Load Workup

[SC_Dave]

So this is a continuation from this thread where I seemed to do everything incorrectly https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/what-should-i-glean-from-this.832377/

I only loaded 3 to test. 4.5, 4.6 and 4.7. I didn't like the way the pistol cycled at 4.4.

Info:
G19.3
KKM barrel
115 gn RMR RN FMJ
Win 231
1.1 C.O.A.L.
10 rounds each
15 yards on a rest.


4.5 gns


4.6 gns


4.7 gns


From this it looks like the KKM barrel likes the 4.6

I wanted to test @ 25 as well but I ran out of time today.

Thoughts?

 

[LiveLife]

looks like the KKM barrel likes the 4.6

Looking good!

This is from the other thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/what-should-i-glean-from-this.832377/#post-10755567

what I see is a trend of shrinking groups as you increase from 4.3 gr to 4.6 gr.

 

[SC_Dave]

Looking good!

This is from the other thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/what-should-i-glean-from-this.832377/#post-10755567


For me, both KKM and Lone Wolf barrels in my Glocks produced good accuracy with 4.6 gr W231/HP-38 but they have produced slightly smaller groups with 4.8 gr loads.

As to using 4.8 gr, while Hodgdon lists 4.8 gr as max charge for 115 gr RN loaded to 1.100" but that is for Lead RN, not FMJ that you are using - http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol

Looks like confirmation for the 4.6! Thanks BDS.

 

[marchboom]

That's how I read the target. You could always fire a few more 10 shot groups of 4.6 gns to confirm the group size. If it gives you the same results just adjust your sights a little and you're set. No need to make this more complicated.

 

[Walkalong]

From this it looks like the KKM barrel likes the 4.6

Looking good!

Yep. Load some more and see if they repeat the performance.

 

[SC_Dave]

Yep. Load some more and see if they repeat the performance.

Will do.

 

[vaalpens]

Nice shooting. I don't have any experience with W231/HP38 and 115gr bullets, so I'm not sure what is a good range. I would have liked to see if the grouping opens up more or contracts again. But if you test the same 4.6gr load again and you get the same results, then it looks like a winner. My only pause before opening the bubbly is the grouping you see just .1gr less than your best load. What is the diameter of those targets?

 

[Walkalong]

I'm betting on the 4.7 target he was getting tired /losing focus and opened up the group a little. (I'm world class at that.) If he loads some of 4.6 and 4.7 and shoots say three or four groups with each, they may seem closer in the accuracy dept.

 

[Dudedog]

4.6 looks good!
Now if it will repeat you are in business.

was getting tired /losing focus

Happens to me.

Worst thing is when I start thinking about what I am trying to do and make "corrections" ruins my shooting and my golf game!

 

[LiveLife]

if you test the same 4.6gr load again and you get the same results, then it looks like a winner. My only pause before opening the bubbly is the grouping you see just .1gr less than your best load.

If he loads some of 4.6 and 4.7 and shoots say three or four groups with each, they may seem closer in the accuracy dept.

4.6 looks good!

Now if it will repeat you are in business.

For most people, if a load cycles the slide reliably and produce good accuracy, it is good enough.

While I usually repeat range sessions to verify accuracy of a load (as Walkalong posted, fatigue does factor in during accuracy testing, usually at higher charges as those are typically shot later), I have shot enough of various 115 gr FMJ/RN bullets to say 4.6 gr W231/HP-38 produced good accuracy. If OP wants greater accuracy, repeat range testing should be done up to 4.8 gr as higher charge load produced slightly smaller shot groups for me over 4.6 gr.

For me, I now use 10 shot groups (instead of 5) and repeat accuracy testing on multiple range sessions. I have done enough W231/HP-38 4.6 gr vs 4.8 gr testing with 115 gr FMJ and while 4.6 gr produces good accuracy, 4.8 gr usually produce slightly smaller shot groups than 4.6 gr

 

[SC_Dave]

Nice shooting. I don't have any experience with W231/HP38 and 115gr bullets, so I'm not sure what a good range. I would have liked to see if the grouping opens up more of contracts again. But if you test the same 4.6gr load again and you get the same results, then it looks like a winner. My only pause before opening the bubbly is the grouping you see just .1gr less than your best load. What is the diameter of those targets?

Thanks vaalpens, They are 6"

I'm betting on the 4.7 target he was getting tired /losing focus and opened up the group a little. (I'm world class at that.) If he loads some of 4.6 and 4.7 and shoots say three or four groups with each, they may seem closer in the accuracy dept.

I thought about this too Walkalong, I took a short break in between loads and stretched my arms some. May sound silly but I have a screwed up shoulder from my firefighting years and it aches some. I tried to break every shot as consistently as I could but even on a rest it's still possible to impart some movement so tired may very well played a part. It would be nice to have a ransom but I can't really justify buying one. A ransom may be taking it a little too far I guess.

 

[Bartojc]

For most people, if a load cycles the slide reliably and produce good accuracy, it is good enough.

While I usually repeat range sessions to verify accuracy of a load (as Walkalong posted, fatigue does factor in during accuracy testing, usually at higher charges as those are typically shot later), I have shot enough of various 115 gr FMJ/RN bullets to say 4.6 gr W231/HP-38 produced good accuracy. If OP wants greater accuracy, repeat range testing should be done up to 4.8 gr as higher charge load produced slightly smaller shot groups for me over 4.6 gr.

The first time I loaded for 9mm and 115gr Berrys with W231 all I wanted to do was build range loads and cycle reliably. Trial and error and being careful as it was my first time I ended up with 4.5-4.6 of W231 and 115gr Berry's Then I find posts like this from people with way more experience than me and I think maybe I am on the right track

-jeff

 

[LiveLife]

And now you are becoming another "seasoned" reloader.

You know, wisdom is gained from experience and we obtain experience by making mistakes.

But talk to my wife and I am still making mistakes ...

 

[SC_Dave]

The first time I loaded for 9mm and 115gr Berrys with W231 all I wanted to do was build range loads and cycle reliably. Trial and error and being careful as it was my first time I ended up with 4.5-4.6 of W231 and 115gr Berry's Then I find posts like this from people with way more experience than me and I think maybe I am on the right track

-jeff

I did the same thing Jeff. I started in the middle of the range at 4.5 for 231 and stayed there because It felt safe for a new reloader and it cycled the gun. I'll load more at 4.6 to verify my last result and probably stay there. I have a 600 rounds at 4.5 still left. It was way more than that some time back.
SCD

 

[Walkalong]

I thought about this too Walkalong

I was looking at the the targets as if I had just shot them. The third (4.7) isn't much bigger than the second, just "sloppier" (Fewer centered shots). I do that all the time after a good one (Lose focus). Also, with pistol loads they don't tend to shoot well in such a narrow window such as well at x.2, but not x.1 & x.3, they tend to shoot well over a .2 to .4 (more sometimes) spread depending on the power etc. So if I am looking at those three I wonder if I was sloppy with the first because I sometimes am, but it looks poor enough to say it was inaccurate, then there is a really good second one, and then (for me) it is very easy to ease up in concentration and open things up a bit, which 4.7 looks like. So I would tend to think I might have something at 4.6, 4.7, and maybe 4.8 or so from just looking at three targets and one try. I would load more up at 4.6, 4.7, and maybe 4.8 and try them again to see if I could do better and maybe shoot some solid targets and get more info on what is working.

 

[SC_Dave]

I was looking at the the targets as if I had just shot them. The third (4.7) isn't much bigger than the second, just "sloppier" (Fewer centered shots). I do that all the time after a good one (Lose focus). Also, with pistol loads they don't tend to shoot well in such a narrow window such as well at x.2, but not x.1 & x.3, they tend to shoot well over a .2 to .4 (more sometimes) spread depending on the power etc. So if I am looking at those three I wonder if I was sloppy with the first because I sometimes am, but it looks poor enough to say it was inaccurate, then there is a really good second one, and then (for me) it is very easy to ease up in concentration and open things up a bit, which 4.7 looks like. So I would tend to think I might have something at 4.6, 4.7, and maybe 4.8 or so from just looking at three targets and one try. I would load more up at 4.6, 4.7, and maybe 4.8 and try them again to see if I could do better and maybe shoot some solid targets and get more info on what is working.

Agree, 4.5 is what I shoot regularly so I was surprised with the spread I saw. With you getting a good group with 4.6 using the KKM it kinda reinforced 4.6 for me. However, I'd be lying if I said I didn't ask myself if there could be that much difference in .1 graduations. My thrower is still set at 4.7 so I'll load more of those and I have plenty at 4.5. I'll adjust and load more 4.6 as well and run it again. I may shoot them in a different order just to see if it makes a difference.

 

[Reeferman]

Dave I have a SAM 9mm 1911 that I started loading 231 under a 115 grain XTP. Started at 4.2 and found 4.6 shoots really well like you did.

 

[vaalpens]

I was looking at the the targets as if I had just shot them. The third (4.7) isn't much bigger than the second, just "sloppier" (Fewer centered shots). I do that all the time after a good one (Lose focus). Also, with pistol loads they don't tend to shoot well in such a narrow window such as well at x.2, but not x.1 & x.3, they tend to shoot well over a .2 to .4 (more sometimes) spread depending on the power etc. So if I am looking at those three I wonder if I was sloppy with the first because I sometimes am, but it looks poor enough to say it was inaccurate, then there is a really good second one, and then (for me) it is very easy to ease up in concentration and open things up a bit, which 4.7 looks like. So I would tend to think I might have something at 4.6, 4.7, and maybe 4.8 or so from just looking at three targets and one try. I would load more up at 4.6, 4.7, and maybe 4.8 and try them again to see if I could do better and maybe shoot some solid targets and get more info on what is working.

As always, good advice.

My approach normally if I'm not sure if I have really identified the load I am looking for is to start with the best so far. In this case it is 4.6gr. Then bracket the 4.6gr load with 4.4gr,4.5gr and 4.7gr, 4.8gr loads (MIN/MAX load data will still be followed). Since I prefer to test in multiples of 2 (2 targets per sheet of paper), I will add another load on the low or high end so that I have 6 loads. 5 rounds per load is enough for me so that I can limit the total number of test rounds. Most of the time I will just pick the most accurate load as my selected load, but sometimes another load will be used especially if the best grouping load's next or previous load shows some really bad grouping. Depending on the powder you use and the powder dispenser, the powder weight can fluctuate by +- .1gr.

Once I have selected a preferred load, I load up some more of the same and start using them to get a feel of how they perform. Then what I like to do is after weeks or months, pull out a few rounds from the bulk load and test them again for accuracy. If they perform as expected again, then I know I have a keeper.

 

[LiveLife]

best so far. In this case it is 4.6gr. Then bracket the 4.6gr load with 4.4gr,4.5gr and 4.7gr, 4.8gr loads (MIN/MAX load data will still be followed).

Thing is 4.8 gr max charge is for Lead load data, not jacketed load data - http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol


115 GR. Lead RN W231/HP-38 Dia .356" COL 1.100" Start 4.3 gr (1,079 fps) 28,400 CUP - Max 4.8 gr (1,135 fps) 32,000 CUP

115 GR. SPR GDHP W231/HP-38 Dia .355" COL 1.125" Start 4.7 gr (1,075 fps) 25,300 CUP - Max 5.1 gr (1,167 fps) 28,100 CUP


OP is using jacketed bullet (RMR 115 gr FMJ) and jacketed load data lists 4.7/5.1 gr as start/max charges. Jacketed bullets sized smaller at .355" leak more gas than larger .356" sized lead bullets and would require higher powder charges to optimize powder burn and chamber pressures. At 4.6 gr, you are still below start charge for jacketed load data, hence why I suggested OP test up to 4.8 gr as my testing showed 4.8 gr produced smaller shot groups than 4.6 gr.

FYI, 2003 Winchester load data lists 4.9 gr as max charge for W231 - http://www.castpics.net/LoadData/Freebies/RM/winchester.html

115 gr FMJ W231 Dia. .355" COL (Not specified) Start 4.4 gr (1,045 fps) 25,900 CUP - Max 4.9 gr (1,135 fps) 32,600 CUP

 

[vaalpens]

OP is using jacketed bullet (RMR 115 gr FMJ) and jacketed load data lists 4.7/5.1 gr as start/max charges. Jacketed bullets sized smaller at .355" leak more gas than larger .356" sized lead bullets and would require higher powder charges to optimize powder burn and chamber pressures. At 4.6 gr, you are still below start charge for jacketed load data, hence why I suggested OP test up to 4.8 gr as my testing showed 4.8 gr produced smaller shot groups than 4.6 gr.

This maybe explains why the 4.5gr load had such a big grouping. With the above load information I would still bracket the 4.6gr load, but would just do at least 4.5gr to 4.8gr (4 loads), and possibly add 4.9gr and 5.0gr also. If I am targeting 4.8gr as a possible best accurate load, then I would at least test 4.9gr also just to see what the accuracy loss is.

 

[LiveLife]

I used to load 115 gr FMJ/RN longer at 1.150"-1.160" thinking closer to rifling and less gas leakage would seal the case mouth faster with the chamber to produce more consistent chamber pressure. But when I found out Atlanta Arms loaded their AMU 9mm 115 gr FMJ match ammo to shorter 1.130" (which must meet accuracy requirement of five 10-shot groups at 50 yards of 1.5 inches used by US Army Marksmanship Unit and other shooting teams), I began to wonder why - https://atlantaarms.com/products/9mm-115gr-fmj-match-amu.html

What I realized is while other caliber/weight bullets benefited from longer OAL/COL which reduced gas leakage, 9mm 115 gr FMJ did not because of short bullet base that when loaded longer, reduced neck tension so much that initial powder burn and chamber pressure build was affected and overshadowed the benefit of less gas leakage from longer OAL.

When I did some comparison testing with 115 gr FMJ loaded longer at 1.150"-1.160" with 1.130"-1.135", shorter rounds produced smaller shot groups. I have since tested 1.125" all the way down to 1.110" and realized another factor at play ... powder case fill.

When you are using denser powders in semi-auto pistols (especially at lower target load charges), as the round slams forward in the chamber with the powder charge shifting forward, powder level can be low enough to expose the primer flash hole. I have done a cursory testing with 100% case fill vs low case fill to expose the flash hole and 100% case fill loads seem to produce better groups (My general purpose range practice and plinking load went from 115 gr FMJ/RN with 4.2 gr Promo at 1.130"-1.135" to 1.110"-1.115" OAL to produce 100% case fill). With low powder fill loads, seating bullets deeper can improve powder ignition and pressure build by ensuring powder charge covers the flash hole.

Of course since 9mm is a tapered case, seating 115 gr FMJ too short could risk reducing neck tension at certain point but measuring OAL before and after feeding from the magazine down to 1.110" OAL did not indicate significant bullet setback issue for me.

OP, sorry for the long rambling but since you are using dense powder (W231/HP-38) at shorter 1.100" OAL, I figured this information was pertinent.

 

[Dudedog]

I normally shoot 124s and have found in general my pistols like them seated deeper than they need to be to plunk.
The only way to see what your gun prefers is to try it.
If you have powder charge (that not a MAX load) that shoots well for you you might want to try going a little deeper.
Not much help with 115s but some OAL tests with 124s, all mild to midrange loads
String: 4
Date: 4/23/2017
Time: 12:54:31 PM
Grains: 124
Hi Vel: 1089
Low Vel: 1052
Ave Vel: 1076
Ext Spread: 37
Std Dev: 14
Xtreme 124 rN 5.0 BE86 OAl 1.11
Velocity Power Factor Ft/Lbs
1089 135.036 326.497
1076 133.424 318.748
1084 134.416 323.506
1052 130.448 304.688
1080 133.92 321.123


String: 3
Date: 4/23/2017
Time: 12:53:05 PM
Grains: 124
Hi Vel: 1092
Low Vel: 1056
Ave Vel: 1072
Ext Spread: 36
Std Dev: 15
Xtreme 124RN 5.0 BE86 OAl 1.13
Velocity Power Factor Ft/Lbs
1058 131.192 308.173
1084 134.416 323.506
1056 130.944 307.009
1070 132.68 315.203
1092 135.408 328.298





String: 1
Date: 4/23/2017
Time: 12:50:35 PM
Grains: 124
Hi Vel: 1065
Low Vel: 1038
Ave Vel: 1056
Ext Spread: 27
Std Dev: 11
Xtreme 124RN 5.0 BE86 OAl 1.155
Velocity Power Factor Ft/Lbs
1038 128.712 296.632
1064 131.936 311.678
1065 132.06 312.264
1062 131.688 310.508
1055 130.82 306.428


String: 5
Date: 3/31/2017
Time: 2:59:36 PM
Grains: 124
Hi Vel: 1015
Low Vel: 977
Ave Vel: 998
Ext Spread: 38
Std Dev: 14
RMR 124 RN 4.5 BE86 1.09 OAL
Velocity Power Factor Ft/Lbs
1005 124.62 278.071
1015 125.86 283.632
1000 124 275.311
977 121.148 262.792
995 123.38 272.565

String: 4
Date: 3/31/2017
Time: 2:57:54 PM
Grains: 124
Hi Vel: 991
Low Vel: 958
Ave Vel: 975
Ext Spread: 33
Std Dev: 15
RMR 124 RN 4.5 BE86 1.11 OAL
Velocity Power Factor Ft/Lbs
982 121.768 265.489
991 122.884 270.378
961 119.164 254.255
986 122.264 267.656
958 118.792 252.67

So with the mild 4.5 gr load .02 made on average 23fps difference.
So did shorter shoot better for me just because of the OAL change or because of the vel differnce that resulted from the OAL change.
Might be something to test when I retire some day and have time

 

[SC_Dave]

In researching load data further I noticed this below and I find it confusing
This is from Winchester


and this is from Hornady's 9th


Keeping in mind these listings are the closet to the RMR 115 FMJ/RN I'm using.
This gives me pause to try the 4.8, 4.9 and even 5.0 spoken about above.
Thoughts?

 

[LiveLife]

Winchester [4.4/4.9 gr start/max] and ... Hornady's 9th [4.1/4.7 gr start/max]

This gives me pause to try the 4.8, 4.9 and even 5.0 spoken about above. Thoughts?

Published load data will vary depending on the test barrel fixture used, groove diameter, barrel length, brand of brass, primer, bullet diameter, bullet nose profile/ogive, bullet seating depth, OAL/COL which all affect chamber pressures and muzzle velocities. Over time, powder formulation can change and powder manufacturers are first to update load data (Lyman #49 still published some loads with different charges for W231 and HP-38 which indicates to me they are publishing older test data).

In general, older "paper" published load data by bullet manufacturers often listed higher start/max charges as they used older pressure testing method and newer online published load data by powder manufacturers list lower start/max charges as they used newer pressure testing method. (Many claim this is due to lawyers).

But in the case of W231 load data and 115 gr FMJ, it's the opposite. Perhaps it may be due to Hodgdon, in March of 2006, being licensed to sell Winchester powders and load data for W231 and HP-38 merged where HP-38 load data showed same for W231 - https://www.hodgdon.com/company/about-us/

Older 2003 Winchester load data lists 4.4/4.9 gr start/max charges for unknown OAL yet current online Hodgdon load data lists 4.3/4.8 gr start/max charges for 115 gr Lead RN sized .356" with very short 1.100" OAL and 4.7/5.1 gr start/max charges for 115 gr GDHP sized .355" with 1.125" OAL.

Same is true for 124 gr FMJ where 2003 Winchester load data listed 4.2/4.5 gr start/max charges for unknown OAL yet current online Hodgdon load data lists 4.4/4.8 gr start/max charges for heavier 125 gr FMJ bullet loaded to very short 1.090" OAL.

For my load development using smaller diameter .355" 115 gr Winchester FMJ (My old 9mm reference bullet) and slightly larger sized .3555" 115 gr RMR FMJ (My new 9mm reference bullet), at 1.130" and 1.110", I felt comfortable testing up to Lead load data max charge of 4.8 gr as I was using smaller diameter FMJ bullets which leaks more gas at the same OAL (Please note current Hodgdon jacketed load data for 125 gr FMJ max charge is 4.8 gr of W231).

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

Of course, as I already posted, as long as you have reliable slide cycling and acceptable accuracy, you can stop the powder work up at any time. For me, I chose to test 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 gr charges and accuracy trend showed smaller group size from 4.6 to 4.8 gr.

 

[SC_Dave]

Published load data will vary depending on the test barrel fixture used, groove diameter, barrel length, brand of brass, primer, bullet diameter, bullet nose profile/ogive, bullet seating depth, OAL/COL which all affect chamber pressures and muzzle velocities. Over time, powder formulation can change and powder manufacturers are first to update load data (Lyman #49 still published some loads with different charges for W231 and HP-38 which indicates to me they are publishing older test data).

In general, older "paper" published load data by bullet manufacturers often listed higher start/max charges as they used older pressure testing method and newer online published load data by powder manufacturers list lower start/max charges as they used newer pressure testing method. (Many claim this is due to lawyers).

But in the case of W231 load data and 115 gr FMJ, it's the opposite. Perhaps it may be due to Hodgdon, in March of 2006, being licensed to sell Winchester powders and load data for W231 and HP-38 merged where HP-38 load data showed same for W231 - https://www.hodgdon.com/company/about-us/

Older 2003 Winchester load data lists 4.4/4.9 gr start/max charges for unknown OAL yet current online Hodgdon load data lists 4.3/4.8 gr start/max charges for 115 gr Lead RN sized .356" with very short 1.100" OAL and 4.7/5.1 gr start/max charges for 115 gr GDHP sized .355" with 1.125" OAL.

Same is true for 124 gr FMJ where 2003 Winchester load data listed 4.2/4.5 gr start/max charges for unknown OAL yet current online Hodgdon load data lists 4.4/4.8 gr start/max charges for heavier 125 gr FMJ bullet loaded to very short 1.090" OAL.

For my load development using smaller diameter .355" 115 gr Winchester FMJ (My old 9mm reference bullet) and slightly larger sized .3555" 115 gr RMR FMJ (My new 9mm reference bullet), at 1.130" and 1.110", I felt comfortable testing up to Lead load data max charge of 4.8 gr as I was using smaller diameter FMJ bullets which leaks more gas at the same OAL (Please note current Hodgdon jacketed load data for 125 gr FMJ max charge is 4.8 gr of W231).

Of course, as I already posted, as long as you have reliable slide cycling and acceptable accuracy, you can stop the powder work up at any time. For me, I chose to test 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 gr charges and accuracy trend showed smaller group size from 4.6 to 4.8 gr.

Thanks very much. This answered a lot of questions in areas that were a little gray for me. By nature I am a very "rule" oriented person and like dealing in absolutes and don't like ambiguity. So, when I see conflicting info (in this case maybe not conflicting but slightly different) I question. I think I'll load some at 4.7 and 4.8 but change the COL from 1.100 as mentioned in Hornady 9th to 1.130. I don't think this should have an impact on neck tension.

Did you ever test any at 4.9 and 5.0? I'm cautious when it gets gets close to the upper load limits.
Dave