Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Reloading (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Load Confirmation (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1164862)

Kentucky Shooter 12-31-2009 17:57

Load Confirmation
 
Please give me your opinion on this load for my 9mm Glocks. I have very little 9mm reloading experience.I have loaded up 50 rounds of these----based on a variety of manuals for reference.

9MM------124 grain FMJ bullet; 3.8 grains of bullseye; Federal 100 primer; bullet seated to an OAL cartridge length of 1.128".

Does anyone see any potential problems with this load? I hope to try them out over the weekend. Thanks for any input.

Boxerglocker 12-31-2009 18:40

Based on what Alliant has listed on thier website. I think it would be a relatively safe load to start. I would only load 5-10 at a time amd work up slowly with a chrono.

njl 12-31-2009 19:31

Is there a reason you're loading so short?

fredj338 12-31-2009 23:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boxerglocker (Post 14453224)
Based on what Alliant has listed on thier website. I think it would be a relatively safe load to start. I would only load 5-10 at a time amd work up slowly with a chrono.

I agree, load in small 10rd max groups, then go up or down 0.1gr for 10 more. Look for the sweet spot. IMO, your load is at or slightly below starting. You may not get reliable functioning. For semiuatos, I neve use starting data. Instead, use avg. middle data from 2-3 sources, then go up & down 0.1gr & work to find your accuracy. Your OAL is fine depending on your bullet. I rarely load 9mm much longer than 1.135".

Kentucky Shooter 01-01-2010 01:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by njl (Post 14453542)
Is there a reason you're loading so short?

No, not really. Just wanting some plinking loads-----if they prove to be too low powered to reliably function, I will bump the next batch up a bit.

Kentucky Shooter 01-01-2010 01:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredj338 (Post 14454775)
I agree, load in small 10rd max groups, then go up or down 0.1gr for 10 more. Look for the sweet spot. IMO, your load is at or slightly below starting. You may not get reliable functioning. For semiuatos, I neve use starting data. Instead, use avg. middle data from 2-3 sources, then go up & down 0.1gr & work to find your accuracy. Your OAL is fine depending on your bullet. I rarely load 9mm much longer than 1.135".

Thanks, especially for the OAL advice. That was one of my bigger questions, and one the manuals seem to have quite a range or variance on.

njl 01-01-2010 10:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kentucky Shooter (Post 14455193)
No, not really. Just wanting some plinking loads-----if they prove to be too low powered to reliably function, I will bump the next batch up a bit.

By short, I meant OAL. If you measure various factory 9mm FMJ loads, I think you'll find they tend to be around 1.15-1.16. Does the data you're using include a minimum recommended OAL? IIRC, the Speer manual I'm using lists a minimum OAL for their 124gr 9mm data of 1.135.

Kentucky Shooter 01-01-2010 10:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by njl (Post 14456477)
By short, I meant OAL. If you measure various factory 9mm FMJ loads, I think you'll find they tend to be around 1.15-1.16. Does the data you're using include a minimum recommended OAL? IIRC, the Speer manual I'm using lists a minimum OAL for their 124gr 9mm data of 1.135.

Oh, ok. My Speer #13 manual calls for 1.120" for 124 grain bullets. (It also calls for 1.125" in the 115 grainers and for 1.130" in the 147 grainers.)

My Lyman manual calls for 1.120" in 125 grain bullets (and 1.090" for 115 grain bullets and 1.160" for 130 grain bullets.)

I was just trying to come up with an average OAL that would be suitable---I am anxious to get to the range to see how these cycle. The cartridge OAL is one area I have found the manuals to vary widely on---this is one part of the equation that often leaves me guessing and doing trial and error. If anyone has any suggestions on that, I would love to know what others do in this situation.

n2extrm 01-01-2010 10:58

IMHO the seating depth variation you are seeing publushed is due to the variable of the bullet used. A Hornady 115grn bullet is or may be shaped diffrent from a Sierra 115 grn bullet. As such the bearing surface and shape of the nose may be diffrent and give you diffrent OAL for the loaded round. I try to load for magazine and function. If the round feeds reliabley and fits the magazine I run it. I try to start with data based on the actual bullet used when ever I can. If it is a Sierra I use their data Hornady theirs, or try to find a bullet that is very similar to what you have and use that. Kedep in mind OAL affects pressure. If you use a fast powder and are near the top of a powder charge/max pressure a small change in OAL could cause a serious pressure problem.

Kentucky Shooter 01-01-2010 11:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by n2extrm (Post 14456670)
IMHO the seating depth variation you are seeing publushed is due to the variable of the bullet used. A Hornady 115grn bullet is or may be shaped diffrent from a Sierra 115 grn bullet. As such the bearing surface and shape of the nose may be diffrent and give you diffrent OAL for the loaded round. I try to load for magazine and function. If the round feeds reliabley and fits the magazine I run it. I try to start with data based on the actual bullet used when ever I can. If it is a Sierra I use their data Hornady theirs, or try to find a bullet that is very similar to what you have and use that. Kedep in mind OAL affects pressure. If you use a fast powder and are near the top of a powder charge/max pressure a small change in OAL could cause a serious pressure problem.

Thanks----very good points. Since my intent is for target/plinking loads, that is why I tend to run starting loads or at least loads on the low end of the velocity scale. Especially when I can't find a published load for my exact bullet, which in this case happens to be a Remington 124 grain FMJ.

fredj338 01-01-2010 11:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by n2extrm (Post 14456670)
IMHO the seating depth variation you are seeing publushed is due to the variable of the bullet used. A Hornady 115grn bullet is or may be shaped diffrent from a Sierra 115 grn bullet. As such the bearing surface and shape of the nose may be diffrent and give you diffrent OAL for the loaded round. I try to load for magazine and function. If the round feeds reliabley and fits the magazine I run it. I try to start with data based on the actual bullet used when ever I can. If it is a Sierra I use their data Hornady theirs, or try to find a bullet that is very similar to what you have and use that. Kedep in mind OAL affects pressure. If you use a fast powder and are near the top of a powder charge/max pressure a small change in OAL could cause a serious pressure problem.

Fitting the mag is one consideration. The other is the round must fit the camber. Some pistols have shorter chambers than others. The bullet will lodge into the rifling if the round is too long & bullet shape determines that.
Make a 3-4 dummy rounds, load them in the mag & cycle them by hand. they should feed & eject easily. If it sticks in the chamber, you'll know.

n2extrm 01-01-2010 12:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kentucky Shooter (Post 14456920)
Thanks----very good points. Since my intent is for target/plinking loads, that is why I tend to run starting loads or at least loads on the low end of the velocity scale. Especially when I can't find a published load for my exact bullet, which in this case happens to be a Remington 124 grain FMJ.

I tend to do pretty much what you are doing. I find something that will fit the mag and feed, work up from a low charge to where the gun will run. The lower end charges as fred said can be problem-matic in selfloading pistols. Once I get a load that will run I tweak it a little to where it shoots and call it a day. I see no need for max pressure in a target load, as you seem to agree no need to get crazzy speeds for target loads.

Fred yes chamber is a part of function too. Thanks for pointing that out I guess I should have mentioned it. :wavey:

n2extrm 01-01-2010 12:25

I think Fred will agree I do not change the springs in a gun to make a load work either. If the load is too soft to cycle the slide I just bump up a little at a time till it works. Others will dissagree, and that is fine to each his own. I feel the slide/frame and all the rest are ment to work with that spring and I leave it alone.

Kentucky Shooter 01-01-2010 12:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by n2extrm (Post 14457156)
I think Fred will agree I do not change the springs in a gun to make a load work either. If the load is too soft to cycle the slide I just bump up a little at a time till it works. Others will dissagree, and that is fine to each his own. I feel the slide/frame and all the rest are ment to work with that spring and I leave it alone.

I certainly agree here-----I won't change the springs to make a soft load shoot either. Fine if thats what a guy wants to do, but too much trouble for me. I want it to run stock, and for anything I want to put through it.

Kentucky Shooter 01-01-2010 15:49

Range Update
 
The loads I mentioned shot great at the range with no failures to function. They chronographed an average of 1013FPS out of my 19 and 966FPS out of my 26.

The picture shows my 10 yard shooting with the G19 shooting on the left and the G26 on the right.

Thanks to all who offered help and advice.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:11.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.