.40 and Accurate No5 [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : .40 and Accurate No5


redbrd
12-31-2011, 07:53
OK a NOOB to .40sw reloading. As it is a high presser load I am ensuring that I am doing my due diligance. The Lee loading data has min load at (165 grain TMJFN) 6.2 grns, speer manual has it at 7.6 grns, and accurates load data has it at 7.2. This is a huge variance. As the min for the second 2 sources exceeds the max load data provided by Lee.

What I am trying to achieve is a lower pressure load for range and IDPA.
Anyone with some experience with this powder your advise is appreciated.

Currently I am thinking starting at the lowest min load data and adjusting from there, but I always appreciate advice form the been there done that crowd.

WiskyT
12-31-2011, 08:09
I don't have any experience with #5. I would just use the Lee start load and see how it does. For IDPA, you just need to punch holes in the cardboard. Just load a couple dozen or so and see if they cycle the gun.

redbrd
12-31-2011, 08:19
Thanks. Maybe I should have thought about a different powder but I use #5 for 9mm and .45 so I have a lot of it.

redbrd
12-31-2011, 08:41
Thanks I will do probably just that.
I do need it to reliably swing steel (dueling trees). That was my motivation for straying into the .40 world. I have been using a 9mm but the steel targets were costing me big-time.

WiskyT
12-31-2011, 09:24
Thanks I will do probably just that.
I do need it to reliably swing steel (dueling trees). That was my motivation for straying into the .40 world. I have been using a 9mm but the steel targets were costing me big-time.

Bullet weight seems to have more effect on knocking down poppers than velocity based on my limited action shooting done years ago. If a 165 that cycles the gun reliably won't kncok down the popper, some wiseass set it to heavy.

There is a minimum PF in IDPA, but it's pretty low and you shouldn't have any trouble making it and staying within published limits with a 165 and #5. You'll need a chrono to be sure, but you'll probably be within Lee's low data and still make PF. Brian Enos forum has lots of chrono data on it regarding PF. Every gun and load is different, but if you can find data that makes it easily in someone else's similar gun, you should still be making it with yours.

SPIN2010
12-31-2011, 09:46
I use AA#5 for reloading 9mm, .40, and 10mm pretty much 100%. I really like the metering (RL550B) and performance of the powder.

When reloading .40cal: I stick right at the 6.0gr mark (+/- .1gr) and adhere to the SAMMI OAL of 1.135" with FP TCJ 180gr projectiles ... never had one issue with any of my .40cal weapons.

CVO
12-31-2011, 09:50
Lyman shows 6.9 start 7.6 max 165 TMJ AA5.

My Lee book doesn't show a 165 FP, Second Edition book. It does show 170 grain to start at 6.5

shotgunred
12-31-2011, 09:51
AA#5 and the 40 is a bad combo. Or at least it used to be. Back when I started reloading AA#5 and the 40 SW was a combo for a blowen up gun. To this day I refuse to use any AA product because of bad experiences with them in the past.

redbrd
12-31-2011, 09:55
I use AA#5 for reloading 9mm, .40, and 10mm pretty much 100%. I really like the metering (RL550B) and performance of the powder.

When reloading .40cal: I stick right at the 6.0gr mark (+/- .1gr) and adhere to the SAMMI OAL of 1.135" with FP TCJ 180gr projectiles ... never had one issue with any of my .40cal weapons.

Thanks, just the kind of experience I was looking for.

redbrd
12-31-2011, 09:57
AA#5 and the 40 is a bad combo. Or at least it used to be. Back when I started reloading AA#5 and the 40 SW was a combo for a blowen up gun. To this day I refuse to use any AA product because of bad experiences with them in the past.

Any insight as to why it is a bad combo? I know it won't fill the case so a double charge is always possible... other factors?

shotgunred
12-31-2011, 10:02
Because it was blowing up guns!:wow:

Dasglockenspiel
12-31-2011, 10:06
RedBrd:

I reload a great deal of 40 S&W and find that it is very compatible with many powder / bullet combos. Unfortunately I haven't used #5 in the 40.

My new Sierra Manual lists the following specs for Accurate #5:

For a 165 Gr JHP, COAL 1.125

6.6 Gr gives 850fps
6.9 Gr gives 900 fps
7.2 Gr gives 950 fps
7.5 Gr gives 1000 fps
7.8 Gr gives 1050 fps (Max Safe Load)

I personally use #2, Win 231 and Win WST for target loads (much lower charges than above), Herco & 700X for all around with 135 thru 180 grain bullet wts.

Just like the 9 x 10 and 45ACP and others you will need to give the cartridge a mild taper crimp for ease of ramp feeding. I mainly shoot 40 thru a M&P40FS which has a fully supported chamber.

Shootem up!

Dasglockenspiel

redbrd
12-31-2011, 10:52
Because it was blowing up guns!:wow:

OK I got that part. I was hoping for something a bit more insightful. Thanks.

albyihat
12-31-2011, 10:54
If you search around you will find that AA#5 has been made in different places over the last few years. According to the "web" this has led to different formulations causing old load data to be incorrect. This coupled with the weak web of the first .40 Federal brass has been attributed to KB's in the .40. I have loaded thousands of .40 with no ill effects, but I have not used AA #5. I think if you are using new bought powder and current load manuals, and loading on the light end you will be fine. But what do I know, I use Titegroup and 180gr bullets which if you search around you will find that this combo will KB more then AA #5.

shotgunred
12-31-2011, 11:04
In the 40 I use and like....


tight group
WSF
WST
Win 231
Power Pistol

redbrd
12-31-2011, 11:29
I am not disappointed. I appeciate all the good info.

fredj338
12-31-2011, 13:08
Thanks. Maybe I should have thought about a different powder but I use #5 for 9mm and .45 so I have a lot of it.

It will work fine, you just can't push AA#5 hard in the 40 & as a medium burner, it won't run well below starting loads either. Lyman says 6.9gr-7.6gr! For IDPA minor, I don't think 6.2gr is going to run well below 875fps, about where that 6.2gr charge will take you. IMO, Lee load book is one of the worst sources, too vague, then not much Lee does makes me warm & fuzzy.

redbrd
12-31-2011, 14:28
Well here is an update. I loaded 3 rounds at 6.5 grns OAL of 1.135 . The weapon, glock 23 cycled properly. Recoil was mild, I didn't notice much difference from a 9mm. Accuracy??? A proper range trip will have to settle that.

WiskyT
12-31-2011, 14:45
Well here is an update. I loaded 3 rounds at 6.5 grns OAL of 1.135 . The weapon, glock 23 cycled properly. Recoil was mild, I didn't notice much difference from a 9mm. Accuracy??? A proper range trip will have to settle that.

Cool, thanks for the update. Obviously you fired them through the bathroom window when your wife went out or you would have done an accuracy test.

GioaJack
12-31-2011, 14:49
I wasn't aware that guns were less accurate when fired through a bathroom window. And all this time I thought those stupid elk were wearing body armor.

Maybe the bedroom window is more accurate.


Jack

redbrd
12-31-2011, 14:52
Cool, thanks for the update. Obviously you fired them through the bathroom window when your wife went out or you would have done an accuracy test.

You aren't far off. Busted. LMAO