BallisticianX

That was an urban legend. Im not mentioning the names but the rumor was started by a gun builder years ago that had customer complaints of barrel erosion. The most popular powder at the time happened to be A#7 and happened to be used in the compliant guns. So it was used as an easy out excuse to divert the blame away from a bad batch of barrels. It was shortly after this rumor flew around the shooting sports someone did some high round count testing with A#7 and a few other powders and found no elevated levels of erosion from A#7 vs anything else tested. I cant remember whom did it but you can find it on the web. A few years ago the same scenario played out on Lil-Gun powder. A high end big bore revolver builder blamed premature throat erosion on his guns on the powder to divert blame and blemish of reputation. Again someone did some testing and found it was not the case but instead the barrel stock was a "softer than usual grade" That article is also searchable. I run A#7 in my 38 Super with awesome results and my barrels are just fine and as accurate as they were 8000, or 12000 rounds ago depending on the gun. Now to the point of the post, Ive never loaded A#7 in 9mm. Im intrigued now...The volume my 10.5 gr load takes up in a Super case looks like a possible overflow (or close to) in a 9mm case. Well if it feels and shoots like it does in my supers you wont be unhappy!

Testing any load changes are prudent before a match....the match environment will certainly expose any issues for sure! The amount of energy applied to a primer vs the DA pull weight has many variables of drag and spring tuning. Speaking in reference to a Smithy: (I have not spent extensive time on Rugers to know there nuances) In a untouched factory spec'd action you can tune just the mainspring down to achieve a 8.5-9 lb DA pull to set anything off. If you have an action job eliminating all drag points to a minimum and a reduced power 12 lb rebound spring can tune the mainspring to 8lbs DA and set just about anything off. With a worked revolver and spring tuning to get south of 8lbs down to 7lbs, in my opinion your limited to SP standard primers from Fed or WIn (CCI is questionable but possible) Below 7lbs your into FED SP standard exclusively for uncompromised ignition reliability. These are my general findings but of course there is always that one unicorn gun that is an exception. I work over everything part interaction, 11lb rebound springs, Wolff Type 2 mainspring re-arched, and debur & polish every working surface and easily run my DA at my preferred 6lbs with Fed SP. Ive had them run at 5lbs reliably but I lose the feel in staging the trigger for longer shots and it gets ify in colder weather. So choose your primer based on what your gun is tuned to (in your case trial and error for whatever makes it go bang everytime). Good luck and enjoy that Wheel Gun!

Let me sum up why the "E" in ICORE is still relevant and meaningful; To be a revolver enthusiast means to love shooting the Wheelgun plain and simple. It doesn't matter what caliber or loading method you use. The design premise and mechanical system remains the same and requires a special level of understanding and skill to efficiently manipulate one through all the motions. To adhere to a traditional caliber or method of charging the cylinder would make one a "purist". ICORE is not just about being a purist, but they are welcome just the same as anyone else, its about accepting tradition and the to grasp new ideas to continue interest in the Wheelgun. Also dont loose sight that the Moonclip was invented to accept a .45 ACP (or webley across the pond) in the Neighborhood of a hundred years ago. So Pistol Calibers in a revolver and accepting moonclips is almost as old or "traditional" as the .38 Special itself. So summing it up...its about the Gun, not what you choose to feed it! So go shoot ICORE and be happy people still give the revolver, in any form, the respect it deserves. P.S. I am a Enthusiast with a side of purist.....I still shoot 38's (38 LC) in my 627. I owned the crazed 929 and personally am not a fan. I do however see the allure of plentiful brass at every range across America with the advantages of its shortness..thats what steered me into it. But Having a .357 revolver with its versatility of powder puff 38's to Full House magnums and its Stainless Steel Cylinder (Yes thats a dig on Ti) just seems better. Of course I seek out and own many older smiths to satisfy my purist side

I suggest the full size Classic C-More with the Alchin Mount. Its versatile with several dot sizes to choose from that can be can changed without buying an entirely new sight. The diode emmitters are $50 and takes less than 5 mins to change without dismounting the sight. Gives you options to try different sizes to determine whats best for you without busting the bank. You can buy the C-more classic, an Alchin Mount, and a 2nd diode for around $330 of which is cheaper than an RTS2. In comparison to the smaller dots Ive tried I always go back to the C-more classic as I feel it gives me more peripheral vision for transitions and my times and hits are better. Also the design is proven and durable. Ive had the mini dots fail and intermittently turn on and off from the "smaller" less robust circuitry getting jarred. Hard to beat a c-more classic for a reliable sight!

I myself prefer an 8 MOA dot for ICORE, USPSA, & Steel. None of these require such precision that a smaller dot would be needed. The distances are all under 35 yards for the most part (ICORE occasionally has 50 yard paper) In these games I personally feel you need to choose a dot size you can pick up on instantly to know your on target and confident to make the shot without hesitation. For me I like the 8 MOA for that. Also the 8 MOA provides a nice less washed out dot in very bright conditions.

In hardness let me specify, the material may not necessarily be harder now nor may it be just a bit thicker cup, but all the major Manufacturers (Fed, CCI, WIN) at one time varied those design points on magnum primers. It was to minimize primer piercing/blowout on elevated magnum pressures. Im sure with the levels of engineering technology and mellaurgy that has gone through various changes. But I can tell you the require "strike to ignite Sp vs SPM still does differ based on real world testing. I have many revolvers Ive worked in various levels of mainspring reduction. Using a Smith at a 7lb DA pull as a test medium I have fired loads of the same powder/bullet/case with all three brands of standard and magnum SP primers to determine suitable alternatives during the primer crunch a few years back. All the "magnums" had significant FTF whereas Fed SP & Win SP were 100% and CCI SP had a 16-32% failure rate (based on 6 shot cylinder). Fed SPM had less FTF then Win followed by CCI. I have noticed over the years Win & CCI seem to flip flop with what impact levels they need to set off. CCI has become easier in the last 10 or so years. I have some 15 year old CCI's that need some major energy to ignite. (Edited for fat finger spelling errors)

I never loaded your mentioned powders for major and dont have any load recommendations (not familiar with AP70N either). Im not sure why your looking for Major in a 38 special, I assume your shooting IDPA? So you need 1,031 FPS minimum for major, No concern to be able to do that as far as safety goes in a .357 mag case & chambered revo as that is on the lower end of a magnum load. With a 38 special case that little bit shorter case and capacity does alter burn characteristics and pressure curves. So Id choose a powder that offers both published data for 38+p loadings and Light .357 magnum loads in your desired bullet weight. With that in mind Id go with Universal before unique. Unique has too much variation with case position for my liking in this application. Start with the load for 38 +P (don't jump into the starting load for .357 mag). Chronograph for a baseline and then work up gradually while choreographing each increment. Pay attention to the recoil impulse and check for pressure signs and inspect cases closely. Every gun reacts differently so you got to keep an on on all these things closely and abort if something doesn't seem right. If the recoil impulse gets uncomfortably sharp Id stop as it wont be comfortable for you to shoot in competition anyway. (Also take note of the .357 max load for the chosen powder & bullet combo and reduce by 15% and that's your max threshold). Another thing to consider in your quest is most commercial special brass is usually pretty thin walled and are not tolerant of elevated magnum pressures (starline would be best). Your gonna get split cases, not necessarily on the first firing, but you'll see it by loadings # 2 and 3. Good luck!

As said a slight increase in velocity with the same powder charge is about the only change because of the larger volume of primer compound in a mag primer vs a standard one. But the magnum primer has a harder cup by design to resist blowout from the higher pressures traditional of magnum loads. So in a factory set action its no problem, but if you have a worked action and depending on the degree of that work relative to the double action reduction you could have FTF with a magnum primer vs softer standard primers. Load 'em up and if they go bang everytime...run em without worry.

I dont recommend polishing the interior of the action, at most just lightly running and Arkansas stone across it breifly is all youll want to do. Its anodized aluminum and you dont want to cut through the anodizing exposing the softer bare aluminum as this will accelerate wear. AZGUNNER is right about focusing on the bolt. I cant say what he addresses but Im sure he is referring to; polishing the bearing surfaces where it rides in the receiver (this not only reduces drag but it will also reduce the anodizing being worn down from the bolts reciprocation). Round/radius the bottom rear of the bolt where it interacts with the hammer as that will greatly reduce the drag when the bolt cycles and resets the hammer (wont stunt the rearward movement as much). Carefully polish the bolt face to remove rough spots so the round smoothly slides under the extractor without dragging (be careful not to remove metal here as it could compromise headspacing, just smooth it up).

I didnt watch the videos so I cant comment on if its overly bad smoking. But if all the powders are smoking with the same bullet equally and you feel its excessive smoke Id assess its the bullet coating. I will say with my experience with TG is it does not play well with coated lead bullets in any of the higher pressure cartridges like 9mm, 38 super, and 40, especially 9mm. It does however work with lower pressure rounds like 38 spcl and 45 with good accuracy and no more than usual smoke. I reserve TG for plated/jacketed in 9mm, 38 Super, and 40. For heavier coated lead bullets in 9mm (135gr+) I actually like WSF. Soft, accurate, clean, and no major smoke. Herco used to be the go to for 9's with heavier lead pills and WSF is regarded as its best replacement and I can say it works well.

Glad you dont have blowouts. Fact is the 9mm case walls & webb are not as strong as super as it was not designed for the pressures major puts on it. You cant argue that fact. So shooting major in a 9 repeatedly is a higher potential for case failure than a 38 Super, again its facts. So if you choose to take a calculated risk thats your choice. If its worked out then thats great too. I am merely displaying factual info. Oh and by the way My dont skimp comment was directed as a general comment to not skimp and sell you and your gun short no matter what you use.

One fired 38 SC brass...a unicorn Ive yet to harness. Saw some questions about how many times you can load 9mm major and 38 SC; 9 major once and your good as long as your range brass was without bulges to begin with, load it twice and its a high risk for blow out, load it 3 times and your more daring than Evil Knievel! With 38 SC starline Ive loaded it 7 times without issue so honestly you'll probably lose it at a match before you exceed it usable life. Bottom line: 9 major is thought to be cheaper and more convenient with range brass. My thought is no, it isnt; cheaper as you might not be paying for brass but it stops there. In order to combat what condition that range brass is in to prevent problems you really need to inspect it and base size it in case of any bulges. That equipment costs money and it takes time. Trust me a bad case will blow out and lock up the gun! So now your doing all that to let it hit the ground for a one time use. I don't see the savings or convenience in it. As mentioned if you buy new brass its about equal cost between the two and again your shooting the 9's once where the 38 SC you can load again. Finally I've owned both and the 38 SC allows for more options in powders and can be made to shoot flatter. So my final thoughts are if your gonna spend 5k+ on the Top Fuel Dragster of the handgun world you shouldn't be worried about skimping on what fuel you put in it to sacrifice the performance you invested in!

The OP mentions load data variables all over the place, most likely because of the varying bullet hardness used in developing that data from one book to another. Also I saw some comments that his load is too hard for lead to be pushed...lead pills pushed that hard can be done as it was pioneered by Phil Sharpe & Elmer Kieth and they had great success. That success without leading for longevity in accuracy was with good bullet lubes and bullets believe it or not with a BHN of 10-12! Todays production cast pills have mostly gone "hardball" around BHN of 18-20. As have coated bullets. There is no advantage to it other than to better withstand deformity in bulk packaged boxes during handling. Despite the thought you need a hard bullet to withstand higher velocities you don't. A softer alloy, to a point of course, will seal and mold itself to the bore and with good lube will not wipe off much lead in the bore. Hard alloys generally need the rifling to cut into the bullet displacing lead away from the bullet in order to conform to the bore resulting in loose deposits coating the bore. One last thing, I always had better accuracy with W296 in the .357 than 2400.

When I used to shoot 9 major (I prefer 38 SC these days) I tried a few powders early on and the two I liked the most were HS6 and Sil. Then WAC is a distant 3rd. I saw less pressure sign with HS-6 at PF vs. WAC & Sil. Also my comp worked more efficiently and felt flatter with HS-6 followed by Sil then WAC. WAC felt violently sharp with more rise than the other two. I settled on HS6. I admittedly never played with any of the Shooters World or Vecton to compare them. I will say that in 9 major the slower the powder you can comfortably fit in the case the better. Lessens the potential for higher chamber pressures to batter the gun and case failure. Not to mention it will run that comp better in most cases.

I just saw the shipping is $20 flat rate for 26 to 50lbs.

Ive worked with both powders quite a bit over the years and both powders are fine specimens. Just like anything else they have areas they are great in and some that its not best suited. Comparing a powder to another powder in generalities is unrealistic. TG is in the fast class of Handgun Powder whereas N320 is in the more medium class. Two different speeds so that will compliment different ends of a spectrum with a single caliber. Ill do my best to sum up my experience with the popular hand gun range. TG is a fine powder in 38 spcl, 40, 45, 38 super and 9mm as is N320....but with caveats to both. The complaint of how hot TG gets is somewhat true but embellished on in my opinion.. Its not overwhelmingly hotter than any other powder after a long session at the range, the gun is gonna be hot after rapidly firing a hundred rounds without a break no matter what powder your burning. After firing a typical stage I never noticed my guns anymore hot vs. from anything else. With coated bullets Ive noticed TG in any high pressure rounds like 9mm, 38 super, or 40 the accuracy is not consistent (especially 9mm) and is a bad choice. In low pressure like 38 spcl and 45's it usually shows me the best accuracy with coated bullets. N320 delivers accurate results across the high pressure rounds with coated bullets and blows TG away in that spectrum. However with plated or Jacketed in 9mm, & 38 Super, & 40 Ive usually found TG and N320 perform closely with an advantage concerning ES going to TG. With Plated or Jacketed in 38 spcl (and most other varients) & 45 TG yields more accuracy then N320. The one exception is the 38 Short Colt, N320 wins in that round with any bullet in a modern 38 or .357 cylinder. Smokiness; TG smokes with coated or cast in the higher pressure rounds, in lower pressure ones it smokes no more than N320. Both equal in Plated or Jacketed. Loading: In my Hornady L-N-L thrower both meter equally well. Both powders work better with Hotter loads. TG mainly because it has a close window of charge range so you dont have a choice. With N320 Ive just found it's inconsistent in most rounds when loaded at min to middle charge weights, more so with large case volume rounds like the 38 spcl and 45. Cleanliness, they both are pretty clean, N320 has a slight edge in higher pressure rounds regarding soot and TG better in lower pressure rounds as theres no singed kernals like with N320. Either way not enough to be a dealbreaker to either one. Cost; thats a personal referendum (if even applicable) that is up to you to decide if you wanna save or spend. I will mention if you desire N320 characteristics and want it cheaper Ive found A# 2 is near identical in burn rate and mirrors feel, cleanliness, velocity range, and close in charge weight. I have converted all my N320 fed guns to A# 2 and have been pleased.

In my 2 open supers , one a govt slide and the other a shorty, I tried PD, MG, & Zero HP's with different powders and found a negligible velocity difference with the Zero & PD and MG slightly slower with all powders used (A#7, 3N38, Autocomp, & Sil). The recoil impulse was also consistent with each bullet within a specific powder. As far as accuracy they were again all equal. I encountered the same results in my M&P9 with a KKM barrel within the powder range for that gun. I didnt notice you mentioning what handgun your shooting so I will round off my experience and feelings on the bullet discussion in a handgun. A 30-40 fps difference between a bullet brand is a .1-.2 grain difference within most pistol powder and its not gonna effect feel or cost enough to fixate on it. Also found that higher end barrels (Schuemann, KKM, Bar-Sto etc) tend to perform with most bullets pretty consistently. So bullet choice becomes less of a concern with reputable offerings. Some brand OEM production barrels do have the potential to be more picky with projectile choice so it could however be a concern with "stock" guns. But remember in the handgun practical world a 1/4-1/2 difference in group size say at 20 yards doesn't mean much so dont get to caught up in that. Be more concerned with powder for the desired velocity and how it correlates to recoil impulse your looking for moreover than the bullet, thats gonna greatly improve your shooting vs which bullet shoots a 1/2 tighter group etc. Then the cost of said bullet, the less you spend means the more you can buy and the more you will shoot, again improving your ability. So in conclusion, by all means test bullets and try a few different powders, determine if any one bullet out shoots another by considerable margin in your gun. If they all run close then choose the more cost effective bullet and focus on what powder makes it feel best.

As previously said the crimp is not the issue. Clear up some misinformation first: -- I taper crimp my target revolver rounds without an issue and holds the bullets in place just fine with no bullet deformity and is the proper type of crimp for smooth body bullets!. -- Roll crimping is only used if you have a crimp groove/cannulure on the bullet and is mostly beneficial for heavy recoiling magnum loads. -- A roll crimp applied to a bullet without a crimp groove will roll and bury the case mouth into the bullet with deformity, and with lead bullets loose lead shavings to increase barrel fouling. Your problem: Many things effect moonclips just dropping in. 1. Brass: In your case .38 Brass brands have different extractor groove dimensions, there is no SAAMI standard for extractor grooves on .38's so they are all over the place between brands. So properly mating brass brand to moonclip is important. Your brass should spin freely once seated into the clip, if it cant spin or is loose enough to barely be held in place it will be a problem. TK Custom has the most comprehensive line of clips to match to what brands (TK's are the Smith factory supplier of clips). keep brass clean. Dirty brass (like dropped in the dirt or sand) or corroded brass can jam up a clip drop too. 2. Clip straightness; a bent clip causes rounds to lean in or out and will stunt the drop in...check clips for straightness using a known perfectly flat surface and if bent replace them! 3. Cylinder Charge hole condition; a 627 extractor is notorious for its cut not lining up on the inside (closest to the ratchet) with the charge hole in the cylinder body itself. You end up with a knife edged "ledge" protruding out just below the extractor. This will catch a case and stop the clip dead. You need to break that edge with a fine stone or a bullet point fine polishing bit. Also visibly check that the charge holes walls inside are smooth without burrs, carbon rings, grit etc. With what happens at Smith these days its a crap shoot how good or bad the finish is in there. If you get tightly spec'd charge holes due to tooling wear this is going to require clean cylinders moreover for reliable clip drops. I always polish the charge hole walls with an 800 grit Flex-hone cylinder honing brush (400 if there esepecially tight or rough then finish with 800). Only takes a few seconds in a power drill to each charge hole and makes a big difference in moonclip drops and extractions. Hope this helps

I simply clamp the extractor rod in a padded aluminum jaw vise insert, insert two fired and expanded cases a few chambers apart and use an allen wrench in between them. Make sure to leave the empty cases hanging out far enough that the allen wont come in contact with the side of the ratchet. A light snug is all you need to tighten. Ive never damaged, marred, or deformed an extractor rod with a padded soft jaw vise. One thing to check if you have chronic loosening is the shoulder contact between the rod, rod collar, and and extractor. The shoulders should mate up relatively square for 360 degree contact between all three parts. Thus creates the perfect frictional fit to keep tight. If the shoulders are obviously not square to each other it may promote loosening. NEVER grab hold of the cylinder to initiate loosening or tightening the extractor rod! you will twist and deform the ends of the star, (bend the pins in older cylinders) or loosen the fit to the breached "d" hole in the cylinder to extractor...all of which will effect timing! I also do not recommend loctite on the threads. Its unnecessary and only adds to the stress and strain on the parts when disassembling later on. If anything I put a single drop of light oil on the rod threads to prevent galling (especially on stainless) so again it will come apart easily without damage. I have never had a rod come loose with this method and Im running my revos hard to the tune of 10-14k rounds annually between ICORE, USPSA, and steel.

Slower powders with light charges at the starting to mid charge weight usually shows unburnt powder or singed kernals.

Me too but Ill probably never know. Another place for weird happenings is Numerich Gun Parts. They are 10 miles away from my home and when they had a walk in counter I was there often and had a lot of odd issues.

RWS HP Subsonics, a bit pricey but the most accurate subsonics I've tried and very quiet. But they are on the edge of cycling an OEM 10/22 bolt and spring. I found the cheaper effective fix to adjust the cycling for subsonic ammo is the KIDD recoil spring kit. It comes with 3 springs; a standard (close to OEM power), a 10% lighter, and 10% heavier and a guide rod for $9.95. The Kidd aluminum bolt handles are $20. The medium spring is slightly less powered than the Ruger OEM spring and with the KIDD aluminum bolt handle works reliably with my OEM bolt to cycle subsonics both unsuppressed or suppressed (got to try it suppressed in TN thanks to my cousin owning one). The 10% lighter spring will definitely work for all subs with OEM bolt un-suppressed or suppressed. So for $30 your good to go. I will mention the Kidd springs will work with the Ruger OEM bolt handle/rod but you'll need to un-stake the guide rod to change but you'll be sacrificing the reciprocating mass savings with the OEM steel handle vs aluminum Kidd one. .

Just my .02...I owned a Tanfo Gold Team new large frame in 9mm bought new about 3 years ago. It was an unreliable; chronically failing to eject. Despite parts changes, tweaks, trips to the distributor, and an experienced tanfo gunsmith it only improved marginally and never could be made to run dependable enough for matches. From the various reading I did to figure out a solution I saw much eluding to the unavailable to the US smaller frame being better suited for 9's and the larger frame available in the US has issues with 9's but will run supers reliably. So unless something has changed in the Tanfo recently my advice is to stay with the super and just shoot it. The "savings" in brass does not outweigh the reliability and confidence of the gun. Not to mention most go to 9 for range brass to account for the savings and convenience. In major your gonna have to roll size or base size all that brass to prevent any bulges so you dont lock up the gun with pinched/blown out brass. So again ask yourself if the dollars saved on brass warrant the equipment to roll/base size and time to do it?

As others have said EGW is top notch. But for a budget and decent quality Fusion Firearms is what I've often used. Don't see much mention of them around the net despite the good quality parts I've experienced. I have used their parts in various personal guns and currently have two 1911's with their hammers in them. One in a STI Spartan gut and rebuild and another in a dedicated 2011 frame for a .22 conversion upper. Both have tons of rounds through them and no problems or wear related issues. I will say be prepared to stone down the hammer hooks on a fusion hammer to get to the .030" height, they leave them oversized in that area for ability to fit up to anything.

Yup, barrel is going back today. Im officially abandoning the bargain model 17 build, this projects has fought me the whole way with a bad omen per say. So I restored it back to its original specs and Im just gonna off it and buy a 617. Sometimes a "just because project" is not worth it.