New bullets - How to develop new load?

[LowBoost]

I have been using the same "recipe" for a little bit. Now I have new "toys" and supplies and need to develop new recipes.

Max COAL is obviously different for all bullet brands in each of the guns, but after repetitive testing I set on a specific length for both guns. I would like to start to develop my ladder, but I don't know with how much powder should I start with? (I use Titegroup)

 

I have looked around in books (Not forums) for these bullets to see if I can find some starting point with Titegroup and then start with 10% less to start building the ladder, but nothing found.

 

Bullets + COAL:

Gun #1 - Bayou Bullets 124gr TCG - 1.075 COAL - 

Gun #1 - Precision Delta 124gr FMJ - 1.185 COAL -

Gun #1 - Zero Bullets .38 Super 124gr JHP - 1.085 COAL

 

 

Gun #2 - Bayou Bullets 124gr TCG - 1.075 COAL - 

Gun #2 - Precision Delta 124gr FMJ - 1.185 COAL - 

Gun #2 - Zero Bullets .38 Super 124gr JHP - 1.085

 

 

Current Gun Load:

Gun #0 - Bayou Bullets 124gr TCG - 1.07 COAL - 3.6gr Titegroup  

Edited February 17, 2018 by LowBoost

[Sarge]

3.6 seems pretty light but if it works for what you want then that’s great. Have you chronoed your current load? You really can’t do much load development without a chrono.

  I’m not recommending anything but if it were me I would just change bullets and bump the charge to 3.8 and go for it. You certainly are not on the ragged edge of anything. Jacketed bullets will be a little slower than coated so going up to 3.8 SHOULD compensate for slower bullets.

[LowBoost]

Thanks for your reply Sarge. You are very well regarded (at least in my book)

I have chronoed my current load several times. It is consistently at: 1072 - 1079fps and 132-135PF

With 3.8gr I am at: 1083 - 1095fps and 134 - 136PF. I noticed a slight difference in accuracy.

 

So, you believe there should not be much difference in powder amount from current coated load going to the PD FMJ @ 1.185 and the Zero @ 1.085 JHP?

Edited February 17, 2018 by LowBoost

[IDescribe]

IF you're getting a timely pressure seal, I'd expect a load difference of about .4gr with Titegroup from 1.085 to 1.185 with the same bullet when looking for a similar average velocity.   With different bullets of the same weight, diameter and type, somewhere between .3gr and .5gr.

 

BUT unless you're loading that for a 1911, you won't be loading at 1.185.  For every other 9mm, the max OAL is 1.169.  That's the max the magazine should hold.  And you probably don't want to be THAT long, probably not longer than 1.16, and you might find a more accurate load at 1.14-1.15 -- you would need to check.  Regardless, you can't really predict a load this way, even if you sort of know what to expect at different OALs, based on prior experience with the powder.  You need to start at starting load and work back up.   

[LowBoost]

IDescribe:

 

I should have mentioned which guns I will be reloading for. CZ SP-01 and CZ Shadow2. I guess the S2, being a competition gun may have tighter tolerances as the plunk tests showed a shorter chamber throat than the SP-01.

 

Interestingly, although I was indeed concerned about the 1.185 COAL, I did try the round in the magazine and it chambered correctly as well. I know I am a newbie, but is there something I missed in all my reading where that length is not safe or are you strictly noting that it may not fit in the magazine? (Not doubting or contradicting you at all, I just want to learn). I want to make sure I approach this process in a safe and sound way.

 

I was about to start loading a few rounds at this length a few minutes ago, but I have now halted until I get clarification on how to proceed.

P.S - Notice that this length showed to work for both guns and is only for the Precision Delta FMJ and is significantly more than the other two bullets, hence my concern.

 

 

Edited February 17, 2018 by LowBoost

[Sarge]

1 hour ago, LowBoost said:

Thanks for your reply Sarge. You are very well regarded (at least in my book)

I have chronoed my current load several times. It is consistently at: 1072 - 1079fps and 132-135PF

With 3.8gr I am at: 1083 - 1095fps and 134 - 136PF. I noticed a slight difference in accuracy.

 

So, you believe there should not be much difference in powder amount from current coated load going to the PD FMJ @ 1.185 and the Zero @ 1.085 JHP?

Wow, I missed the 1.185. That’s awefully long. I only load my major rinds to 1.165 or so. How much Bullet is inside the case is what changes the pressure and velocity with a given charge. I would be more concerned if you said you load x Bullet to 1.16 but I’m going to shorten to 1.06 with same Bullet. While I still think it’s unlikely that could really boost pressure.

  But as long as you are going longer just load 15-20 at 3.8 and 15-20 at 4.0. Shoot the 3.8 across chrono and get a ball park figure. Then if needed shoot the 4.0. But like said,  you are still on the weaker end of the PF spectrum , so unless you do something radical with length or charge you have room to experiment.

[LowBoost]

OK - I am preparing some 5.56 cases right now, but I will prepare another dummy round and do another plunk test with the Precision Delta bullet.

I wonder if I misread the size? Could be, but I doubt it. Would it be possible that it indeed measured 1.185?

[Hi-Power Jack]

I tried loading MG 115 gr JHP's to 1.175" and there was Very Little grip on the bullet -

actually had one bullet ripped out of the case during the loading process - ended up

with a loose bullet, lots of powder and an empty cartridge case with a live primer, all

over my gun.

 

1.185" seems Very Long, unless the PD 124 FMJ's are Very Long .... ???

[LowBoost]

Precision Delta 124gr FMJs are .6030 in - 15.31mm

I will make a new dummy round and plunk test again. Will post results shortly.

[Furrly]

1. 185 for 9mm Is waaayyy to long.. 

1.16 tops 

[stick]

I load my 147gr rounds to 1.130.  1.185 for a 124gr is super long.  Are you correct in that length?

[LowBoost]

OK - Just finished with dummy round and plunk test. Shadow2 Max COAL = 1.2010 (It rotates freely, feeds in the magazine and chambers without a problem). Same reading as the first few times I measured. So.. That means if I reduce 5% = 1.14 and if I reduce 10% = 1.08

 

This brings some confusion. How come the the Bayou TCGs are being loaded to 1.07, The Zero JHP shows I can do 1.085. Isn't the bullet profile (TCG vs Round Nose vs HP) has a bigger effect than what it shows I can do?

 

Thoughts? Suggestions?

Edited February 17, 2018 by LowBoost

[LowBoost]

UPDATE

 

I watched Leo Deleon's video on how to determine Max OAL. I gave that a try and now the Max OAL shows 1.141!!!

So, if I reduce that by 5% it gives me 1.083. I will then load to 1.08.

 

I will try this same method for the other two bullets and see what results I get. I feel a LOT more comfortable this way than the "traditional" plunk test.

 

Edited February 17, 2018 by LowBoost

[LowBoost]

UPDATE #2

 

I used Leo's method and performed measurements for all three bullets in the Shadow2. It shows:

Bayou Bullet 124gr TCG - 1.085 

Precision Delta 124gr TCG - 1.140

Zero 38 Super 124gr JHP - 1.065

 

Should I subtract 5% to these numbers? Subtracting 5% off 1.065 looks like it would be too short? (1.011)

 

Edited February 17, 2018 by LowBoost

[stick]

16 minutes ago, LowBoost said:

UPDATE #2

 

I used Leo's method and performed measurements for all three bullets in the Shadow2. It shows:

Bayou Bullet 124gr TCG - 1.085 

Precision Delta 124gr TCG - 1.140

Zero 38 Super 124gr JHP - 1.065

 

Should I subtract 5% to these numbers? Subtracting 5% off 1.065 looks like it would be too short? (1.011)

 

You have to test different OAL's to determine group size from each gun.  Each chamber is different.  Load up some rounds, shoot groups and see what you and the gun like.

[LowBoost]

Yes - I understand that. My question is if I should subtract 5% to these new values I got with this other process to determine COAL or if I should use these as starting point?

 

[stick]

2 minutes ago, LowBoost said:

Yes - I understand that. My question is if I should subtract 5% to these new values I got with this other process to determine COAL or if I should use these as starting point?

 

use that as a starting point.  don't reduce anymore than you have to. 5% should be ok.

[IDescribe]

I am sorry I didn't back to this thread earlier.  

First,  why are you talking about reducing OALs by a certain percentage?   No idea where that comes from.  Forget that quickly.  I am confident you misunderstood someone somewhere. 

 

If you are talking about taking load data and reducing 10%, THAT is referring to powder charge weight.  Some sources, like Accurate, Ramshot, Vihtavuori, and Hodgdon give you a starting load and a maximum load.  Other sources, like Alliant, give you a max load only, and starting load is max load minus 10%.  So if they tell you they tested Bullet X at 1.140 with Sport Pistol and give you a charge weight of 4.0 grains, that means that 4.0 grains is the max load, and your STARTING load for the ladder you would build would be 10% less -- so .4gr less, so your ladder would run from 3.6gr to 4.0gr.

 

For OAL, there is some maximum OAL with every bullet at which the cartridge will chamber and the bullet will not contact the rifling.  Common practice is to load .010-.015 shorter than that maximum to make sure that the unavoidable variations in both bullet manufacture and the consistency with which you operate your press doesn't produce any rounds that touch the rifling.  IF you're max OAL without rifling contact is 1.2010, which is fairly common for FMJ-RN, that means that you could more than likely set a target OAL of 1.195 or 1.200 and not load any bullets long enough to touch the rifling when chambered.  HOWEVER, SAAMI maximum OAL for 9mm Luger is 1.169, which means that almost every gun chambered for 9mm Luger uses magazines geared for a maximum OAL of 1.169.  So WHEN your chamber's maximum is longer than 1.169, you still need to account for your magazine's maximum of 1.169.  I would suggest you not load longer than 1.160, maybe 1.165.  AND even thought that is your maximum, that doesn't mean you won't find your most accurate loads a little shorter.  But do not load to 1.185.  That will chamber in your pistol fine, but it's too long for your magazine.

 

AND you need to check maximum OAL for every bullet you use.  Period.

GOod luck. 

 

[Hi-Power Jack]

7 hours ago, IDescribe said:

  
 1.  why are you talking about reducing OALs by a certain percentage?  Forget that quickly. 

 

 2.  Common practice is to load .010-.015 shorter than that maximum

 

Looks like the answer to your first question is #2. above.    

 

BUT, you're correct, of course.   Once your Plunk Test determines the Maximum OAL, you have to shorten that by a bit to ensure proper feeding    

[IDescribe]

11 hours ago, Hi-Power Jack said:

Looks like the answer to your first question is #2. above.    

 

 

It's not, though.      Look at what he's saying.  He's talking about knocking 5% or 10% off of his maximum OAL -- so for this bullet where the max OAL is 1.201, he's talking about reducing that either .12 or .06 as a percentage of his max.  But for a bullet with a maximum OAL of 1.1, he'd be reducing .11 or .055.  It makes no sense.  I am guessing he got confused about the 10% reduction from max powder charge because I have never seen anyone talk about reducing OAL by some percentage, but I suppose I may be completely misreading something, as well.  I swear I'm not drunk this time, at least.   

Either way, LowBoost, YOUR OAL reduction should be .010-.015 of the mechanical maximum -- either the chamber max or the magazine max -- no matter what those maxes are.  For someone who knows their gear and consistency, they might tighten that down to .005 less than max, but I wouldn't recommend it for someone still learning.

[LowBoost]

You are correct, I got confused about the 10% reduction from a max powder charge instead of loading .10 shorter than my max.

Somewhat in my defense, that day I was certainly confused as to why the usual plunk test yielded an OAL different than using Leo DeLeon's method.

Either way, it seems that Leo's method is a little more consistent in my tests.

 

As for powder, I will be using Titegroup, I have seen so many loads with this powder for the same CZ pistols I will load for, I have no doubt that my "ladder" should be from 3.4 up to 3.8 grains. I will load 10 rounds for each bullet at 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8 and start from there.

 

Thank you all for the help and advise.  I will make the commitment to load a bit every week. Everything that I learned from books, videos, and your posts can easily be forgotten if not put in practice. A one-year hiatus from learning and loading for me is like starting all over. 

Hopefully, now that I have made some serious investment in my gear, this will not re-occur! 

 

 

Edited February 24, 2018 by LowBoost

[NWPilgrim]

LowBoost,

You seem to be a bit scattered. Not good for reloading. Perhaps you are jumping around between too many sources. You do not seem to have a good foundation understanding of reloading principles, but are eager to learn. Focus that to a main reference and work on the basics.

Listen to what IDescribe advises, he is spot on for everything.

Working up a new load should start with a loading manual that gives well tested and safe data including OAL as tested and max powder charge and bullet used. Start st the low end of powder charge (10% less than max if not listed). Use the listed OAL. This should be safe even with different primer and bullet brand. Work your way up to a max load that does not exceed the max velocity listed. Now you have a baseline for max charge.

From there you. Can change one factor at a time and ladder test some more for velocity and accuracy. Increasing OAL will make more room in the case and therefore slightly less pressure so you could test a bit more powder. If you decrease OAL from lusted spec you will increase pressure and sometimes that can be significant.

Mistaking OAL reduction for powder reduction is way off the charts of understanding. Really read through a reloading manual and not just skim for tidbits here and there.

Reloading is a scientific endeavor, especially when you go beyond tested data. Don't just jump on the latest internet recipe and try to make changes to it without a good understanding of standard principles and methods. Takes time. Better to make simpler well tested recipes that work in all guns to start with. Modify for specific guns only when you truly understand the ramifications of them.

Not intending to berate you, just giving you a warning that you are working beyond you level of understanding. We all started at the beginning and had to learn gradually. Take your time and you'll do fine. I've been reloading 30 yrs and made a few mistakes on the way, too! Still learning.

[Hi-Power Jack]

5 hours ago, LowBoost said:

  loading  .10"  shorter than my max.

 

I wouldn't drop down that much - if your Max is 1.130", I'd bring it down to about 1.125"  (- 0.005 ").

[LowBoost]

Well, I admit that I may have misspoken in my opening post. My intention was not to start a load from scratch. I do understand that for a completely new load, I would start with a manual or manufacturer data. What I intended to explain was that I already have a load for my guns, but I now have new bullets (FMJ and JHP) versus just TCG that is what I loaded.

 

While performing the plunk test, I realized the COAL for these bullets are different from the Bayou TCG is, hence my question that if my previous load was 3.6gr of Titegroup, if it is OK to start at say 3.4gr of the same powder but a different bullet and slightly different COAL. I am at fault by introducing other variables related to my question where I mixed powder reduction and COAL reduction, I admit that. I don't believe I am scattered as after spending a year or so reading and lurking the forums, I settled on BE forums as my source to ask questions and learn. A lot of extremely knowledgeable individuals like you all that share your time with us newbies. This is invaluable. 

 

I am extremely OCD and some fellow members that know me personally can tell you. My OCD and constant learning is what probably prevented me from just go at it and load! I guess just being extremely cautious. Now that I am comfortable handling the materials, etc. I have no problems. Also, when I am not at it for long periods of time and not practice, it's like starting all over again! (I made the mistake of selling my gear twice due to time and hardship). Now that I am back at it and spent a good chunk on gear, I plan to go full throttle on it.

 

No offense taken as I am here to learn and it is good every once in a while to have someone tell you to stop, look back and start from scratch again, no shortcuts.

Thank you all again for all the advice!

 

 

 

Edited February 25, 2018 by LowBoost

[IDescribe]

All right...

OAL        

There are a variety of methods that can be used to approximate max OAL.   Use one.  Then load a dummy and make sure it plunks and spins freely.  Personally, I load a dummy too long -- size, bell, seat, crimp to .379 -- and make sure it's too long, then I seat it deeper and deeper and deeper, a couple thousandths deeper each time.  Eventually it will start to spin, but I can feel it dragging on the rifling lands, then eventually it will spin with no drag.  That first OAL at which it spins with no drag, I record as the max, and it's within two or three thousandths of the maximum OAL without rifling engagement.  It's foolproof.  It takes a little longer, and it's tedious, but it doesn't fail to produce to a precise and accurate max OAL.  But, really, any method will work so long as you load a dummy at the end and make sure it spins freely. 

How much should you reduce from your Max OAL to create a "working" OAL?  That's largely up to you.  There is some natural variation in OAL.  Bullets vary.  Cases vary.  Cases come with walls of different thicknesses and alloys that compress and "spring back" differently.  The metals of your press flex.  The tabletop your press is mounted to flexes and shifts.  AND your arm moves a little differently each time.  There are all sorts of things that can contribute to OAL variation.  YOU want a working OAL that's short enough that natural variation isn't going to seat a bullet long enough to engage the rifling lands.   It's common to recommend people reduce .015 from max.  I usually recommend .010.  And a couple of people here have said .005.   I do .005 regularly myself.  BUT I know my gear and my arm, and I know how tight my OAL variation is.  If you're confident in yours, and you want to do .005, knock yourself out.  But something else there -- with long range rifle, the closer you load the bullet to the rifling, the more accurate the round is... at 600 yards.   At 25 yards with pistol, it's not as reliable a truth.  At 25 yards, you might find that .020 or .040 out of the rifling provides the most accurate load.  Or not.  So closer is not necessarily better.  You can tune OAL on your own and experiment.  

POWDER CHARGE   

Published load data will give you a window from starting load to max load.  They may give you the bottom and top of the window.  Or they may just give you the top.  If the top is all they give you, the starting load is 10% less.

They also give you an OAL.  You do not have to use this OAL.   What they've given you is a field report.  It's what THEY did.  You must determine your max OAL on your own, then a working OAL.  If your working OAL is the same as their reported OAL, you'll likely have similar results.    If you use a longer OAL, you will  most likely get lower peak pressure, lower average pressure, and lower average rate of acceleration, and lower velocity.  If you use a shorter OAL, you can expect the opposite -- higher velocities and at higher pressures.   How much to worry about that is questionable.  Some people, if their OAL is far enough away from the published OAL, will bump up or reduce their starting and max loads to reflex the expected change in pressure.  Others will still use starting load, but use a chrono and monitor max velocity as the limiting factor.   Personally, I would have to have a dramatic difference in OAL before I decided to reduce starting load.  But I will pay attention to velocity and come down on max load if I'm getting more velocity than the data indicates I should get for the powder charges I'm using.

For your three bullets -- 

Bayou 124gr TCG -- 3.5 to 3.9 should be fine.

Precision Delta 124gr RN -- I'd go 3.9 to 4.3gr

Zero 124/125gr --  3.7 to 4.1gr

 

3.4gr to 3.8gr is going to be too light for those jacketed bullets, especially that RN.