cwsanfor

Got it. That's what I did, took the comparator measurement from the brass I just fired, and set the sizing die/shell holder to produce a 0.0026" shoulder setback from there, shown here.

.0029-.0012= .0017" of set back for a semi-auto is on the edge of reliability. I'd personally push back the shoulders at least .003" back in a semi. So I would push it back to 0.004". But experience is the best teacher. Load up and fire 100-200 rounds and see if that .0029 setting with the .0017" set back works for you. Maybe they will be 100%. Maybe they won't. I'd recommend that you see what that load does when the gun is hot and dirty. Religious Shooter, We apparently share two interests . Let be sure I understand you. For the first reloading of this LC M885 brass, my average shoulder setback was 0.0029". After firing, I measured the shoulder location again with the comparator, and found that the shoulder was advanced 0.0012" during firing. I was thinking the 0.0029" setback was near the generous end of the 0.002-0.003" range I usually see cited for gas piston guns like this SIG556. Are you saying I should dial in a larger setback? Sorry for all the dumb questions, I am new at rifle loading.

No, you still want to have a case-gauge. The comparator only tells you lengths... a case-gauge tells you whether your cases are within spec at mouth, shoulder, datum, body and rim. There are *lots* of ways a round can pass a comparator test, and fail to fit a case-gauge. $.02 Interesting. I still am not sure what causes this round to protrude above the top step of the Wilson gauge. Should I try a Dillon gauge, or some other brand, or one that is 5.56 rather than .223? I think this round is correct for this gun, but I can't see the value of using a gauge that says it is not. Am I making any sense?

Thanks, gentlemen, for your feedback. The bolt closed, and all ten test rounds fired without a problem. After firing, the shoulders were pushed out an average of 0.0012", so my die setting of 0.0029" shoulder setback seems appropriate. I suppose I could reduce it a hair, but this seems fine for now. I am not sure the Wilson Gauge is useful to me since I an not loading to my particular barrel, not to .223 Remington SAAMI standards, so it goes back to Midway, and I'll continue with the Hornady Comparator.

I am sure you are correct. It's just that moving from straight-walled pistol loading to rifles and considering 60,000 psi going off a few inches from my nose makes me very attentive, and I'm trying to do this correctly at the beginning so I can build from there. Based on what I'm hearing at this and several other fora, I also agree with you that I am doing .223 things to a 5.56, and also mixing tools, like the Hornady Comparator and the Wilson case gauge. I think such tool mixing will yield what appear at first glance to be anomalies. I'm going to see if this brass chambers, then load a few, see if they magazine, chamber, and eject, check for setback, and light them up Saturday.

To measure the cases I used the Hornady Comparator with 330 insert, anvil base, and a Mitutoyo 500-195-20 Digimatic micrometer. Yes, the cases were deprimed, tumbled in a stainless steel pin tumbler, swaged, flash hole deburred and uniformed, and lubed with a very light application of Redding/Imperial Sizing Die Wax before sizing.

I am about to load my first 5.56 rounds and have a case headspacing question. The cases are from LC M885 fired once in my SIG556. The equipment includes a Lee Turret (Hornady LNL AP and Lee Classic SS available but not being used), Redding National Match Die Set, Hornady Comparator, Giraud Trimmer, and L. E. Wilson case gauge. I deprimed and tumbled the brass, swaged it in a Dillon D-600 SuperSwage, debarred and uniformed the flash holes and primer pockets, lubed with Imperial Sixing Wax, and sized in the Redding die, measuring the before and after comparator lengths of each case (see ). I then trimmed each case to 1.7523 in the Giraud. I had previously set up the die to touch the shell plate, then about 1/8th further turn down. The press deflects slightly when I pull the lever, so I have some cam over. I measured each of 107 cases with the Hornady Comparator, and got an average of 0.0029" shoulder pushback using the Redding Competition Shell Holder (0.006""). Thought I was GTG. Then I got an L. E. Wilson Gauge and all of the case bases I checked protrude slightly (about a rim's width) above the high step of the gauge. At this point I figure the SIG556 must have larger than usual chamber headspace, and that I need more than .003" shoulder pushback to be within SAAMI spec, so I take some previously sized brass, put in the Redding Shell Holders 004", 002" and the standard Lee shell holder, increasing the shoulder pushback with each one. None of these resizings caused the case to properly fit the Wilson gauge: it seems I still did not push the shoulders back enough to be within SAAMI standards. Not sure where to go from here. Options that come to mind include: 1) Lower the Redding sizing die, then see if case sized it it will clear the case gauge, 2) Try the Lee Dies until I can figure out how to set the Reddings, 3) Ignore the case gauge, load and fire these rounds and see what happens, 4) Ignore the SAAMI spec and assume the SIG556 has a very long headspace (same as 3), 5) Something else. Thanks in advance.

I've loaded these with various propellants, although I've only chronoed them with VihtaVuori N340 and N350 so far. They shoot well. I got 7,000 and will probably get another 10,000 before they get sold out. At $0.07 per bullet delivered, it's a great bargain and a more than adequate round.

I had a MyWeigh i200 (what I believe Brian sells), and if had bad zero drift. I returned it, got another, it was just plain innacurate. I exchanged it for the MyWeigh GemPro 250 (excellent service from OldWillKnot), and love it. Dead accurate compared to a high-dollar Sartorius at work, and I love the higher resolution. It's overkill, but I was a chemist for 22 years and scales are one of the few things I'm anal about.

This eight rung test of 10 mm used one powder, load, bullet, OAL, etc., varying (1) combinations of Lee dies and Redding Competition Pro dies, and (2) magnum and standard primers in these combinations: Lee size, seat, crimp; Standard primers Lee size, seat, crimp; Magnum primers Redding seat, Lee size, FCD; Standard primers Redding seat, Lee size, FCD; Magnum primers Redding size, seat, Lee FCD; Standard primers Redding size, seat, Lee FCD; Magnum primers Redding size, seat, crimp; Standard primers Redding size, seat, crimp; Magnum primers All loads were 13.6 gr Accurate Arms #9 (weighed on a just-calibrated RCBS Chargemaster) under Precision Delta 180 gr FMJ assembled on a Hornady LNL AP with 1.26 COL in virgin Starline brass, load temperature 45F (actually shot at 50-55F) from a stock Glock G20sf except for the Bar-Sto barrel and 20# ISMI recoil springs. Predicted values are from QuickLoad v.3.6. VELOCITY it appears that magnum primers in this load increase velocity about 26 fps: that is, the AA #9 velocity was less than predicted by an average 80 fps with standard primer, and brought closer to predicted with magnum primers at an average delta of 54 fps. STANDARD DEVIATION OF VELOCITY I'm not sure how statistically sound simply averaging summed standard deviations is (I'll ask the statistician, a former Navy Surface to Air Warfare Officer, Monday), but magnum primers reduce SD from 10.8 to 9.2, or 1.6. GROUPS The magnum primers tightened groups a bit. This is pretty subjective (because I am a mediocre shot and shooting through the chrono distracts me), but the groups from magnum primers were definitely slightly better, and if I get a Ransom Rest or a better shooter at a greater distance to the target, I am pretty sure I would verify that magnum wins here. LEE VERSUS REDDING I think this is scant data to make a call, but it is interesting that the lowest single SD (5.9) and the lowest pair (5.9 + 8.9 = 14.8) is with the Redding Competition Pro seating die and the FCD. I really have seen very little COL drift with eather seating die, so I'd hazard a guess that <if> this is a significant difference, the FCD accounts for it. CONCLUSION I will probably try this again with another powder, but I am on the basis of this dataset going to agree with McNett that magnum is the default primer for denser propellants and greater bullet weights in 10mm, and I believe I will continue with the Redding Competition Pro seating die and the FCD until I see a reason to do otherwise.

I'm working on a script that would give unauthenticated ("not logged in") users the right to sort, hide, etc., but I am time constrained.

There are tabs along the bottom of the page for other weights.

I've Googled this, and sent an email to Redding, but do any of you know whether other than the micrometer adjustment stem on the Competition Pro, is there any difference between the Redding Competition Pro and the Pro die sets? Are the internals the same? I am particularly interested in 10mm.

Like Kyle said. I have the 20, 22, and 24# ISMI's for my G20sf, and the 24# runs fine, although I have shot little lower-powered ammo through it, it has always cycled fine. The 22# spring was throwing brass 16 feet. Howver, the gun is new, not loosened up, and the ammo is like Underwood or loaded to that level.

I compiled this spreadsheet to get a better handle on the range of available loads for my new Glock G20sf. I originally entered only 180gr data, but today I added all data currently in hand for these grain weights: 135, 150, 155, 165, 170, 180, and 200 (including, due to popular demand, powders I don't plan to use, like Unique) from Hornady 8, Speer 14, VihtaVuori Reloading Manual 4, LoadBook 2004, QuickLoad 3.6, and my load development. I initially entered data from various forums, Lee 2, Hodgdon/IMR/Winchester 2010, Ramshot 4.4, Accurate 2010, and Lyman 49 for the 180 gr bullets I was loading, and will add the non-180gr weights and powders from these other sources as time allows, maybe today. I'm working on a way to enable unauthenticated users to sort by columns, such as Powder, Source, Bullet, etc, without being able to change the underlying data. All disclaimers apply, there may be errors in this data, the data may have different results in your gun or if you make any changes in the conditions, you should start low and work up, loading may be hazardous to your health, firearms can be dangerous, etc., but of course you already knew that ...

I completed last week's load development. Turns out you can chrono just fine in a light drizzle. I loaded four ladders for eight powders (VihtaVuori N105, Alliant Blue Dot, VihtaVuori N340, VihtaVuori 3N38, Hodgon Longshot, VihtaVuori 3N37, Accurate Arms #9, and Alliant Power Pistol), with the hottest loads limited to about 36,000 psi or about 5% compression, whichever came first, and worked up to that with three loadings reduced by 0.2 gr each step, except in the case of Power Pistol and Long Shot, which were reduced 0.3 gr per step. I used new Starline brass with 0.987" length, 24.6 gr H2O MCC, COAL 1.26"; bullets were 180.3 gr Precision Delta FMJFN; primers were Federal LPP; rounds assembled on a Hornady LNL AP (but hand-weighed to 0.1 gr, not dropped, on a MyWeigh i201 and a RCBS ChargeMaster when the former became too tedious) with Lee dies. The gun was a Glock G20sf with 4.5# connector, ZEV Competition springs, Bar-Sto 4.61" barrel, and 24# ISMI recoil spring, benched. Quickload and ambient temp 45F, 12' muzzle to chrono, 14' chrono to target. The results in the original format (four groups of increasing powder weight for all eight powders) is at https://docs.google.com/a/sanfordconsulting.biz/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApfazXeV8cnBdExNUE5feFdmUkdJOTM4M2cwb3UzNFE&hl=en_US#gid=1. I rearranged the data into what I think is a better format at https://docs.google.com/a/sanfordconsulting.biz/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApfazXeV8cnBdFNOcF95MTJfdDlCNEVnMnoyV0d5elE&hl=en_US#gid=10. The latter format shows all four rungs of a ladder on one sheet, and (1) simulates the way I'd ordinarily shoot a ladder, one powder at a time, so I can feel the effects of increasing weight; (2) facilitates adding graphs for Pressure versus Velocity and Actual versus Predicted Velocity; and (3) will be the format I use going forward. The grouping data is probably marginally useful, because shooting groups at the same time as chronoing is distracting, and I sometimes had to reposition the point of aim to avoid shooting the chrono, etc. I'll shoot groups later for selected rounds without a chrono. However, although a low standard deviation (SD) is not always associated with increased precision at the target, the SD's here give me some clues as to what loads to pursue. VihtaVuori 3N37 seems to be the SD winner, and tracks QuickLoad (QL) very closely, although the N340 was also good. The Power Pistol (PP) load I was fretting about, 9.9 gr, was just fine, and was the third highest in velocity of this bunch, 1,303 fps at 36,252 psi. Going above 9.9 gr does not noticeably increase velocity in PP with this round, according to QL. LongShot ran fastest, 1,324 fps at a comfy 35,829 psi. There's only about 20 fps more available before exceeding 37,500 psi. BlueDot (BD) was second fastest (1,319 fps at a mere 28,514 psi). If you are comfortable with 17% compression and about 38,000 psi, which I am not, I believe BD would run about 1,370 fps with this round's parameters, although I would not recommend this, particularly at colder temperatures, because of BD's pretty clear inverse temperature sensitivity and somewhat odd pressure/velocity characteristics. Speaking of which, I got this email from the Technical Service Manager at Alliant this week: "Blue Dot does up a bit at cold temps. I do not know how this could be put into the QuickLoad system. I will pass your comments on to one of our engineers for their comments.". I hope to get better factors including Ba for BD, but I know of no way for QuickLoad to account for inverse temperature sensitivity, so I will not likely play much with that. I'm likely to stick with VV powders for less flash, less soot, and better metering, and PP when I want to save some money. That's kind of my general strategy anyway. I think 1,270 fps is all I can comfortably get from 3N37 (at 37, 628 psi), but the truth is I don't plan to load everyday 10mm much faster than 1150-1200 fps. So it was a good day at the range. My BIL brought down his AR-15, a jacked up piece with too many mods to mention. It shot sub-MOA like a breeze at 250 yards. Cap'n Tom's was not open, so we ate at the Blue Mist BBQ, which was okay, but it is certainly not Lexington #1, the Finest BBQ in The Universe. South Carolinians, please hold your comments. Charlie was so enamored of my BIL's H&K USP .45 that he hardly shot his own G27. Charlie likes those 100+ year old cartridge designs .... (the writer reloads and dons protective gear while affirming that John Moses Browning was a Genius and Prophet, and that the 1911 is a fine shooting platform, my favorite of the last century).

So, I went to Caliber's today and was putting some of the tips you all offered into practice. I also had Kenny, who works at my local indoor range, Caliber's, check my grip, and I seem to have unconsciously fallen into a "death grip", squeezing the grip too hard. I loosened up and my groups were reduced about 50%, so there's some progress already. I think I had some limp-wristing early on, and mistook an overly firm grip with locking my wrists. I'm within the bowling pin freehand at 65', but that's about it. However, I suprised myself at 30', shot pretty good, well enough to improve my score at GSSF. I like the competition springs in the G34. That may also have helped some: I probably should have only changed one thing at a time. I know I shot much better with the G34 than the G19 today, and that's often not been the case. Kenny suggested I focus on one gun, but that's hard for me to commit to, so I'll try the increased power trigger spring in the other Glocks, except the G26, which I carry. I'm going to shoot more, check in with Kenny on basic grip and stance stuff, continue dry firing daily, read and study the DVD's for about a month, then see Chris Tilley. It may be useful to learn what I can from more than one coach. So feel to continue to chime in. I'll post if anything significant happens to my performance, in case it helps someone like DFWO.

Thanks, very good points. I'm heading out to the indoor range in a minute, and will give that a shot, as it were. Umm, yes, I'm very familiar with that prayer. It's applicable to an amazingly wide range of issues.

Gentlemen, I much appreciate your advice, and that given me at another forum (can I say that?). To sum up the excellent suggestions I've gotten, I plan to: 1) Do what Brian said, "shoot some 5-shot groups, standing/freestyle, at 25 yards", 2) Dry fire 15 minutes every morning with a penny but without the laser, 3) Mix dummy rounds or Snap Caps at random at the range, 4) Have an expert friend examine my grip, and particularly my trigger action (jerking? speeding up at the break?), 5) Re-read Brian's book, restudy Burkett's DVD's 1-3 and 7, probably subscribe to Vogel's videos, 6) Take a break from round development as soon as I finish this, 7) Get an Advantage Arms .22 conversion, and warm up .22>9mm>.40S&W>10mm instead of 10mm>40>9mm, 8) Double-plug my ears, 9) Then, spend some one-on-one time with Chis Tilley, who is only an hour away, in Raleigh, and appears to be a fair shot and good trainer. If all that fails, I will work on zen-like acceptance and humility, accept my place in the Shooting World, and stop hanging out with such good shooters.

Despite shooting about 1,000 rounds a month for almost two years, I am not where I want to be with accuracy. I finished in the middle of the pack at a GSSF match, and shoot okay, but not as well as several I know who shoot less. I think I have issues with trigger control (often low and left). I have tried to focus on the Enos/Leatham/IPSC/Combat approach, have studied Matt Burkett's videos and much material on the web. I've tried my trigger centered on the pad of my trigger finger, as well as Mas Ayoob's "power crease" position, read Enos's book twice, etc. I use the currently canonical isosceles stance, but wonder if I should loosen up and try the old Weaver or even one-handed stance, and maybe even the thumbs-down or (gulp) teacup grip. I have access to free instruction at the range I use, but I think they teach one way only. Oh yeah, and I am cross-dominant also, being right-handed and left-eyed, so I've considered trying to shoot left handed, and have issues keeping both eyes open. I use tape on the right lens of my shooting glasses. I think one issue is that because I am much better at reloading than shooting, I spend too much time shooting benched over a chronograph. Maybe reloading's my "Spiritual Gift", and I should rejoice in my role as the Family's Reloader, but I grow weary of everybody I shoot with being more accurate than me, and am willing to throw some time and money at the issue. Here's the question: does any have experience with trainers who will work with a mid-level shooter one-on-one, the shooter being neither a beginner nor someone currently much interested in "action", IDPA, IPSC, three-gun, or self-defense tactics per se? Someone in or near NC would be ideal, but if I was reasonably sure it would help, Arizona or whatever would not be out of the question. I think that maybe just one day with the right person might reboot me. My current goals are to regularly finish in the top 10% at GSSF matches, maybe later IPSC/IDPA, and then rifles. Thanks in advance. Should I be posting this in another forum?

Margaret was good enough to send me some of the Zero JHPs, and they arrived the same day as a case of MG JHPs. I measured 50 of each for diameter, length, and mass, and was surprised that the standard deviations on the Zeros were considerably less than the HAPs (about one third as much deviation in mass, and about half the deviation in length and diameter), and also less than the MGs. I'm not sure if the difference going to be evident in groupings, evident over the chrono, or statistically significant, but as soon as the PD JHPs arrive (they are supposed to be in stock, so maybe this week), I'll load the 200 rounds, chrono them, and report here. If you are interested in details, they are in the Google Doc at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApfazXeV8cnBdFp5YlVOODNMTGZmS21XRC0xVEljU0E&hl=en_US . I've forgotten my college statistics, so if anyone recalls what P-test or ANOVA I should run on that data, I'm all ears.

Thanks, Robby. Melissa said she'd see if they had any around and will send me a few to test. I ordered some of the MG's, and I will mike all three, load 4.6gr N330, chrono them, and post the results. Wally

Thanks, Joe. Loading minor, in fact, generally staying below 35,000psi and always below 38,500psi. I know, boooring. Right now the MG's in case volumes are slightly cheaper than the PD, and there's some documentation that the MGs may be more consistent (http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=6&f=42&t=266934). So I ordered a case of those. Should only require a couple of adjustments in QL. Powders, what you suggest and HP-38 come to mind. Looking at this QL report, from which I have removed powders I can't get in the USA, there's a pretty wide choice. I like PowerPistol (I wear sunglasses when shooting it), but I can get a velocity with about 4.0gr of HP-38 that takes about 6.0gr of PP. The chrono will tell. Type........................... mc (gr)...fill (%)...vel (fps) Accurate No.7.............. 7.8873 100.0000 1245.3287 Alliant BULLSEYE........ 4.5163 93.0000 1225.7675 Alliant POWER PISTOL 5.8042 100.0000 1206.8331 Hodgdon Universal........ 4.6846 100.0000 1196.4884 Vihtavuori N330............ 4.7706 100.0000 1194.0621 Alliant UNIQUE............. 4.7149 100.0000 1163.1111 Vihtavuori N340............ 4.8501 100.0000 1162.0575 Vihtavuori 3N37............ 5.6452 100.0000 1159.8597 Vihtavuori N320............ 4.1554 97.0000 1140.9904 Alliant GREEN DOT... . 4.0788 100.0000 1132.0629 Accurate Solo 1250...... 4.3730 100.0000 1127.0755 Vihtavuori N350............. 5.3271 100.0000 1117.9785 Accurate Solo 1000.... .. 3.9523 97.0000 1114.9924 Accurate No.9....... ...... 7.8396 100.0000 1100.5717 Alliant RED DOT.... ..... 3.6415 100.0000 1097.5416 Alliant HERCO............. 4.5877 100.0000 1055.3848 But it looks like I can save about $60/month based on 1000 rounds.

I'm currently loading HAP 125gr 9mm for Glocks (so no lead bullets). I get HAPs for about $0.11 per round in bulk, but the wife has complained about my shooting costs, so I'm looking for everyday substitutes for that, VV powders, and Starline brass ... Optimally, I'd love not to have to change or adjust dies, and use existing QuickLoad data when loading either HAP or a similar JHP. Does anyone know which is most similar to HAP: Precision Delta, Montana Gold, or Zero? I shoot about 75% inside, value a jacketed base to minimize lead exposure, and assume all these have a jacketed base. Looks like I can get the PDs for about $0.08 per. Zero and MG seem a bit more. Thanks.

The VihtaVuori N330 consistency was not the problem. I went back and checked QuickLoad against a bunch of known loads, and the unadjusted burn rate was dead on in every instance. I was getting bad chrono readings because of light hitting the sensors on my Chrony. I built a "coffin" with LED lights, and am shielding the sensors with index cards when needed. Sort of a lot of trouble, but the range where I can chrono runs east-west, and has trees all around, so consistent light during the day is a problem. Not as big a potential problem as when you adjust your burn rate in QuickLoad and inadvertently load a bunch of 45,000+ psi rounds (I thought they felt a bit snappy). I'll pull the remaining rounds or freeze them and shoot them this winter, since I do not have a reason to shoot 9mm Major, particularly unintentionally.