 - Zip - Sport Pistol - Green Dot - IMR Green - W244

Slower burning pistol powders:

Unique - Universal - IMR Unequal - Vectan Ba 9 - BE-86 - Power Pistol - N330 - Vectan A1 - Herco - Vectan A0 - WSF - N340 - 800X

No. 5 - Auto Pistol/Lovex D036-03 - True Blue - HS6 - AutoComp - Ultimate Pistol/Lovex D036-07 - CFE Pistol - Silhouette - 3N37

N350 - 3N38 - IMR Blue - W572 - Blue Dot - No. 7 - Major Pistol/Lovex D037-01 - Vectan Ba 7.5 - Pro Reach - Long Shot - 2400

Enforcer - No. 9 - Heavy Pistol/Lovex D037-02 - 4100 - Steel - Norma R123 - N110 - Lil'Gun - W296/H110 - 300-MP - 11FS - Vectan Ba 6.5 - H4227
 
Family/Life Update: I am happy to report my out-of-state parents' move into a new house due to medical reasons has finished and my back is celebrating the last absolutely FINAL trailer load. They are definitely benefiting from multitude of last minute change orders made to the construction plan to better accommodate their declining medical conditions and the house is now fully wheelchair accessible which is anticipated. FYI, PLEASE make sure your retirement house does not have multiple stories, stairs or steep terrain that could be fall/injury hazards. ;)


Thread Update: Due to multiple out-of-state trips I had to make the past several months, I have not been able to do any range testing that were planned such as several Myth Busting thread verifications, RMR 9mm 95 gr FMJ load development, new powder comparison testing (N320 vs Sport Pistol and W231/HP-38 vs W244 etc.), primer comparison testing etc. As family situation improved, I have started to post back on THR threads but without any new range testing data or shot group pictures.

= Now I finally get to do some shooting!!! = :D:D:D

I started the thread with the notion "that covers more advanced reloading concepts and discussions new reloaders can glean to warm up to and allow seasoned/match shooters to ... squeeze out more accuracy from their loads." This notion has been the driving force behind my recent approach to reloading which was to quantify reloading variables with measurable and repeatable factors to optimize reloading consistency.

The culmination of various test/Myth Busting threads will better standardize load development and accuracy testing. This will ultimately lead to the "Mother Of All Bullets" thread which will be conducted with a machine rest that I hope to have a working prototype before Christmas.

I also plan to expand the testing of muzzle flash size in low light condition - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/need-low-flash-9mm-powder.809859/page-2#post-10357740

Here is the updated listing of Reloading Variables/Test/Myth Busting threads:
  • Pending - RMR 9mm 95 gr FMJ load development and pistol/carbine range testing
  • Pending - N320 vs Sport Pistol testing
  • Pending - W231/HP-38 vs W244 testing
  • Pending - Titegroup vs IMR Target testing
  • Pending - Primer performance (Which primer produces smallest groups?)
  • Pending - Powder performance (Muzzle velocities/SD vs group size - The "holes on target", the end result I am working towards ... smallest group combination with mixed/sorted range brass)
 
Last edited:
Thread Update: Unplanned surgeries for me (this time) with new diagnosis of spinal stenosis (I tell you, choose your parents carefully) that won't be helped by back surgery so several months of consultation and physical therapy was further followed by emergent diagnosis of glaucoma with extreme pressure increase and nerve damage and touch of cataract (thankfully not my shooting eye) which all forced an early retirement (When it rains, it pours). I spent quite a lot of time with my parents out of state who experienced further unplanned surgeries and worsening of medical issues and my retirement shooting/reloading projects along with my boat restoration/house projects came to a complete stop. Dad even suggested I should just build a range at their property so I could shoot. :D

With my parents' situation improving, I am back home again to be able to reload and shoot, picking up where I left off with my retirement shooting/reloading projects - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...endence-from-work.853305/page-4#post-11225321

With inquiries from THR members regarding lighter bullet carbine loads and new BCA Glock 40-9 conversion barrel accuracy, loaded up some RMR 95 gr FMJ with Promo for a day of testing (After a nice bowl of Menudo for lunch first :D) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ck-22-40-9mm-conversion-barrel-review.860473/
 
- PRIMER SEATING -

Repost from another thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...l-primers-no-bang.862844/page-2#post-11383434

lonewolf5347 said:
Well I did run a small indoor match last night great hit but no BANG.

I tried it again after the match still no bang.
Click to expand...
Did the offending rounds fire on second/third firing?

Are you having same no BANG problem in other pistols?

Any of these brass had their primer pockets reamed/modified? With mixed range brass with unknown history, I found primer pocket depth could vary and this could cause failure to fire even when primer was seated to flush. If these can be seated deeper with hand primer and go BANG, it's not the primer rather primer pocket depth to set the anvil tip against the priming compound.

I would have you try this to make sure you are seating the primers to the point where the tip of the anvil is pre-loaded against the priming compound:
  • Deprime and resize some brass
  • Inspect primer pockets for debri and measure depth for consistency (Set aside deeper primer pocket cases to test separately)
  • Hand prime or press prime ensuring the top of primer cup is seated BELOW flush (Preferably .004"-.008" below flush as measured with end of calipers)
  • Prime some deeper primer pocket cases to flush and set this aside separately
  • Chamber primed cases (NO bullet, NO powder) in the barrel (My Glocks will feed/chamber resized/primed cases from magazine or you can manually drop the primed brass in the chamber and release the slide)
  • Fire pistol pointed in safe direction wearing hearing protection
If all "below flush" seated primers go BANG, it's not the primer

If any deeper primer pocket cases with primers seated to flush failed to fire, you may have found one cause of misfire

If you still experience no BANG with below flush seated primers, try other pistols or inspect back wall of breech face for hard caked on fouling build up and soak/scrape off the build up. (This thin hard caked on build up is hard to casually detect as it will seem like a thin layer of veneer/paint. But after soaking in Hoppes #9 solvent and if can be scraped/flaked off, it's hard caked on fouling build up that can limit striker pin travel to cause failure to ignite primers regardless of spring rate - Even after striker pin/spring replacement as tip of striker simply won't go forward enough to indent the priming compound against the tip of the primer anvil)

If all primers go BANG with other pistols or after scraping off hard caked on fouling build up, it's not the primer.


See the anvil feet sticking out below the primer cup? They need to be pressed in to set the anvil tip against the priming compound (I think packing the primers so anvil tip is not set against the priming compound maybe done for safety) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ts-your-experience.630512/page-2#post-7794378

index.php


Priming compound is held by cup/barrier and moisture sealant as shown below with different color barrier (Color you see under the primer anvil is not the color of the priming compound rather the color of barrier/sealant)

index.php


Different brand primers have different shape/tip/height of anvil and the tip must be pre-loaded/set against the priming compound for reliable ignition. Proper seating of primers is a 2 step process and if you stop at Step 1 with anvil tip not pre-loaded/set against the priming compound, initial striker hit may not result in primer ignition rather seat the primer deeper, setting the anvil tip against the priming compound. If this is the case, second/third primer strike will ignite the primer.

Step 1 - The initial resistance you feel when seating primer is primer cup being pushed down the primer pocket. Depending on the primer pocket depth, seating primer cup flush may not set the anvil tip against the priming compound.

Step 2 - The secondary resistance you feel is primer anvil feet bottoming with primer pocket and sliding up inside the cup to pre-load/set against the priming compound (.004" below flush) and face of cup deforming (.008" below flush).

index.php


BTW, properly seated primers should look like these. Notice some flattening of primer cup face at .004" below flush and additional flattening of primer cup face at .008" below flush (You can see variation in primer cup hardness by amount of primer cup flattening). My QC check is to load finished rounds in bullet tray and run my finger tip over the primers to feel below flush seated primers. Any high primer I detect gets seated deeper

index.php
 
- RELOADING FOR .45ACP and POWDER CHOICE -

Repost from another thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/oal-for-45-acp.863361/#post-11386357

Rembrandt said:
Help me understand the OAL of 45 ACP. Recently acquired a Wilson Combat and was reading thru the owners manual for recommended loads. It states 1.25 OAL. Seems like the bullets are not seated deep enough.

Hornady 200 gr XTP's (.583 OAL)
Berry's 200 gr Round Shoulder (.506 OAL)
Berry's 200 gr Target HP (.531 OAL)
Click to expand...
I think this may help you approach .45ACP reloading simpler and easier - Consider Hollow Point/Truncated Cone/Semi Wad Cutter and Flat Point (In your case Round Shoulder) as RN bullets with either tip cut off or material removed from the contact points that RN bullet makes when it bumps the feed ramp and the chamber wall.

Take a comparison look below at FMJ/RN profile of factory PMC/CCI and Berry's reload along with HSM HP bullet that has RNFP profile. Notice the HP with rounded shoulders have the same profile as the FMJ/RN bullets but just with the tip cut off? Notice how short the OAL is to maintain the same profile above the case mouth as the FMJ/RN bullets?

index.php


If you look at below picture, you will notice the RNFP bullet on the right is also loaded to short OAL but is essentially RN bullet with tip cut off. As to Truncated Cone/Semi Wad Cutter profile bullets, imagine a RN profile superimposed behind the TC/SWC profile but material removed from the contact points. As you saw from above picture of different FMJ/RN bullets, you will notice not all RN profile bullets have the same exact profile we call "ogive" (different roundness and length of bullet) and depending on where the contact point is of particular RN profile, determines the nose length and width of HP/TC/SWC profile bullets.

index.php


And when many reloaders mention loading SWC with shoulders (Bearing surface of bullet base that engages/rides the rifling) about "thumbnail" thickness above the case mouth, that's because 1/32nd of an inch above the case mouth is how the SWC bullet profile is typically designed to duplicate the RN contact points. Look at below comparison picture of 2 different SWC nose profile bullets and you will notice the bullet on the left with much shorter OAL is essentially SWC bullet on the right with more of nose cut off.

index.php


And not all HP bullets have Truncated Cone profile. Take a look at Remington Golden Saber HP bullet below and you will notice it has rounded shoulders that more or less replicate longer RN profile with tip cut off.

index.php



So for my load development, regardless of bullet type/profile used, I use the following steps with dummy round (no powder, no primer) to determine the max OAL first then working OAL for my powder work up:

index.php

  • Then using max OAL, feed the dummy round from the magazine and release the slide without riding it.
  • If the dummy round won't feed reliably, incrementally decrease the OAL (say by .005") until it does. This is your "working OAL".
And once you determined the working OAL, you can reference available published/online load data to conduct your powder work up.

While powder manufacturers provide current online load data, I like referencing Speer online load data as it contains start/max charges for many different powders - https://www.speer-ammo.com/reloading/handgun

Here's Speer load data for 200 gr plated/HP bullets - https://www.speer-ammo.com/download...iber_451-454_dia/45_Automatic_200_TMJ_SWC.pdf

And Speer load data for 200 gr lead SWC bullet - https://www.speer-ammo.com/download...n/45_caliber_451-454_dia/45_Auto_200_LSWC.pdf


As to limiting yourself only to large flake powders like Unique and Red Dot/Promo to prevent a double charge, I would caution as a double charge of Unique for 200 gr LSWC will not overflow the case. Instead, I prefer to utilize safe reloading practice that will prevent a double charge regardless what powder I am using.

index.php

index.php


And if you are looking at Vihtavuori powders like N320, consider Alliant Sport Pistol which is around comparable burn rate but burns cleaner at much cheaper price - file:///home/chronos/u-cb07b9aa1a32fb243c11b4084eb32eda82f2081f/MyFiles/Downloads/Sport%20Pistol%20performance%20info%20for%20SHOT%20011017.pdf

Sport Pistol is cut extruded powder like N320 but cut shorter. But since granule size is more uniform than flattened ball powder W231/HP-38, it actually meters better. While W231/HP-38 meters with around .1 gr variance for me, Sport Pistol meters better with less than .1 gr variance - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/c-h-502-micrometer-powder-measure-10-drops.834894/

index.php


And if you are looking for higher velocity loads for HP bullets, I have used WSF for decades to produce full power/duplicate factory JHP loads but in recent years, switched to Alliant BE-86 due to greater accuracy powder produced. BE-86 has similar small flake granules as Bullseye powder.

index.php
 
Last edited:
- USE OF CALIPERS AND PIN GAGES -

Repost from another thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/measuring-crimp.860279/#post-11320703


Tensaw said:
taper crimp on 9mm ... I can measure the same round several times and get slightly different measurements. I'm using a digital caliper. Is it just me?
Click to expand...
No.

One could get varying taper crimp measurements from the same finished round due to following:
  • Worn calipers
  • Inconsistent use of calipers
  • Out-of-round bullet / tilted bullet during seating
  • Inconsistent case wall thickness
  • Inconsistent resized case length/Progressive reloading/etc.

Proper use of calipers and checking for accuracy/wear - Like using check weights for scales, I recommend use of known standards/gages for calipers especially since caliper gears can wear and loose accuracy from use. Since measuring cylindrical objects could have different "feel" depending on the amount of pressure applied to caliper jaws, I prefer to use pin gages to check my calipers with my eyes closed so I can get more consistent feel/readings (as bullets and finished rounds are cylindrical) and improper use of calipers and worn calipers will result in inconsistent taper crimp measurements.

You also want to use the same size pin gage as the items you are measuring since different parts of the caliper gears can wear at different spots. Since I mainly reload 9mm/40S&W/45ACP, I have .355"/.400"/.451" pin gages.

Pin gages can be quite affordable to have for each caliber you reload for. Here's Vermont Gage .355"+ pin gage for $4.61 - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ks-for-digital-calibers.821135/#post-10545265

If you verified with pin gages that calipers are inaccurate, this could be one of contributing factors to inconsistent measurements around case neck.


Out-of-round bullets / tilted bullet during seating - Due to manufacturing process and/or shipping/handling damage, bullets can become out of round which can contribute to oblong finished rounds at case neck. And if you see noticeable bulge on one side of case neck, it could indicate tilted bullet during seating that will also elongate finished rounds and give you inconsistent taper crimp measurements around the case neck.


Inconsistent case wall thickness - Depending on headstamp, case wall thickness can vary quite a bit at case mouth on the same case where we apply and measure taper crimp. In this myth busting thread, case wall thickness was measured at 12/3/6/9 O'Clock positions .100" below case mouth above which we typically measure taper crimp and I found case wall thickness could vary by .002" to .003" - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...nd-bullet-setback.830072/page-3#post-10712225

And .200" below case mouth where most of neck tension is created from thicker case wall, case wall thickness also varied up to .002" to .003" (And BTW this why increasing taper crimp at case mouth won't significantly increase neck tension as most of neck tension comes from reduction of case neck further down from case mouth from resizing die) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...nd-bullet-setback.830072/page-3#post-10713822

So adding inconsistent case wall thickness to improper caliper use/worn calipers/out-of-round/tilted bullet can aggravate the inconsistency of taper crimp measurements.

Other factors (Inconsistent resized case length/Progressive reloading/Brass condition) - These are less of an issue but when stacked on top of other factors can contribute to inconsistent taper crimp measurements.
  • While most reloaders do not trim auto-loading pistol brass, they often use mixed range brass and resized case length can vary depending on headstamp and number of firing/work hardening and this could result slightly varying amount of taper crimp applied to case mouth.
  • If reloading on progressive presses, depending on the shell plate load/tilt/deflection when varying resizing effort allows daylight between the bottom of die and top of shell plate and/or cause shell plate to deflect/tilt on sub carrier, push on the station that is applying the taper crimp could vary.
  • It is also my opinion that depending on work hardening/condition of brass, brass spring back could contribute to out-of-round finished case mouth/neck measurements. Measure some resized brass and see how many of them are out of round.
Tensaw said:
the manufacturer said it was critical that the crimp was a specific amount. In the past I always crimped just enough for the round to plunk and fit a case gauge.
Click to expand...
Reloaders have access to measuring tools that can measure to .001". Since most case wall thickness at case mouth averages .011", I usually add .022" to the diameter of the bullet for taper crimp amount.

So for .355" sized bullets, .355" + .022" = .377" is the taper crimp I measure at case mouth which essentially returns flare back on the bullet flat and very slightly more. If the case wall is slightly thicker, it will apply slightly more taper crimp.

And for .3555" - .356" sized bullets, I use .378" taper crimp.

Using too much taper crimp can cut into the copper plating (if using plated bullets) and deform/reduce the bullet diameter which can decrease accuracy.
 
- LOAD DEVELOPMENT FROM MAX/WORKING OAL TO POWDER WORK UP, INCLUDING OPTIMIZING ACCURACY -

Repost from another thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/help-with-9mm-loads-and-oal.851180/#post-11126373


TBL65 said:
RMR 124 gr FP Match Winner ... W231 ... 1.150 seems about max for my G19. I’m thinking I will test them at the 1.148 I have them loaded to now and ... Then try some a little shorter at 1.135
Click to expand...
Published load data COL/OAL vary because test barrels they used to measure chamber pressures have different leade (Space bullet jumps from case to start of rifling). And since most universal barrel fixtures used for testing are single shot that do not feed from the magazine, us reloaders must determine the OAL that will work in our pistols/barrels/magazines.


Load Development - First step in load development with a new bullet is determining OAL. There are two different OALs that we use, Max OAL and Working OAL. Max OAL is the longest length chambered round's nose will not touch the start of rifling. But the Max OAL may not reliably feed from the magazine. So we function test by feeding dummy rounds (no powder, no primer) at Max OAL from the magazine and see if they will reliably feed from the magazine (Pull slide back and release without riding the slide). If they don't, I will incrementally decrease the OAL (say by .005") until they do. Working OAL is the longest length that will reliably feed from the magazine. Often Max OAL can be the Working OAL but usually, Working OAL is shorter than Max OAL.


Determining Working OAL for Multiple Pistols - Just because a particular Working OAL works in your pistol doesn't mean it will work in another pistol as factory barrels can have different leade length, start angle of rifling, groove-to-groove diameter, different rifling type and chamber dimensions (SAAMI maximum or SAAMI mininum). Gen1 through Gen4 Glock barrels have leade length on the longer side and 9mm Glock barrels can allow longer than SAAMI max OAL of 1.169" depending on bullet nose type. In recent years (Including Glock with Gen5 "Marksman Barrel"), factory barrels have moved towards shorter and shorter leade length and thus require shorter Working OAL.

To address this new trend, this THR support thread lists max/working OALs of various factory/aftermarket barrels matched to particular brand/weight/nose type of bullets for reference - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...let-max-working-oal-col-for-reference.848462/

From the reference thread, following are listed as max/working OAL for RMR 9mm 124 gr FP Match Winner (Current production with larger .074" copper fold over at base - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...g-oal-col-for-reference.848462/#post-11077625):
  • 1.150" / 1.150" - KKM aftermarket barrel
  • 1.140" / 1.140" - M&P Shield factory barrel
  • 1.095" / 1.095" - Tactical Kinetics aftermarket barrel
  • 1.090" / 1.080" - Taurus PT-809
  • 1.085" / 1.085" - Lone Wolf aftermarket barrel
So if you load for multiple pistols, use the Working OAL that will work with barrel with shortest leade. FYI, below is comparison picture of different RMR 124 gr jacketed bullets to show different max/working OAL depending on nose profile. OALs shown is Working OAL for my barrel with shortest leade.

index.php



Powder Work Up Consideration - Once a Working OAL is determined, then proceed to powder work up. One consideration I use when conducting powder work up is using significantly shorter OAL (deeper bullet seating depth) than published and I will reduce start/max charge by .2 - .3 gr depending on the amount of bullet seating depth.

index.php


If you look at comparison picture above with different nose type bullets, you will notice different bullet base lengths. Depending on the Working OAL and bullet type used, bullet seating depth will vary.

Start low and work up ... It's how deep it is in the case that matters. I measured the RMR 124 Gr MW TrFPs at .555 long.
Walkalong makes very good point. It's how deep the bullet base is seated inside the case neck that matters more than OAL. Usually, Truncated Cone/Flat Point bullets have longer base than FMJ/RN bullets and bottom of bullet base will get seated deeper in the case than FMJ/RN bullets.

So when referencing FMJ/RN load data that used 1.125"-1.150" OAL for FMJ/FP bullets at much shorter OAL which results in deeper bullet seating depth, I will consider reducing my start/max charges by .2 - .3 gr. As Walkalong suggested, it's good idea to start low as you can always go up.

Below are load data for 124/125 gr bullet from Hodgdon (Since 124 gr bullet weight can vary by 1.0 gr, I reference load data for 125 gr bullet interchangeably with 124 gr bullet) - http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol
  • 125 gr Hornady HAP W231/HP-38 Dia .355" COL 1.069" Start 2.8 gr (753 fps) 25,300 PSI - Max 3.3 gr (876 fps) 33,600 PSI
  • 125 gr Lead Cone Nose W231/HP-38 Dia .356" COL 1.125" Start 3.9 gr (1,009 fps) 25,700 CUP - Max 4.4 gr (1,086 fps) 31,200 CUP
  • 124 gr Berry's HBRN-TP W231 Dia .356" COL 1.150" Start 3.9 gr (920 fps) 27,400 PSI - Max 4.4 gr (1,037 fps) 31,900 PSI
  • 125 gr Sierra FMJ W231/HP-38 Dia .355" COL 1.090" Start 4.4 gr (1,009 fps) 24,600 CUP - Max 4.8 gr (1,088 fps) 28,800 CUP
Note the different bullet types/nose profiles/diameters/COL/OAL and different start/max charges. IMO, RMR FP Match Winner comes closest to Lead Cone Nose as far as bullet nose/base and would feel comfortable referencing my initial/starting powder work up from. But as the Working OAL decreases below published 1.125", I would consider reducing my charges as I can always go higher.

And as ray15 posted, another consideration to factor is your barrel's groove-to-groove diameter and bullet diameter. Not all commercial 9mm jacketed bullets are sized the same and can vary from .354" to .356" (With .355" being typical) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...re-sized-the-same.818806/page-2#post-10567453

Many factory barrels are oversized at .356"+ and accuracy benefit from using larger sized bullets (FYI Speer TMJ/Gold Dot are sized .3555" and Zero FMJ .356"). RMR 9mm jacketed bullet sizing run slightly larger at .3555" and this can increase chamber pressure a bit and may require slightly less powder charge to produce same muzzle velocity as published.


Determining Target Loads - For my powder work up, I look for two things:
  1. Powder charge that will reliably cycle the slide and extract/eject spent cases
  2. Powder charge that will produce smallest groups (most accurate)
As I conduct my powder work up and once achieve reliable slide cycling and spent case extraction/ejection, I will look for accuracy trend to determine possible light target loads. Depending on the powder used, this may not be the case as with slower burning powders, you may not achieve accuracy until high-to-near max load data.

And if I achieve reliable slide cycling and spent case extraction/ejection with start charge and good accuracy (especially with W231/HP-38/Sport Pistol and faster burning powders), I will "work down" from start charge to see if I can identify even lighter target loads. (Disclaimer: "Work down" below published start charges at your own risk)


Determining Most Accurate Loads - After my powder work up, once the most accurate powder charge(s) is identified, especially with light target loads, I will then incrementally decrease the OAL (say by .005") to see if accuracy improves without compressing the powder charge. You can calculate max case fill by following this post - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/red-dot-9mm-and-case-fill.848934/#post-11078957

So even though your starting working OAL may have been 1.150", you may end up with 1.130" or even shorter at 1.080" as your most accurate load. (Of course, significant incremental reduction in OAL will also trigger incremental reduction in powder charge)

These are many reasons why members post different OALs for the same bullet.

I hope this helps with your load development.
 
Update to Post #242 - PRIMER SEATING - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-and-discussions.778197/page-10#post-11386382

Repost from another thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/primer-maximum-acceptable-depth.860999/#post-11335744

Walkalong said:
The tolerances on primers and primer pockets show us why we can't just seat to a certain depth below flush in all cases, although generally if you get them below flush you are ok, usually.
Click to expand...
Not to mention primer pockets that were "modified" and made deeper by reloaders. (Particularly for mixed range brass with unknown history of brass condition/usage)

For these reasons, especially when hand priming, I look for the initial resistance of primer anvil feet hitting the bottom of the primer pocket but continue until I feel the secondary resistance of anvil sliding into the primer cup and pre-load on the priming compound.

Depending on the primer pocket depth, just seating to flush may not ensure ignition of primer.


Here's US Army AMU's take on primer seating depth - http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2016/01/primer-seating-depth-uniformity-and-accuracy/

"Here at the USAMU, we ensure our rifle primers generally run -0.003″ to -0.005″ below the case head. Maximum primer depth is -0.006″ and minimum is -0.002″."​


And SAAMI primer and primer pocket dimensions for reference

index.php


index.php
 
- DETAILED STEP-BY-STEP / TIPS / RANGE TESTING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THOSE NEW TO RELOADING -

Repost from another thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/my-proposed-recipe-newbie-here.864640/#post-11414374


Post #3 - Instead of guessing for OAL and powder charge to produce accuracy, here's a better way.

When I conduct load development for any new bullet, I do the following outlined in detail in this post - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-and-discussions.778197/page-10#post-11400667
  • Resize several cases and make sure they drop in the barrel chamber freely and fall out - This checks proper resizing of brass
  • Measure the resized cases and use shorter length cases for dummy test rounds (No primer, No powder) - Shorter length brass allow more bullet to extend above case mouth when loaded to same OAL as longer length case
  • Determine working OAL - Lock the slide back and feed/chamber dummy rounds from the magazine without riding it. You may need to decrease the OAL (say by .005") for reliable feeding. NOTE: While many factory barrels can accommodate 124 gr RN OAL to 1.169", due to 9mm having shorter bullet base with neck tension issue at longer OAL, many use shorter than 1.150" OAL.
  • Powder work up considerations - NOTE: If your working OAL is significantly shorter than published OAL, consider reducing max charge by .2-.3 gr. NOTE: If using bullet different from published load data, reference all available load data and use the most conservative load data for initial start/max charges.
  • Conduct full powder work up - Beginning with start charge, load several rounds at each .2-.3 gr increment towards max charge
  • Range test - Initially, focus on powder charge that reliably cycle the slide and extract/eject spent brass. Then monitor accuracy trends as many faster powders can produce accuracy at lower charges to be used as lighter target loads. Most slower burning than W231/HP-38/Sport Pistol powders tend to produce optimal accuracy at high to near max load data.
  • Fine tuning load for optimal accuracy - Once you identify the powder charge (Not at max charge) that produces smallest groups, incrementally decrease the OAL (say by .005") to see if group size decreases. Example of this is 124 gr RN loaded to 1.150" working OAL with low to mid range load data may produce greater accuracy at 1.135" due to greater neck tension for more consistent chamber pressures/more efficient powder burn.
Other considerations: Unlike many other brand plated bullets, Berry's sizes their bullets slightly larger at .356" for 9mm (Their internal testing produced greater accuracy with larger sizing) and I have gotten good results using lead load data. With regular plated bullets rated to 1200 fps, accuracy deteriorated above mid-range jacketed load data. Load data for thick plated bullets like Berry's HBRN-TP or Speer TMJ often have similar velocities as jacketed (FMJ) bullets.
  • Checking neck tension and bullet setback of dummy/finished rounds - Once you determined the working OAL, perform Quality Control check to test neck tension and bullet setback. While many simply push down on the bullet against the bench top to test for sufficient neck tension, I do not believe this accurately duplicates impact force the bullet nose experiences when slammed against the feed ramp pushed by the cycling slide. Instead, I measure the length before and after feeding the round from the magazine.
  • Taper crimp consideration - Taper crimp (Instead of roll crimp used for revolver rounds with crimp groove) is used for straight wall semi-auto cartridges that headspace on case mouth. Using too much taper crimp or roll crimp can reduce the finished case mouth diameter to the point where case mouth won't headspace with chamber and be inserted deeper or headspace off extractor.
Below is RMR 9mm 124 gr FMJ sized .3555" with .378" taper crimp loaded to 1.130". Note the sharp 90 degree edge of case mouth to headspace with the chamber (And note the even case neck bulge around the bullet base to indicate good neck tension and that bullet was not tilted during seating which would produce one sided bulge)

index.php


And finished rounds all showing sharp case mouth edges and even case neck bulge around the bullet base indicating bullet did not tilt during seating (Note 9mm tapered case with base larger than case neck)

index.php

  • Taper crimp - Plated bullets are often made with soft lead core and use of too much taper crimp can not only cut through the copper plating but deform/reduce the bullet diameter which will decrease neck tension. Since case wall thickness at case mouth averages .011", I typically add .022" to the diameter of the bullet which essentially will bring the case mouth flare back flat on the bullet and very slightly more. So for .355" sized bullets, .355"+.022"=.377" taper crimp measure at case mouth. And for .356" sized bullets, .356"+.022"=.378" taper crimp - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...nd-bullet-setback.830072/page-3#post-10712225
  • Acceptable amount of bullet setback and correcting insufficient neck tension - With longer OALs (like 1.150"-1.160") that seat bullet base closer towards case mouth where case wall is thinner (Think less friction/tension against bullet base), less neck tension is applied and after bullet nose bumps the feed ramp, could experience greater bullet setback. With sufficient neck tension, there should be no bullet setback (especially for match grade rounds). For many reloaders making general purpose range blasting ammo, bullet setback of less than .005" is acceptable but greater bullet setback indicates poor neck tension that needs to be addressed.
  • Make sure you are full length resizing the brass by checking for daylight between bottom of die and top of shell holder/shell plate during resizing. If you see daylight with ram in the uppermost position while resizing a case, lower the resizing die until it barely "kisses" the top of the shell holder/shell plate.
  • Use shorter OAL to seat the bullet base deeper where the case wall is thicker to produce greater neck tension. This is why increasing the taper crimp amount at case mouth won't really improve poor neck tension as friction from taper crimp is overshadowed by much greater neck tension friction from thicker case wall applying force against bullet base. In this myth busting thread, I measured case wall thickness .100" and .200" below case mouth to illustrate the difference - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...nd-bullet-setback.830072/page-3#post-10713820
  • Use thicker case wall brass if using shorter OAL won't resolve poor neck tension issue. Unlike most other straight wall semi-auto calibers, 9mm uses tapered case which is wider at the base. Due to this reason, simply seating the bullet deeper and deeper won't continue to increase neck tension and eventually, the bullet will simply drop down from decreasing neck tension at some point. Based on my experience with various 115/124/125 gr RN bullets, this threshold is shorter than 1.100" and I do not load 115 gr FMJ/RN shorter than 1.100". This myth busting thread post lists bullet setback amount (or none) experienced by various headstamp brass using .354"/.355"/.3555"/.356" sized bullets (Yes, 9mm bullets come sized different) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...neck-tension-and-bullet-setback.830072/page-4
Post #7 - Since many plated bullet weights can vary by 1.0 gr, I will interchange load data for 124 gr and 125 gr bullets. BTW, W231 and HP-38 are same exact powder - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-different-labels.797388/page-6#post-10806193

Here are Hodgdon's lead, thick plated and jacketed load data - http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol
  • 125 gr Lead Cone Nose W231/HP-38 Dia .356" COL 1.125" Start 3.9 gr (1,009 fps) - Max 4.4 gr (1,086 fps)
  • 124 gr Berry's HBRN-TP W231/HP-38 Dia .356" COL 1.150" Start 3.9 gr (920 fps) - Max 4.4 gr (1,037 fps)
  • 125 gr Sierra FMJ W231/HP-38 Dia .355" COL 1.090" Start 4.4 gr (1,009 fps) - Max 4.8 gr (1,088 fps)
And here's Speer thick plated load data - https://www.speer-ammo.com/download...m_caliber_355-366_dia/9mm_Luger__124_rev1.pdf
  • 124 gr Speer TMJ W231 Dia .355" OAL 1.135" Start 4.0 gr (887 fps) - Max 4.5 gr (998 fps)

Since you are using Berry's regular plated bullets sized larger at .356", I would suggest you reference more conservative lead load data or more conservative load data for thicker plated bullet (sized the same at .356") but loaded longer.

NOTE: While many factory barrels can accommodate 124 gr RN OAL to 1.169", due to 9mm having shorter bullet base with neck tension issue at longer OAL, many use shorter than 1.150" OAL.

So if your working OAL that works in both pistols comes out at 1.150", I would test 4.0, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 gr.

And once you identify the most accurate powder charge, I would incrementally decrease the OAL and test 1.145", 1.140" and 1.135" to see if accuracy improves. Chances are, you will find using shorter OAL will produce greater accuracy from increased neck tension.

BTW, many load 124 gr FMJ/RN to 1.135".


Post #9 - ... Since you are new to reloading, here's a great place to start off - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/reloading-library-of-wisdom.649184/

And since barrels with different leade length (space bullet jumps from case neck to start of rifling) can require different max/working OAL, here's a listing of different factory/aftermarket barrels with corresponding max/working OAL for various bullet brand/types/weights - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...let-max-working-oal-col-for-reference.848462/

FYI, here's a listing of my recent myth busting threads and pending reloading projects being worked on to help with your reloading hobby - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...endence-from-work.853305/page-4#post-11386385


Post #15 - Think about it. While many reloaders obsess about producing consistent "finished OAL" yet it is truly the consistency of "chambered OAL" after bullet nose bumps the feed ramp that determines the consistency of chamber pressures produced which will translate to consistent muzzle velocities/accuracy. And these are reasons why many load 124 gr FMJ/RN to 1.135" and 115 gr FMJ/RN to 1.130" (And for me, down to 1.110").

BTW, here's a listing of bullet manufacturers and vendors THR members have used over the decades - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ponents-on-sale.707473/page-178#post-11161685

Looking forward to the range report.

And as to refining shooting techniques, check these threads out:
Enjoy and have fun!


Post #16 - Based on our PMs, looks like you are well on your way to reloading.

I added content on taper crimp to my previous posts and want to add these further to help you with measuring - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/measuring-crimp.860279/#post-11320703

One could get varying taper crimp measurements from the same finished round due to following:
  • Worn calipers
  • Inconsistent use of calipers
  • Out-of-round bullet / tilted bullet during seating
  • Inconsistent case wall thickness
  • Inconsistent resized case length/Progressive reloading/etc.
Proper use of calipers and checking for accuracy/wear - Like using check weights for scales, I recommend use of known standards/gages for calipers especially since caliper gears can wear and loose accuracy from use. Since measuring cylindrical objects could have different "feel" depending on the amount of pressure applied to caliper jaws, I prefer to use pin gages to check my calipers with my eyes closed so I can get more consistent feel/readings (as bullets and finished rounds are cylindrical) and improper use of calipers and worn calipers will result in inconsistent taper crimp measurements.

You also want to use the same size pin gage as the items you are measuring since different parts of the caliper gears can wear at different spots. Since I mainly reload 9mm/40S&W/45ACP, I have .355"/.400"/.451" pin gages.

Pin gages can be quite affordable to have for each caliber you reload for. Here's Vermont Gage .355"+ pin gage for $4.61 - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ks-for-digital-calibers.821135/#post-10545265

If you verified with pin gages that calipers are inaccurate, this could be one of contributing factors to inconsistent measurements around case neck.

Out-of-round bullets / tilted bullet during seating - Due to manufacturing process and/or shipping/handling damage, bullets can become out of round which can contribute to oblong finished rounds at case neck. And if you see noticeable bulge on one side of case neck, it could indicate tilted bullet during seating that will also elongate finished rounds and give you inconsistent taper crimp measurements around the case neck.

Inconsistent case wall thickness - Depending on headstamp, case wall thickness can vary quite a bit at case mouth on the same case where we apply and measure taper crimp. In this myth busting thread, case wall thickness was measured at 12/3/6/9 O'Clock positions .100" below case mouth above which we typically measure taper crimp and I found case wall thickness could vary by .002" to .003" - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...nd-bullet-setback.830072/page-3#post-10712225

And .200" below case mouth where most of neck tension is created from thicker case wall, case wall thickness also varied up to .002" to .003" (And BTW this why increasing taper crimp at case mouth won't significantly increase neck tension as most of neck tension comes from reduction of case neck further down from case mouth from resizing die) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...nd-bullet-setback.830072/page-3#post-10713822

So adding inconsistent case wall thickness to improper caliper use/worn calipers/out-of-round/tilted bullet can aggravate the inconsistency of taper crimp measurements.

Other factors (Inconsistent resized case length/Progressive reloading/Brass condition) - These are less of an issue but when stacked on top of other factors can contribute to inconsistent taper crimp measurements.
  • While most reloaders do not trim auto-loading pistol brass, they often use mixed range brass and resized case length can vary depending on headstamp and number of firing/work hardening and this could result slightly varying amount of taper crimp applied to case mouth.
  • If reloading on progressive presses, depending on the shell plate load/tilt/deflection when varying resizing effort allows daylight between the bottom of die and top of shell plate and/or cause shell plate to deflect/tilt on sub carrier, push on the station that is applying the taper crimp could vary.
  • It is also my opinion that depending on work hardening/condition of brass, brass spring back could contribute to out-of-round finished case mouth/neck measurements. Measure some resized brass and see how many of them are out of round.
 
Last edited:
LiveLife you selflessly continue to bring measurable results to the forefront through many, many working hours. Speaking for THR we deeply appreciate the straightforwardness and simplicity that you lay out time and time again in this thread. After reloading I find myself continuing to refer repeatedly. Your sacrifice is duly noted thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LiveLife
  • Locked
THR Group Project - RIFLE - Advanced Reloading Concepts and Discussions
2
Replies
49
Views
6K
wombat13
W
jell-dog
  • Locked
Titegroup powder in 9mm - Too hot?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
35K
LiveLife
LiveLife
LiveLife
  • Sticky
Where are Reloading Components Available/On Sale (Not a Discussion Thread, Link Required)
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Replies
644
Views
115K
LiveLife
LiveLife
LiveLife
  • Locked
Reloading variables - jacketed/plated/lead pistol
Replies
4
Views
679
LiveLife
LiveLife
LiveLife
  • Locked
Prototype Portable Combination Pistol and Carbine (PCC) Machine Rest Build
2 3
Replies
66
Views
3K
LiveLife
LiveLife
Back
Top