Reloading confusion

[Sirspeedy77]

Good evening everyone! I’ve done a fair bit of reading, own 2 books and have found manufacturers data for my loads.. I’m currently working with Speer 9mm 115grain TMJ - (round nose metal jacket).. I’ve used HP38 for powder and have worked up a couple batches. 50 per. (I realize now they should have been 10 or so but I’m learning).1st batch is 4.6 grains hp38 at 1.135 give or take .003 COAL. Second batch is 4.5 grains hp38 at 1.135 this time within .002 COAL - both batches I rejected anything that had a higher variance in COAL. Will be fired from a Canik Tp9sfx -

I’m nervous, a bit scared and Completely baffled thwt I was able to find 4 different recipes, between Hogdons, Speer, Lymans book and Lee book. I chose the recipes based on intersections within the available data seated to the COAL on the Speer website. I assumed the bullet manufacture to be more favorable for data. I have not fired any rounds yet, all seem to pass the plunk spin check and fit in my ammo checker block.


I’m seeking advice. Are these loads comparable? Am I correct in my determination of recipe? (Intersecting data seating to bullet depth of manufacturer). I’m new, obviously lol. I’d rather be safe than sorry. I tried to use the search to answer these questions but nothing seemed definitive. Thanks for the help in advance. I look forward to learning a lot around here

 

[AJC1]

So how to approach safe IMO. Load to the low end of the range for your first tests. Then go higher. When combining data never go shorter than the published oal. If you go longer it's safe and reduces pressure. If it were me and I was loading my very first set I would go to the bullet manufacturer and build a load exactly in the center of the load range and the exact oal if possible.

 

[Sirspeedy77]

That’s kind of what I figured, Speer data shows 4.4 low and 4.9 max.. I went 4.5 and 4.6 because I was afraid too low would fail to feed /cycle so I hoped 4.5 would be safe lol.. guess I’ll never know unless I fire them... if I understand my newly acquired data, I can load shallower without a problem up to saami specs, but even .002 deeper could be a big problem in this load?

 

[IlikeSA]

Those first shots are always the scariest.

Your best method for measuring overall length for to long is the plunk test. Plunk a round in your disassembled barrel and see how it fits. It should be even withthe barrel hood and not stick out or go in to far. Do this with a few before you go to the range. The last thing you want is to find it is to long or you have a bulge in the cartridge.

To short, as mentioned, increases pressure. That's why you dont want to load and unload your top round from your magazine, as it can suffer bullet setback. That's also why you want to have a proper crimp.

I haven't loaded 9mm so I won't comment on the 2 thousandths.

 

[LiveLife]

Welcome to THR

you dont want to load and unload your top round from your magazine, as it can suffer bullet setback. That's also why you want to have a proper crimp

With all due respect, we have already discussed to conclusion many times and myth busted that taper crimp does not produce significant neck tension and will not prevent bullet setback as most of neck tension comes from .200" below case mouth where case wall is thicker and where bullet base is seated to (Taper crimp is applied above .100" below case mouth) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...nd-bullet-setback.830072/page-3#post-10713822

It is proper resizing of brass, thickness of case wall and sizing of bullet that produce friction with bullet base to produce neck tension and reduce/prevent bullet setback as well illustrated in this myth busting thread - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...neck-tension-and-bullet-setback.830072/page-4

Canik Tp9sfx ... Speer 9mm 115 grain TMJ ... HP38 ... 4.5/4.6 grains at 1.135

Speer 115 gr TMJ on the left and 124 gr TMJ on the right

BTW, W231 and HP-38 became same exact powder after 2006 when Hodgdon was licensed to sell Winchester powders under Hodgdon label so we now interchange W231 and HP-38 load data - https://hodgdon.com/company/about-us/

You may find some older load data that will show different powder charges for W231 and HP-38 but most newer load data should show same exact powder charges. Here's a listing of same and comparable powders for your reference (FYI, Hodgdon powders tend to be cheaper than same Winchester powders) - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-different-labels.797388/page-6#post-10806193

Below is Speer load data for 115 gr TMJ (Total Metal Jacket) which is thick plated round nose bullet that could be driven to full jacketed load data - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ng-at-25-50-yards.808446/page-3#post-10470195

• 9mm 115 gr Speer TMJ W231/HP-38 OAL 1.135" Start 4.4 gr (1026 fps) - Max 4.9 gr (1133 fps) - https://reloading-data.speer-ammo.c...m_caliber_355-366_dia/9mm_Luger__115_rev1.pdf

And Hodgdon lead load data - http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol

• 9mm 115 gr Lead RN W231/HP-38 COL 1.100" Start 4.3 gr (1,079 fps) - Max 4.8 gr (1,135 fps)

FYI, Speer 115 gr TMJ loaded to 1.135" OAL will work with most barrels - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...col-for-reference.848462/page-2#post-11465109

For me in general, 115 gr FMJ/TMJ/plated RN loaded to 1.130"-1.135" with 4.5 gr of W231/HP-38 will start to reliably cycle the slides of my Glocks. At 4.6 gr, accuracy trend starts and I use 4.8 gr as my 9mm reference load that is slightly more accurate than 4.6 gr and comparable to Winchester white box.

You should be fine as 4.5/4.6 gr HP-38 loads are mid-range Speer TMJ load data and even mid-range Hodgdon lead load data, especially since you are using longer than published OAL.

My guess is 4.6 gr load will produce greater accuracy than 4.5 gr load fired from your Canik but we will wait for your range report.

I’m nervous, a bit scared and Completely baffled that I was able to find 4 different recipes, between Hogdons, Speer, Lymans book and Lee book. I chose the recipes based on intersections within the available data seated to the COAL on the Speer website.

Actually, you shouldn't use the "hunt and peck" method for load development.

With any new bullet this is what I do for load development:

1. I first determine the "max OAL" using the barrel - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...rel-find-a-max-o-a-l-with-your-bullet.506678/
2. Then I feed dummy round (no powder/no primer) at max OAL from the magazine and release the slide without riding it to function check and incrementally decrease the OAL (by .005") until the dummy round feeds reliably from the magazine - This is the "working OAL" you should use for conducting powder work up
3. I will reference available load data and use the most conservative start/max charges for my initial powder work up and load 10 rounds of .2-.3 gr powder increments
4. At the range, I will first identify the powder charge that will reliably cycle the slide and extract/eject spent cases
5. Then monitor accuracy trend of higher powder charge loads towards max charg. (NOTE: If you are nervous and do not want to test near max/max charges, once you have reliable slide cycling and spent case extraction and ejection with acceptable level of accuracy, you can stop your powder work up. It's your gun and your fingers. )
6. Once you identify the most accurate powder charge, incrementally decrease the OAL to see if accuracy improves. So if your 115 gr FMJ with 1.150" working OAL produced smallest groups with 4.8 gr powder charge but decreasing the OAL to 1.135" produced even smaller groups, you want to use 1.135" OAL)

Here is a step-by-step procedure for load development to reduce reloading variables you can reference - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-and-discussions.778197/page-10#post-11419509

 

[Jonesy814]

One way to get really consistent OAL is to sort and load your brass by headstamp

 

[LiveLife]

When combining data never go shorter than the published oal

With newer factory barrels with shorter leade, sometimes we have to use shorter OAL than published OAL.

I would go to the bullet manufacturer and build a load exactly in the center of the load range.

Actually, there's nothing wrong with referencing powder manufacturer's load data and I would always recommend conducting powder work up from start charge to identify possible lighter target loads.

And while slower burning than Unique/Universal powders tend to produce optimal accuracy at high to near max/max charges, many faster burning powders can produce accuracy at lower charges, sometimes even at start charge or even below start charge. That's how we get our lighter "target loads" from.

Below is Speer lead load data for 200 gr SWC and Red Dot I reference for Red Dot and Promo powders. I use 4.0 gr powder charge which is lighter than published start charge using longer 1.240"-1.245" OAL. It is my favorite lighter recoil 45ACP target load.

• 45ACP 200 gr Lead SWC Red Dot OAL 1.190" Start 4.1 gr (749 fps) - Max 4.5 gr (831 fps) - https://reloading-data.speer-ammo.c...n/45_caliber_451-454_dia/45_Auto_200_LSWC.pdf

 

[LiveLife]

I can load shallower without a problem up to saami specs

While SAAMI max length for 9mm is 1.169", you won't find too many reloaders using that long of OAL, especially for 115 gr FMJ/RN bullet and use more typical 1.130"-1.135" OAL.

Why?

115 gr FMJ/RN bullet has relatively short bullet base that could cause neck tension issue resulting in bullet setback and chamber pressure build issue.

Below comparison picture shows (From left to right) various 115 gr FMJ RN from Zero, RMR, Winchester (with skirt base/sharp rim), Everglades (dished base) and Federal (hollow base) - NOTE that Federal hollow base FMJ on the far right shows longer bullet length with longer bullet base/bearing surface to better engage rifling and to seat the bullet base deeper where case wall thickness is greater.

So to address the neck tension issue, some bullet manufacturers have dished or hollow based to increase bullet base (Bearing surface that engages the rifling) and some increased the diameter of bullet sizing from .355" to .3555" and .356" - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...re-sized-the-same.818806/page-2#post-10567453

I have done 115 gr FMJ/plated RN testing from 1.160" down to 1.100" OAL and found shorter OAL produced greater accuracy, likely from improved neck tension.

Even Atlanta Arms which provides match ammunition to various match teams including US AMU recently decreased their Elite Match AMU 115 gr FMJ (Their most accurate match ammunition) from 1.130" down to now 1.105” - https://atlantaarms.com/products/elite-9mm-115gr-fmj-match-amu.html

"Elite Ammo - 9mm 115GR FMJ Match AMU - This ammunition is designed for extreme accuracy at 50 yards.

This ammo is used by the Army Marksmanship Unit and the Marine Service Pistol team for service pistol matches.

Accuracy test requirement: 5 ten-shot groups at 50 yards with an average group size not to exceed 1.5 inches."
​

Care to guess why they decreased the OAL?

 

[Cannibul]

For a new reloader.

Speer bullet = Speer data.

It's as easy as that.

 

[Sirspeedy77]

Thanks for the help everyone i appreciate it - i think i'll drive up to the range tonight after work and test a few of them. What are your thoughts on loading .002-.003 under speer listed COAL at such lower charges? safe? (Within reason, i know you cant verify). I feel with my limited knowledge that because i am so low under listed max loads that my .003 max variance would be safe? Is this solid reasoning?

 

[AJC1]

I strive for .001 variance and .002 is still very good. I believe you have little to worry about. These things have variation and are not a saftey concern entail your on the ragged edge.

 

[ballman6711]

Published loads are what the tester found suitable/acceptable on that day with the components and test equipment used. It's up to you to use that data as you choose. Published loads should be safe in most modern, properly functioning firearms.

If I were at mid range loading data and my coal was .002 ~ .003 shorter than book data, I would shoot them and see. If loading at or near max it would/may be a different story.

If your common sense says it isn't right, then it probably isn't. Stay safe and have fun!

chris

 

[LiveLife]

What are your thoughts on loading .002-.003 under speer listed COAL at such lower charges?

115 gr FMJ or TMJ loaded to 1.135" will be fine.

Since 115 gr FMJ/TMJ will pass most barrels at 1.150"-1.160", starting at 1.135", you are expediting your load development and accuracy testing. Even though you are not conducting full powder work up from start to max charges, once you identify the powder charge that produces smallest groups, you can test shorter OAL to see if accuracy improves. So let's say 4.6 gr produced smaller groups with 1.135" OAL, then you can test 1.130", 1.125", 1.120" OAL with 4.6 gr of W231/HP-38 to see if accuracy improves.

And if you are concerned with compressing powder charge, don't worry as we can do max case fill calculations to see whether shorter OALs will compress powder charge - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/9mm-ammo-and-chrono-data.871329/#post-11566462

W231/HP-38 is dense granule powder and we have already done calculations to show even 4.8 gr charge won't compress powder at 1.100" OAL using 115 gr FMJ/TMJ.

But since you are new to reloading, let's go over some safety basics and best reloading practices first:

Are you experiencing bullet setback when you feed dummy rounds (No powder, No primer) from the magazine and release the slide without riding it? This is important as it doesn't matter what your "finished OAL" is rather "chambered OAL" after bullet nose bumps the feed ramp. If you experience significant bullet setback, you could increase chamber pressure above published max. So measure some dummy rounds before/after you feed them from the magazine and see if you can measure any bullet setback.

Are you working with verified/calibrated scale and calipers to ensure accuracy of your measurement? I verify my scales and calipers with check weights and pin gages.

Pin gages better represent round bullets (compared to blocks) and are just a few dollars - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ks-for-digital-calibers.821135/#post-10545265

A good set of check weights should go down to low enough weight to test scale's resolution sensitivity of .1 gr along with verifying powder charge range of several grains. This $12 set will go down to 10 mg (.15 gr) - https://www.amazon.com/Calibration-...d-search-10&pf_rd_t=BROWSE&pf_rd_i=4989308011

I use Ohaus ASTM Class 6 check weights that go down to 1 mg (.015 gr) for $72 - https://www.zoro.com/ohaus-weight-kit-cylndr-500mg-to-1mg-ss-class6-80850110/i/G0843236/


Keep us posted with a range report.

 

[reddog81]

Thanks for the help everyone i appreciate it - i think i'll drive up to the range tonight after work and test a few of them. What are your thoughts on loading .002-.003 under speer listed COAL at such lower charges? safe? (Within reason, i know you cant verify). I feel with my limited knowledge that because i am so low under listed max loads that my .003 max variance would be safe? Is this solid reasoning?

I wouldn't even think twice about it. .03 variance would be a problem. A human hair is .003 in thickness. Reloaded brass can have nicks and dings on the bottom of the case, from the extractor, that can cause your measurements to be off by that much.

 

[LiveLife]

.03 variance would be a problem. A human hair is .003 in thickness. Reloaded brass can have nicks and dings on the bottom of the case, from the extractor, that can cause your measurements to be off by that much.

Very good points.

As there are reloading variables, there are also shooting variables. To produce consistent rounds and maintain accuracy, we need to address both of these variables.

Impact force from feeding and chambering a round with poor neck tension could seat the bullet deeper by .010" or more which makes sweating over .002" on finished OAL moot and could push the chamber pressure over published max.

 

[fxvr5]

Here's some information you might find useful;

See the document at the following link to get a better idea of how OAL can affect pressure. See the charts on page 3.
http://www.castpics.net/LoadData/Freebies/RM/Ramshot/Ramshot_3.pdf

The issue of compressed powder has been brought up. Some load might produce compressed loads, but most won't. Does in matter? In most cases it won't matter. There is no need to be concerned if your powder is compressed if you're following published data, since it is compressed for everybody who uses that data, and if there was a problem with that it would likely not get published. Here is what the professionals says about compressed loads:

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/reloading-education/reloading-beginners/compressed-loads
"Hodgdon notes in its reloading data if the subject charge is a compressed load. A full case, or lightly compressed charge is an ideal condition for creating loads with the most uniform velocities and pressures, and oftentimes, producing top accuracy."


When you start your accuracy testing, there are some things to consider, and one is how many shots should you fire into your group. Well, one often used standard is 5 shots. But 5 shots is too small a number of rounds. Why? Because the size of 5-shot groups will vary by a factor of 3 or 4, perhaps more, even when shooting the same ammo. Below is an article that discusses this concern.

https://www.ssusa.org/articles/2019/9/25/accuracy-testing-shortcomings-of-the-five-shot-group/

 

[TxWolf]

Sorry to interrupt guys but Info like this is exactly why I signed up on this forum.
Very knowledgeable shooters and loaders in here that have already done what I am wanting to do.
Thanks. Carry on.

 

[Sirspeedy77]

I agree Tx, you guys have put me at ease and I appreciate the knowledge. It seemed the more I read the tighter the tolerances need to be. I’m in there pulling and reloading bullets that I could have probably shot just fine lol. I’m heading out to the range soon, I’ll keep you updated. Thanks again, I really do appreciate the help!

 

[buba68]

I agree Tx, you guys have put me at ease and I appreciate the knowledge. It seemed the more I read the tighter the tolerances need to be. I’m in there pulling and reloading bullets that I could have probably shot just fine lol. I’m heading out to the range soon, I’ll keep you updated. Thanks again, I really do appreciate the help!

You will be fine with your loads in your Canik. I have the TP9TFx also and the gun is made to shoot Nato pressure ammo all day. My typical range load is Berry's 124 gr plated RN with 4.8gr HP-38/W231 with a COL of 1.12 accurate load for my Canik. COL variation of a couple thousands is normal and nothing to loose sleep over.

 

[LiveLife]

My typical range load is Berry's 124 gr plated RN with 4.8gr HP-38/W231 with a COL of 1.12

Did you mean 115 gr Berry's plated RN?


4.8 gr of W231/HP-38 is over published max charge of 4.4 gr for Berry's thick plated bullet loaded longer at 1.150" OAL - http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol

• 9mm 124 gr Berry's HBRN-TP W231/HP-38 COL 1.150" Start 3.9 gr (920 fps) - Max 4.4 gr (1,037 fps)

And over Speer load data for TMJ which is thick plated bullet with max charge of 4.5 gr loaded at 1.135" OAL - https://reloading-data.speer-ammo.c...m_caliber_355-366_dia/9mm_Luger__124_rev1.pdf

• 9mm 124 gr Speer TMJ W231 OAL 1.135" Start 4.0 gr (887 fps) - Max 4.5 gr (998 fps)

BTW, Speer load data for 115 gr TMJ lists 4.9 gr as max charge for W231 - https://reloading-data.speer-ammo.c...m_caliber_355-366_dia/9mm_Luger__115_rev1.pdf

• 9mm 115 gr Speer TMJ W231 OAL 1.135" Start 4.4 gr (1026 fps) - Max 4.9 gr (1133 fps)

And if you are indeed using 4.8 gr of W231/HP-38 for Berry's 124 gr RN loaded short at 1.120" OAL, please follow THR H&R forum rules for posting extra heavy loads - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...e-posting-extra-heavy-load-information.27444/

"REQUIRED READ for those posting Extra HEAVY LOAD Information

... We owe it to one another to include proper cautions whenever we post ANY load in excess of published information. To fail in this duty may well endanger our forum associates - - either their firearms or their health.

... please specifically quote the exact source, with the note that it is now considered over max. With NEW data you have worked up and which is beyond currently published maximums, PLEASE heed this admonition:

At the beginning of your message, insert in BOLD type a no-uncertain-terms cautionary note, for example:

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The High Road, nor the staff of THR assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information."​

 

[Sirspeedy77]

Well not too bad, forgot paper targets so I went with comfort ability and looked for high pressure signs. Oddly each bullet I shot hit exactly what I was aiming at. I won’t brag about grouping because without paper lol. I am happy with the loads, I am going to make up some 4.4 grain loads and see how well they do. For plinking ammo I don’t even need fast or too horribly accurate. I just don’t want to sacrifice safety for cheap ammo either. I’ll update this weekend when I head back with paper and see how well they group up!

 

[sparkyv]

Good to hear all went well and you hit whatever you aimed at.

I will add to all this info already posted that I cannot tell the difference between a tenth of a grain of powder charge. Heck, my measure has a tenth of a grain of tolerance.
I'll also say that I like to use as long of a COAL as possible, ~15 thou off the lands or magazine fit, whichever is shorter. YMMV

 

[buba68]

Did you mean 115 gr Berry's plated RN?


4.8 gr of W231/HP-38 is over published max charge of 4.4 gr for Berry's thick plated bullet loaded longer at 1.150" OAL - http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol

• 9mm 124 gr Berry's HBRN-TP W231/HP-38 COL 1.150" Start 3.9 gr (920 fps) - Max 4.4 gr (1,037 fps)

Yes what I stated is what I shoot in my Canik and it runs fine with the load. So I will include the disclaimer for everyone.

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The High Road, nor the staff of THR assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information."

 

[LiveLife]

Oddly each bullet I shot hit exactly what I was aiming at.

I am happy with the loads

Nice.

Welcome to the hobby that is a passion for some of us.

I am going to make up some 4.4 grain loads and see how well they do. For plinking ammo I don’t even need fast or too horribly accurate.

That's why we conduct full powder work up from start charge as sometimes, especially with W231/HP-38 and faster burning powers, we can get reliable slide cycling and good enough accuracy to use as lighter recoil target or plinking loads.

With even faster burning powders, like Bullseye, we can even "work down" from start charge and many bullseye/steel challenge match shooters even use reduced rate recoil springs to reliably cycle the slide with very light recoil loads that are still accurate.

Why overwork your pistols and hands/wrists if you don't have to when you just need to punch holes in paper or make "ding" sound on steel plates?

 

[mdi]

I started reloading in 1969. I always have started at the min. listed loads for a new to me cartridge or component combination. In all that time I have never had anyone call me a wimp or sissy, and I have never had a semi-auto fail to cycle and never had a Kaboom. (I log every load and refer back if I'm changing the powder charges). When I started, way pre web and way pre "anonymous experts", I figgered the load data in my manuals was determined by someone much smarter than me and with equipment much more sophisticated than my hand feeling recoil, and the listed loads were there for a reason. For specific data on a specific bullet I have always gone with the manufacturer's data first, OAL and powder charges.

I have seen way too many new reloaders given advanced reloading methods and theory that often just add to their confusion, and cause them to overthink a situation (often imagining problems that won't exist). One of the biggest fears I see is "will .003" shorter OAL blow up my gun?". Yes, if grossly deep seated probably, but with a sane load and a few (even several) thousandths there probably wont be a problem. Another is "setback" shortening a round and blowing up a gun. Proper sizing and no or very little crimp will produce good neck tension and prevent bullet movement (I have been reloading for semi-auto hand guns since '88 and never had a round shorten up appreciably from feeding in 4, 9mm pistols and 3, 45 ACP guns and I often use mixed range brass)...

K.I.S.S. and enjoy...

Rant over...