Titegroup and 115 gr fmj

[marineshooter]

I've been away for a long time medical issues. Now I'm able to reload again. I've got lbs of titegroup and 115 gr fmjs . Hornady #10 says 3.7 to 4.1 at 1.100, but I'm reading people are going with 4.4 to 4.6 at 1.100. I know about doing a ladder starting at 3.7 and going up. But there's not much to go up. Hodgens website not much help. Any help would be great.

 

[Soonerpesek]

I've been away for a long time medical issues. Now I'm able to reload again. I've got lbs of titegroup and 115 gr fmjs . Hornady #10 says 3.7 to 4.1 at 1.100, but I'm reading people are going with 4.4 to 4.6 at 1.100. I know about doing a ladder starting at 3.7 and going up. But there's not much to go up. Hodgens website not much help. Any help would be great.

Hornady is usually fairly conservative in their data......However, there is a reason Titegroup has a small range, like it's shotshell powder cousin---a little goes a long way.
My advice, for the $.02 it's worth, is to start somewhere at a PUBLISHED load and work from there....

..............and, hopefully your issues are under control--------nice that you're back.........

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I've been away for a long time medical issues. Now I'm able to reload again. I've got lbs of titegroup and 115 gr fmjs . Hornady #10 says 3.7 to 4.1 at 1.100, but I'm reading people are going with 4.4 to 4.6 at 1.100. I know about doing a ladder starting at 3.7 and going up. But there's not much to go up. Hodgens website not much help. Any help would be great.

Two things to be aware of: Hornady’s data is only for Hornady’s bullets. It may or may not be good for any other bullets. Also, you don’t say which bullets you’re using so it’s kind of hard to say which data might be best to use.
My general rule is to use the bullet makers data as a primary source and compare it to the powder maker’s data, using the same or a nearly identical bullet, as a secondary source. If I can’t find matching data for the bullet, I dig out the mic’s and measure the bullet, then go looking for a close match.

 

[marineshooter]

Thanks for your reply. Lee's shows 115 jhp at 4.3 to 4.8 max. I realize that fmj and jhp are different. The fmj being about .050 shorter and different profile, but 3.7 to 4.1 then 4.4 to 4.6 is a bit of a gap. Sorry I'm using Everglades fmjs.

 

[marineshooter]

Thanks for your reply. Lee's shows 115 jhp at 4.3 to 4.8 max. I realize that fmj and jhp are different. The fmj being about .050 shorter and different profile, but 3.7 to 4.1 then 4.4 to 4.6 is a bit of a gap. Sorry I'm using Everglades fmjs.

I was using Everglades jhp 115gr at 4.6 grains of titegroup with 1.150 oal. No problems, accurate ,about recoil of self defence ammo. Just trying to get idea of load for fmjs. Hornady seems kinda on the low end of things.

 

[Tall]

I've never tried Titegroup in 9 mm. My results in 38 WCF caused me to stop using it. It heated up the barrel in very little time.

 

[LiveLife]

titegroup and 115 gr fmjs . Hornady #10 says 3.7 to 4.1 at 1.100, but I'm reading people are going with 4.4 to 4.6 at 1.100. I know about doing a ladder starting at 3.7 and going up. But there's not much to go up. Hodgens website not much help. Any help would be great.

Here are the published load data for reference - https://hodgdonreloading.com/rldc/

• 9mm 115 gr Lead RN COL 1.100" Start 3.9 gr (1075 fps) - Max 4.3 gr (1151 fps)
• 9mm 115 gr Speer TMJ RN COL 1.135" Start 4.1 gr (1061 fps) - Max 4.5 gr (1121 fps) - https://reloadingdata.speer.com/downloads/speer/reloading-pdfs/handgun/9mm_Luger__115_rev1.pdf

If you are using longer 1.130"-1.135" COL/OAL, 4.2 gr will reliably cycle the slide (And produce around 130 power factor). If you are using longer 1.150" OAL, you may need to use 4.5 gr powder charge as 115 gr FMJ has short bullet base and will produce less neck tension (Less pressure build) at longer OAL.

If you are using shorter 1.100", I recommend referencing more conservative lead load data.


So what should determine whether to use longer 1.130"-1.135" or shorter 1.100"?

Bullet setback and/or accuracy.

Different headstamp brass has varying thickness of case wall and especially with 115 gr FMJ/RN bullet with short bullet base, can produce differing amount of bullet setback.

So if using thinner case wall brass at 1.130"-1.135" OAL produce significant bullet setback, consider using shorter 1.100" OAL or thicker case wall brass.


What if you are not experiencing bullet setback at 1.130"-1.135" and want to know whether to use shorter OAL?

If using shorter OAL produces smaller groups, use shorter OAL (Also incrementally lower powder charge and verify group size). If not, use longer OAL.

 

[vaalpens]

I don't have a lot of test data with 115gr fmjrn and Titegroup, but following is a load I have tested:

9mm, P365X, 3.1" Case: FC COL: 1.125" RMR, 115gr, FMJRN, TiteGroup, 4.5gr, FED100 Average: 1120 ES: 46 SD: 17.9 Force: 320 PF: 128 Velocities: 1098, 1144, 1115, 1113, 1132 Grouping @ 10yd: 0.85" Test Date: 05/29/2021

Welcome back and be safe.

 

[LiveLife]

P365X, 3.1" ... COL: 1.125" ... RMR, 115gr, FMJRN, TiteGroup, 4.5gr
Average: 1120

Nice ... Almost 129 PF out of short barrel.

 

[marineshooter]

Thanks for the great responses. I know now what I thought I knew. Being away from the hobby and having chemo brain, I get off track at times. Thanks again. This is one of the best forums for firearms that I've found. People pass on information without being jerks. It's nice to be able listen to others knowledge.

 

[lordpaxman]

Titegroup’s a good powder but it gets squirrelly in hurry if you step outside the lines. Mind your seating depth.
Hodgdon online has 115gr GDHP 1.125” 4.5 - 4.8 gr Titegroup
and Hornady #10 has 115gr FMJ-RN 1.100” 3.7-4.1 gr Titegroup.

Your current load sounds a lot like what the competition shooters use. .050” increased in a 9mm COL adds quite a bit of volume and you’re probably at minor PF. Hornady may seem conservative but there’s not a lot of space in a 9mm. Make sure you don’t have setback and if you can chrono your load it’d tell a lot. Good luck!

 

[Charlie98]

Titegroup’s a good powder but it gets squirrelly in hurry if you step outside the lines. Mind your seating depth.

+1

That's really true of nearly any powder in the 9mm... small case, operating at high pressure. Making matters worse, case volume between different cases can change things, sometimes dramatically.

Not a fan of TiteGroup, but it works well in 9mm. Like others have mentioned, stick with published data as much as you can. If you are using a specific bullet that doesn't readily have data available for, try to find the closest match... to include things like jacket type (or alloy, for cast...) and base construction. Using ballistic calculators like QuickLoad can help prove (or disprove) a potential load as being safe.

 

[bullseye308]

Welcome back, sorry no help with your load. Chemo brain is no fun, let it clear before loading. I did chemo in 2019 and it was rough. Cancer came back last year and had surgery and that was worse. Keep your head up and be safe loading.

 

[lordpaxman]

That's really true of nearly any powder in the 9mm... small case, operating at high pressure.

Yes, but, Uber fast powders in 9mm behave differently at the limits. Something like N320 is well behaved, Titegroup is not. I misread a Titegroup COL load for 115 LRN, spec was 1.100”, it was back when loads were printed on paper and the load above had 1.090”. At a midrange powder charge it was blowing the web out in a 1911 SA. The chrono was catching it, increased powder charge but hardly any V increase. N320 on the other hand will play nicely, very linear slightly outside the lines.
I’m not recommending anyone (including moi) do anything unsafe, but sometimes we need to alter published COL and Titegroup is very sensitive at that.

 

[Charlie98]

Even slower, more docile powders can get out of hand. Back Home, Years Ago I got into trouble with Unique in the 9mm. Indeed, it had much to do with bullet seating depth at max loads. I came out of that with a more healthy respect for seating depth and COL. I would hate to think what might have happened were I using something like TiteGroup back then.