cwsanfor

I am using Hornady Lock N Load Die Bushings, and I had never noticed there is a rubber O-ring under them, which provides some flex to the die position, like a Lee die clamp ring. I'm guessing that will obviate the usefulness of squaring the dies, and that with the Hornady bushings you rely on the sort of Lee/Arbor/Wilson approach of having some flex in the dies. I may try to sort of square them with a machined washer just in case.

I need to revisit my die setup, and I noticed some information about "squaring" dies in the press, that is, adjusting them, then applying pressure from the shellplate before locking them down: http://www.exteriorballistics.com/reloadbasics/resize.cfm www.sierrabullets.com/techservice/xring/pdfarchive/vol1no1.pdf http://www.redding-reloading.com/component/content/article/21-tech-line/61-create-a-custom-die-with-a-simple-shellholder-change exteriorballistics says "This procedure applies to both sizing and seating dies, but should not be used with either carbide sizing dies or benchrest/competition seating dies." So I wonder: 1) Do you pistol reloaders bother with this, and 2) Why not in carbide or competition dies?

This is probably a question for Brian, hopefully he'll see it. benos' High-performance scale appears to be the MyWeigh i201 with resolution of 0.1gr. There is a MyWeigh GemPro 250 with a 0.02gr resolution. The GemPro 250 is about $60 more. More resolution seems better, although for pistol loading this may be overkill. One vendor indicated there may be more of an issue with fluorescent interference with the 250 compared to the i201. So Brian, I'm wondering what were your considerations in offering the i201 rather than the 250: overkill, price, better functionality, other? Thanks.

As was pointed out by GooseGestapo on THR, I was oversizing the brass. I had screwed the Redding sizing dies down to the shellplate the other day for some reason. Adjusting it out 1/2 turn allowed me to go back to using the Redding crimp die, and putting the Lee FCD away. No unsightly bulge now, and everything chambers better. I also removed a bit of flare, but that was not so much the problem. All the rounds seemed to have the bullet concentrically seated.

I've been loading 9mm 125gr HAP at 1.10 or 1.09 COL in Federal brass with the Redding taper die that comes with the Competition Pro set. The finished round has a diameter of .377 at the mouth, which I take to be a normal crimp. All is well with this round. Hornady loads the same bullet in their Steel Match round with a .376 crimp, which I assume to be due to steel cases being thinner than brass. So I decided to try the HAP in some swaged NATO WCC brass with no changes to the dies, and I get a .379 crimp (NATO WCC is thicker than Federal brass, so no surprise), but also a bulge at the base of the bullet, about the middle of the COL, measuring .380. It's not enough to make the round fail to enter, on its own weight, the Wilson case gauge or the Glock barrel, but almost. They will not freely spin in the barrel like factory rounds, or my other handloads. The bulge is quite visible: it's like a ring in the middle of the round. The rounds will chamber and manually eject, but I haven't fired any yet. I suspect that the additive effect of using a .356 bullet and thicker brass is causing this bulge. I could: 1) Use the Lee Factory Crimp Die and no doubt mash this bulge away, but that would likely swage the bullet down, and be using the FCD to "cover up errors in my loading procedure", 2) Stick to thinner brass like Starline or Federal with HAP bullets, but I'd like to use the several thousand NATO cases I have, 3) Possibly adjust the Redding die (or try the Hornady and Lee regular crimp dies I have around, but I'm not sure any of those dies are doing much, or should do much, that low on the case anyway. 4) Do something else. I'd appreciate your opinions as to whether this is a problem, and if so, what you would do about it. Thanks in advance.

As described in another post, I had some rounds turn out much slower than QuickLoad predicted, and am curious if you have had the same issue, particularly with VihtaVuori powders. I was loading 125 gr HAP over VV N330, and got deviations of up to 170 fps slower than predicted chronographing the rounds on a Shooting Chrony. Got a bullet stuck in a barrel as a result. To match up the predicted versus actual velocities I adjusted the Max Case Capacity from 13.3 to 13.8 (per my physical measurement), and had to adjust the Burning Rate Factor (Ba) from 3.1 to 2.6, putting it down in the N310 range. That seems like a lot, but my predictions with N330, N340, 3N37 now jive pretty well at all loadings. I have not had this problem with Power Pistol or TiteGroup, so the issue so far seem specific to VV powder. Anyone else seen this?

Yes, I shot three strings of them in my Glock G34, G19, and G26 over a Shooting Chrony Gamma. Ran 1129, 1058, and 1027 fps with no malfunctions and good groups, although I am getting better groups with homegrown rounds using 125 HAP bullets over VihtaVuori N330. I don't think I'll be paying $20+ a box for Steel Match often, but I wanted to see how Hornady was loading the HAP bullet. I think they're using powder more like Power Pistol than N330, and plan to call them today and ask. A side benefit was that I was looking for distinctive colored cases to load some dummy rounds for dry firing, so I put 6 gr of sand in the spent Steel Match cases, inserted a bullet, dipped the bullet in enamel, baked it at 300 for three hours, and I have some dummies I can't mistake for anything else (g).

I finally got to chrono these rounds this weekend. I shot 1) 10 each in the G34, G19, and G26 with a fixed 1.1 COL, with loads of 4.1, 4.3, and 4.5 gr VihtaVuori N330, 2) 10 each with 1.1 COL/ 4.5 gr, 1.08 COL/4.3 gr, and 1.065 COL/ 4.1 gr (for a roughly constant 35,000 psi predicted), 3) 10 each Hornady Steel Match 124 gr (which I'm trying to duplicate) 4) 10 each Winchester NATO and Federal 115 gr for a comparison and chrono verification, since I know their velocities). All rounds were delubed this time, and I had previously fired 100 each of the NATO and Federals through each gun with no malfunctions. I got two FTE and two FTF in the G34 with 4.1 gr N330 at 1.1 COL, and one FTE in the G26 with 4.1 gr at 1.1 COL. These two guns are newer than the G19, and probably a bit tighter. If the G19 were new, I suspect it would not have reliably run the lowest charge. What I think happened is this: QuickLoad underpredicts the velocity from N330 under HAP much more than with 3N37 under Delta Precision 124 gr FMJ RN. Rather than the predicted 1,094 fps from the G34, a 4.1 gr 1.1 COL measured only 862 fps, a 232 fps difference, and only 108 Power Factor. I think this is just not enough to cycle the action in a fairly new G34. The COL does not seem to be a factor, and probably not the lube. So this weekend I'll chrono 1.1 or 1.09 COL HAP over 4.4/4.5/4.6 gr N330 and see what that does. QL predicts the hottest of those at 39,000 psi, but I'm pretty sure it is high by at least 10%, so I'll work up to that load looking for overpressure signs. In the unlikely event that anyone wants to see the data from this past weekend, it's at https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApfazXeV8cnBdGlTWHJaMWNHV3hlTjZTWWlEc3ZDWEE&hl=en_US&authkey=CPuW35sF . Thanks for the feedback.

Thanks for the replies. My chronographing this weekend was rained out, but I went to the range yesterday and shot 50 Win NATO 124gr and 50 Federal 115gr through the G34, G19, and G26 with zero problems. That seems to vindicate the guns. I'll return to the reloads this weekend. I loaded a ladder with the same predicted pressure but various OAL, and a ladder with the same OAL but varying powder charges. I'm thinking the FTF issue may have been related to some combination of: 1) Lower power factors, since only the softer rounds gave a problem, 2) I used Imperial Sizing Wax (which I usually do not) on those rounds because I was using a new set of dies, and I did not tumble or wipe the finished rounds, so they may have been a bit sticky, 3) Possibly a OAL issue, 4) I had just installed Match Grade Slide Locks in all guns and had run fewer than the suggested 200 rounds through them (this seems like an unlikely cause). I usually try to only change one thing at a time, and here I changed four (new dies, new load recipe, using sizing wax, and changing slide locks). We'll see. My current batch of reloads was tumbled after seating, each one chambered in a Glock barrel, tested in a Wilson case gauge, and manually cycled through a Glock, so I bet they all shoot fine.

I believe I'll load 50 cartridges from 1.07-1.10 COL, vary the powder to keep the pressure and velocity about constant, and chrono that batch in all three guns, and I should be able to tease out whether it is the power factor or OAL that is causing the misfeeds. So I'll load: COL, gr N330, psi, velocity 1.07, 4.1, 1124, 32972 1.08, 4.2, 1134, 32980 1.09, 4.3, 1143, 33015 1.1, 4.4, 1153, 33073

Darrell, are all those at a COL of 1.085? I ask because QL shows 4.8gr of N330 under 125gr HAP a 1.085 COL giving 45,773 psi and 17.3% compressed, which is hotter than I am comfortable with.

Thanks. It just seemed odd that since N330 at 4.7gr yields (according to QuickLoad) 39,162 psi and 8.9% compression, so for a load that will reliably cycle but not blow up the G34, I am limited to 4.5 and 4.6gr in a powder that was "designed for 9mm". I guess that since N330's range between starting and maximum load is usually only about 0.6gr (VV and Hornady data), this is just the nature of the beast.

I am developing a load using Vihtavuori N330 under 125gr Hornaday HAP bullets In new Starline brass. I used an OAL of 1.1 after finding that 1.125 touched the rifling in a Glock G19, G26, and G34. That OAL passes an L. E. Wilson case gauge, and will both drop out of and spin in all three barrels. I loaded 4.1, 4.3, and 4.5 gr N330. All three loads chambered and fired well in the G19 and G26, but I got repeated FTF in the G34 except with the 4.5gr load. QuickLoad predicts 31,139 psi and 1,133 fps for the 4.3gr load, and 34,853 psi and 1,172 for the 4.5gr load. I don't mind loading to +P pressures, but thought it odd that I apparently anything below the SAAMI maximum pressure with these components won't cycle the G34, or presumably a G17. It caused me to wonder about the OAL, but I know several people loading HAP to 1.10, and the lack of FTF in the two shorter barrels suggest that the heavier G34 slide just needs more power. Anybody load this combination, or have any experience that would care to comment? Thanks.