ttolliver

I'm reminded of my flying days when it used to be said there were two groups of tail dragger pilots -- those who have ground looped and those who will. A bummer for sure, but now it's behind you I went my first couple years strike free too, but then when I broke the seal I really broke it. I think the 3rd year I must have tagged the arms or upper screens 3 times, maybe 4. And now not once since. Crazy.

I rarely bother with 25 yard groups at this point, but mine does 1" groups at 25 feet just fine. Actually a little less since I stubbornly persist in measuring groups edge to edge rather than center to center. What can I say, I gotta be me

You're getting a lot of great advice here, but ultimately what is the right answer for someone else isn't always the right answer for you. The question I like to pose to people first is what their workbench temperament is. If you enjoy time spent tinkering at the workbench and spending 3 hours there on a Saturday morning sounds like pure bliss, you have no reason to turn out ammo faster than a single stage. Get a single stage and consider time spent workbench therapy. But you may have ADHD, or maybe kids and time is a premium. Or maybe you just want to reduce your shooting cost and aren't really into reloading for reloading sake. If for whatever reason it makes sense for you to get in and get the job done, a progressive is probably the better answer. Answering that question may decide it right there. But one truism that will never change is that a single stage press is always the better platform to learn reloading on...period. And there are very few reloaders who don't continue to use their single stage for certain calibers/tasks even after they get their progressive. If you're trying to stay under $500 to start, a RCBS Rock Chucker kit plus the RCBS die sets for your 3 calibers will come in around that price range (we'll ignore the cost of consumables, hehehe) and you will never regret the single stage purchase even if you move on to a beautiful blue machine later. My opinion on turret presses are that they're close to a progressive in some ways but far enough to leave room for regret later. If you decide you have maybe $150 more in your budget a Dillon RL550B isn't out of line to start with. Read Brian's advice on the best first machine. I won't try to rewrite it here, but suffice it to say people who are in the business of making happy, successful customers won't steer you to the 650. Go with a 550 with confidence that it has immediate resale value if you later decide to grab a 650. Good luck!

CHA-LEE -- was your Pro one of the models with the original barrels or the newer, more accurate ones? Mine is one of the newer barrels. I'll grant you it isn't the tack driver of a nice 1911 or revolver, but it's on par with a G34 I used to own. I guess it met my expectations. That being said, I think the Edge is the better recommendation. Maybe closer to $2000 once you tack on a couple minor accessories and outfit a decent set of magazines.

I did the button head imbedded in a spare factory mag release for a bit of last season until the LFs came out.

Almost exactly what wgj3 said! Shameless plug, check out my M&P 40 limited pkg for sale Not trying to be obnoxious and cross-sell, but the list of parts there is what I came up with as the ultimate package last year around this time as I was putting that together. It's only 2 ticks away from perfect as far as I can tell. First it's the 4.25" model because I couldn't find a 5". But it turns out the 4.25" has the same sight radius as a full size 5" 1911, so it turned out to be a disappointment in principle for me, not in reality. Second is maybe a ding or maybe not. I wanted a CORE model for the option of maybe tinkering with a red dot. But (at least last year) there are no adjustable rear sights on the market yet for the different rear dovetail placement of the CORE models. So you have to go with a fixed rear. Not a problem for those who prefer a fixed...and many do in their competition guns to remove the point of failure. But I prefer adjustable rear sights and it was a bit of a ding for me. I kicked around whether to go brass magwell or aluminum. Many say the extra mass helps, but you'll also run into thoughts that it doesn't help as much placed where it is. And yet other opinions that lighter always transitions faster so only add weight after you shoot the gun and decide you need weight. So I went that route and started with an aluminum -- and never really felt a need for more. On the griptape front, I really like the way the Dawson tape follows the contour of the backstrap so you could still change the backstrap if you wanted. And like wgj3 said...I don't need an aggressive backstrap.

I don't think crimp is your issue, but since you mention being a newbie and trying different crimps here are a couple thoughts on the crimp. Unless you're loading a roll crimp cartridge, most reloaders view the crimp as really just straightening the brass back out. Occasionally you'll see people refer to crimping a bit heavier like they want some bite there, but I've fallen in with the straighten out crowd and never had any issues. So what I do is shoot for a crimp that's .001 less than the diameter of the case just below the crimp. Good luck!

Cool, thx. As it happens, I have a CZ 75b that I'm using for my chrono gun. Not the best model for our sport, but she's a mighty fine shooter.

I'm surprised that my searches aren't finding that much on popper calibration loads. So here goes... I have some MG 125 FMJs that I'd like to use up in this project, but I'd happily use 115s for the job. I'm initially thinking N320 as an excellent choice for both temperature stability and consistency, but I'm open to any recommendations. Thanks!

Not sure what caliber you're thinking, but longshot was one of the powders I ran across as a recommendation for 40 major. It made PF with ease and initial impression was that it was going to be an accurate load. But it also had the sharpest recoil I've ever felt from that particular gun. I don't mean by a little either. It was a whole order of magnitude harsher than the rest. So yeah, as opposed to some powders that struggle to make major at maximum loads, longshot minimum loads will likely get you 181 PF or so. And leave you wondering how to tame the recoil

Hey MLack, welcome from a fellow Minnesotan Give me a shout if you need any help plugging into the local USPSA scene. Our section website www.mnuspsa.org has links to our calendar and contact/web info on all the MN clubs. I'm not a 3-gunner, but can point you to some great guys who are. See ya around!

I can't improve on the answers you've already gotten. I can't say Apex is the only provider, but they're the respected name that comes immediately to mind for M&P triggers. Another name to know and use is http://www.speedshooterspecialties.com/. With maybe only one exception, I think all of my M&P parts came from SSS. I suppose someone will point out that this belongs in the classifieds, but if you're interested I'll make you a smoking deal on a M&P Pro Core 4.25" set up for Limited. I put it together about this time last year and shot it all season as my 40 Major Limited/Limited-10 gun. Then late last season I got the bug to get a custom 2011 built. I've been dithering over whether to peddle it off or keep it as a backup gun for the last several months. If the 2 would shoot the same ammo I'd absolutely keep it. But since they won't I think I'll get an STI as a backup. Anyway, the only reason I bring it up is because you mention maybe dual use as carry where 4.25" might be more desirable. Just an idea....back to your normally scheduled programming

Hey Splat, welcome! My approach is to develop every load focused on accuracy while monitoring PF. You may bail out on a powder early if felt recoil is clearly out of line during testing. But generally I evaluate recoil once a round clears the accuracy and PF hurdles. I start by scanning recommendations here and cross-checking them with reloading manuals where possible so I know where I am in relation to published loads. You need to know when you're going above published loads and take that very seriously. You will run into recommendations here that are above published maximums. If I figure a given load will likely do what I want in the 3.5gr to 3.7gr range I'll run up 20 each of 5 different powder levels around that sweet spot (20 each at 3.1, 3.3, 3.5, 3.7, and 3.9). By starting that much lower than the expected sweet spot I'm accomplishing 2 things. Most importantly I'm following the rule of starting low and working up. But I'm also intentionally creating a round that should (hopefully) group a little less accurately so that I can clearly see where it gets accurate. Say a reloading manual says a given powder/projectile can be loaded from 3.0gr to 5.0gr. If you accuracy tested every possibility in that range you'd see a pattern emerge. The lowest powder levels would give you big groups that would progressively dial in to some point and then start getting bigger again. Say that sweet spot was 4.0gr. You'd only see 4.0gr is the most accurate by bracketing it. By going low in my range I try to force that bracket into my results. With each of those 20 round powder levels I shoot 10 though the chrono and two 5 round groups to check accuracy. If the rounds never group nicely at any powder level, it's back to the drawing board. If they group nicely lower than desired PF, it's back to the drawing board. If they group nicely at a really high PF (and likely high felt recoil), it's back to the drawing board. But say that you got results you were expecting and 3.5 and 3.7 were both in the PF ballpark and accuracy was best in that range. My next step is to go back with another batch of 100 split evenly between 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7. This gives me enough to run through the chrono again, do a little more accuracy testing and make some recoil comparisons. Commonly there's no distinguishable difference between a couple of those loads for accuracy but there will always be a velocity difference. So you can lean the direction you need for PF margin. But say you didn't get a decent result out of the first trip. I do all of the testing above at one COAL. If for some reason you are highly motivated to make that particular powder and projectile work, COAL is the next thing to tinker with (assuming you're getting a good crimp). So you could adjust your COAL and figure out a different set of powder levels for the new COAL and run the test again. I almost never tinker with COAL, but the option is there. Once you learn your gun's COAL preference you'll find yourself sticking to that COAL without much variation. At least that's what I've found. Good luck!

Ditto. And one recommendation -- Once you find your optimal settings loctite your set screws in place. I bought my RM holster along with a set of 5 RM mag carriers. I doubt I went more than half a match without something starting to wiggle until I did. Although nothing was ever unsafe.

I have an RO that's run flawlessly for me as well. Was my main competition gun for the 2013 season. I didn't do a darned thing to the internals. Just swapped in a 16lb spring and hung on a few user-friendly aftermarket parts: S&A magwell, VZ grips, extended mag release, and Dawson front sight. Oh, and I tossed a strip of grip tape on the front strap. And it's happy with the Chip McCormick 8 round Power Mags I started with, so I haven't had a need to look elsewhere for mags. I don't play IDPA to know if any of those are verboten, but that set me up for USPSA. That pile of add-on parts has got to be at least $350. Given local RO prices, I'm going to guess the RO itself is all of your $800 after tax or transfer fee or however you get one. Call it another $100 for 4 x 8-round magazines to start and you're at $900. The rest of the stuff in my pile can be picked up and bolted on over time. But it's fair to say that'll end up a $1100 to $1200 setup by the time you're done. Hope it helps!

Yup, all great advice. I too pick a likely range I want to test by .2 increments, but there are always exceptions. Titegroup, for instance, is one of those powders with such a small range of application that you are forced to go .1 increments. My personal approach is to do enough research across different manuals (and here for competition loads) to figure out the powder level that's likely to be best. Then I'll go above that by one increment and below it by 2 or 3 increments. So if research suggests 5.0gr is the likely winner, I would probably load up 20 each of 4.4, 4.6, 4.8, 5.0, and 5.2. I know that seems like a pretty wide range if I'm already half convinced I'll see 5.0 as the winner. But I like to see an established trend in both the velocity and the group size. And sometimes you get surprised this way. Last, but not least, it is a nod to the wisdom of starting low and monitoring closely. I go 20 each so that I have 10 to put across the chrono and enough to shoot two 5-round groups to get a general idea of accuracy. I'm not worried too much about accuracy on the first trip, but I do like a general idea. What I do next depends on the results I get the first time out. In the simplest example, say 5.0 is indeed the leading round for velocity and accuracy. I'll go back with another batch of 100 (30 at 4.9, 40 at 5.0, and 30 at 5.1) for another round across the chrono and careful accuracy testing immediately around that 5.0. Of course I've had times when 5.0 might give me the competition velocity, but accuracy was better somewhere else in the range. When that happens I play with COAL and take another batch like the first. That's the only time I tend to tinker with COAL. Otherwise I use published/recommended COAL from start to finish. And I almost never have to play with COAL. I should also say that if I get pressure signs I won't bother to shoot the top end rounds. I'll just pull them and remanufacture them into practice rounds later. Good luck!

I've only been loading 40 since the recent powder shortages so can't speak to all of your options, but CFE Pistol turned out to be an excellent powder when my N320 ran out.

I have the time to run my own prep so I prefer to buy completely unprocessed. Where I am happy to pay a premium is with single head stamp batches. Or batches with only 2 or 3 head stamps.

N320 isn't very temperature sensitive either. I would put it this way. There are powders that can produce similar recoil, or burn on the cleaner side, or measure nicely, or are less temperature sensitive, and so on. But very few powders do it all well. VVs do. The only downside to the stuff is price and availability.

Like the OP, I do accuracy testing offhand at reasonable distances. 25' allows me to draw a much more precise sight picture than 25 yards. And unless tumbling is a worry, a tight clover leaf at 25 feet is the same as someone else's 2" at 25 yards. I found that resting the gun itself on anything messes with my grip and the recoil cycle in a way I can't describe but don't like. When I'm having a bad off hand say or want an extra bit of precision I just move to the side of the shooting box and touch the outer side of my forearm to the upright. That gives me a rock steady aim without messing with the natural weight or recoil cycle of the gun.

Oh, but I agree it sounds fun

I just looked this one up for a recent stage design. By round count and number of shooting positions you've described a medium length course of fire. And 1.1.5.4 says no. Also I think 4.3.1.4 would be an issue. 1.1.5.4 Medium or Long courses of fire may stipulate the use of either strong or weak hand, provided that only one hand, either strong or weak, is specified for no more than the last 6 shots required. 4.3.1.4 Various sizes of metal plates may be used (see Appendix B5), however, metal plates must not be used exclusively in a course of fire. At least one authorized paper target or Popper must be included in each course of fire

I went through the same RO vs STI research before I ended up with a 45acp RO. At the end of the day they seem to be equally respected. I ended up with the RO simply because it was the first one of those two I ran across when everything was hard to find a couple winters ago. I saw that thread with all the headaches that fellow had. I can only say that my experience has been the opposite, although I have closer to 5k through mine than 25k. But I've had zero gunsmith work on mine and it ran though a full competition season with zero issues. The trigger could be lightened if I wanted, but it's plenty decent as is. And the gun is dead accurate and still tight. Maybe time will tell me a different story, who knows. But I think every manufacturer can throw a lemon from time to time. And sometimes we create our own issues with less than ideal cleaning/lube habits and spring replacements. The story that guy tells about outfitting one with competition parts is certainly the case. But those of us already in the sport know that list going in, hehehe. For my part I have VZ grips, grip tape on front strap, S&A magwell, extended mag release, FO front sight, and 16lb recoil spring. CMC Power Mags round out the kit for me.

Even though we know they're not linear, I do treat them that way just to pick a starting point for a range of chrono loads. For instance, say a given powder has published powder charges of 3.1 to 4.6 and the PF I want if calculated linearly from their velocity data would be 3.8. What I'll do for my first chrono trip is take some rounds loaded to 3.4, 3.6, 3.8, 4.0, and 4.2. If their data was from a longer barrel than I'm shooting I might drop the 3.4 and extend the range up to 4.4 in anticipation of slightly less velocity off the bat. As most people say, I don't tend to get published velocities either. So on a typical first round like that I'd probably get the velocity I want around 4.0 but occasionally it's at 4.2. Say in this case it falls around 4.2. For the next trip I'll go back with rounds loaded to 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 to check each of the 3 for any advantage in accuracy and get a second chrono reading. Most of the time 2 of the 3 will be equally accurate and I pick the one closer to my target PF.

I tried SNS traditional lube groove cast 220s with my M&P 40 when I first started working up a competition load. Loaded to 1.160 (the longest the M&P mags would support) and they wouldn't reliably chamber. Maybe 1 in 30 would catch an edge and jam while chambering. They shot plenty soft, though, and were showing decent enough accuracy in initial trials. I just didn't want to flirt with reliability so I moved to testing 200s where I found an excellent, reliable load. Anyway, my chrono data was all loaded to 1.160 and taken at a cool 34 degrees. This was out of a 4.25" barrel M&P Pro Core with the new barrel. I only really share these as a data point. You really should load longer unless you're a really experienced reloader. But having my numbers tells you where a starting load for a given PF may start falling. Solo 1000 3.4gr 160.4 3.5gr 162.8 3.6gr 165.1 3.7gr 168.4 3.8gr 169.9 WST 3.7gr 167.6 3.8gr 171.1 3.9gr 175.3 4.0gr 177.7 * edit to fix the table that didn't paste well the first time