JDMahan Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 My son has just started shooting steel challenge, and wants me to reload for him (i know, but at least he'll shoot with me). Anyway, I've been reloading .45 for bullseye for years, on a Dillon 550. But I've never loaded 9mm. Picked up some Acme 124g RN to try out. I have jugs of Bullseye, and a fair amount of Titegroup, so I would appreciate suggestion using those. Or if those powders won't work, what do you suggest. Looking for as light as we can go and still have reliable function (in a Range Officer 9mm) He did already buy me a new tool head, dies, and conversion kit?, so there's that. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCTaylor Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Titegroup 3.2-3.5 will work. Not sure how low you can go but those will certainly function the gun. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMahan Posted February 20, 2018 Author Share Posted February 20, 2018 Thanks, I'll load up a few in that range and check for function, and then nudge it up and down to fine tune accuracy. I've never loaded the coated bullets before, but I assume (I know, always a dangerous thing) I won't get into trouble if I use data for cast of the same weight. I feel like a rookie, even though I've been reloading forever. I only loaded three .45 loads; one for 25yds, one for 50, and using titegroup for indoors. Thanks again for the help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CGH Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 I use 3.6 gr of titegroup with the old style of 124 from Acme and loaded it at 1.06 in my G34. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMahan Posted February 21, 2018 Author Share Posted February 21, 2018 Isn't 1.06 pretty short? I put together some dummy rounds today at 1.12, and they passed the 'plunk test, and Fed ok by hand cycling. I should have mentioned these are the new profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furrly Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 4 hours ago, JDMahan said: Isn't 1.06 pretty short? I put together some dummy rounds today at 1.12, and they passed the 'plunk test, and Fed ok by hand cycling. I should have mentioned these are the new profile. 3.6-3.8 at your length, as long as your load passes the plunk test your good to go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike94yj Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 Following Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CGH Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 6 hours ago, JDMahan said: Isn't 1.06 pretty short? I put together some dummy rounds today at 1.12, and they passed the 'plunk test, and Fed ok by hand cycling. I should have mentioned these are the new profile. Thats why I mentioned using the old style, not sure what you are using. From what i have read and seen so far 1.12 is a good place to start with the new profile ( I have a bunch of the old ones to use up before I try those out). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMahan Posted February 21, 2018 Author Share Posted February 21, 2018 Got it, makes sense. I'm heading to the Range this morning, I'll report back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMahan Posted February 22, 2018 Author Share Posted February 22, 2018 (edited) Ok, home from the Range. I had loaded 10 each of 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7 of tg, all at 1.12 oal 3.5 functioned barely, failed to lockback, empties dribbled out on my arm. 3.6 was better, positive ejection and function. 3.7 the group really tightened up, felt very mild, perfect function. Empties landed in a nice pile just behind and right of my shoulder. Only 10 shots, but very encouraging. Based on this I'll load up a enough of the 3.7 to seriously test for accuracy. Maybe it really is that easy... Thanks to everyone for the help, I'm sure you saved me lots of time and grief. I really appreciate it. Edited February 22, 2018 by JDMahan Typos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furrly Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 Glad To hear You figured it out..my loads are 3.8 gr, 1.130 OAL on my czs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlightning Posted February 25, 2018 Share Posted February 25, 2018 My load, with the new style is 3.58 TG base on 10 point data. 1.11 out of CZ S2. 131 PF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMahan Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 Hey, you're close to me, I'm in Highlands Ranch. I don't think I could discern a .02g difference on my beam scale; I usually throw 10 and average. After working up (3 8 & 3.9), and down, 3.6, I think I've settled on 3.7, 1.12oal. Runs perfect, and very accurate. As a bonus, my 2 hks really likes this load too. Thanks for the input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now