Art Yeo

AFAIK, the factory Gen2 bbl is completely compatible with the older frames. But, if you are paying for a bbl, why not get a better bbl?

Art do yourself, and everyone else a favor, and get some creditability and use the money for that box of Ammo on a chronograph so your info is accurate and your not guessing...... I did chronograph my loads, just not the factory loads. That's the guessing part based on what was printed on the box.

Among most of the so-called custom load I have tested, the accurate ones seem to be the stout ones. Based on their velocities and recoil, I'm guessing they are either close to the regular commercial loads or similar to NATO rounds (which are like the +P commercial ammo). So far, I have not been able to find a light load that's consistently accurate except Bullseye and the 115gr FMJ. So to answer your question, I have not tried factory ammo with my 2012 factory bbl but I am guessing it is similar. I will, however, give a box a try the next time I go to the range and let you know what I find. Hope this helps.

Comparison charts are available here http://www.beretta92.com/specs_92fs.aspx The latest and most refined versions are: 92A1 and M9A1. They have the latest bells and whistles and improvements added to make them last even longer.

Why would muzzle flash be an issue for competition? I am not getting it. Now, if it is for self defense and shooting in the dark, I would agree. Even that, it is arguable that the flame spitting weapon would scare and leave more mental scars on the assailant than dim discharges.

Just go to that link on your browser, highlight the link on top of your browser, CTRL-c (to copy). Come back to this thread on your browser and CTRL-v (to paste) the link into your posting. Thanks for bringing up the issue about flexing frame. It sounds interesting.

I'll give that a try one of these days.

Based on 10-8 Website, Hilton Yam recommends KKM for the drop-in bbl. I have only used KKM so I do not have data to compare for Storm Lake. KKM bbl performs better than factory Gen2 bbl. If you are looking to get a larger bbl and use a gunsmith service to fit it, then either Storm Lake or KKM will work, depending on the skills of your smith.

Looks good and congrats! I shoot under 1" easily and consistently with any of my 1911's at 25 yards. I can also do under 1.5" with my Beretta 92A1 and the CZ 75 SP01. Are you saying the M&P9 requires a GM to shoot well when it was touted to be a general Military and Police pistol?

I have actually asked someone to shoot it while I watched the muzzle flash, it is slightly more than other powders. As for sound, are you guys shooting with your bare ears or something? I can believe a shooter disliking loud sound and like guns. Time to fill in your Form4 and get your silencer. Personally, I think the sound and flash thingy are a little over-exaggerated.

Some History After researching for the most promising powder for the 9mm Luger, I found out that the Power Pistol (PP) was specifically designed with the 9mm Luger in mind, although it can be used for other calibers. My understanding is that this powder was used for the standard NATO 9mm luger cartridges. The old name was internally called Bullseye84 and Alliant introduced a new name (Power Pistol) when they commercialized the powder to the public. My experience My PP powder arrived recently and I loaded 300 rounds in 115gr JHP, 124gr TMJ and 147gr CMJ. As you may already know, NATO 9mm Luger are all loaded with pressures above the SAAMI 9mm Luger specs. It's probably in the +P range. In this early test, I loaded them close to max or slightly above max based on the US Army Marksmanship loads. Across 4 pistols (M&P9 Pro 5", M&P9 FS+Gen3 bbl, M&P9 FS+KKM bbl, Beretta 92A1, Beretta Px4 Storm FS), accuracy was highly predictable. The M&P Pro 5", M&P9+KKM bbl and the Beretta 92A1 really loved these loads and the experience made me rather pleased. These were tested at 25 yards only. I think I have finally found the most pleasant powder in terms of getting results for my 9mm Luger guns.

May I ask you why trying to hit majors with small bullets is more interesting to you than using larger bullets, like 45ACP?

I would suggest getting the book "The ABC of Reloading ..." and read chapter 3. It's critical you understand what's going inside the case when you discharge a cartridge before u reload.

I do own a 5" M&P Pro and have tested it against many handloads and factory ammo. Based on the current data I have, it is possible for this gun to shoot 2" or under at 25 yds. But, it is certainly more sensitive to changes and you have to develop your own loads to get there. At longer distances 25yds or longer, I find the following guns more suited for such pursuits and less troublesome: a decent and well-built 1911 with 45ACP M&P45 Beretta 92-series with stout 9mm (near max SAAMI std) or +P CZ 75 SP01 with same stout 9mm as above Again, I am not saying it is impossible with the M&P Pro 5" (or Full-size) but it is sensitive. Of the 4 above, it is significantly easier to find accurate 45ACP handloads than 9mm ones for longer distance shooting. If IDPA, IPSC, USPSA is involved here, you need to balance between accuracy and split time, so a stout 9mm may need to be lightened.

I pressed for any collected data or conclusions during their lab proofing, he was not very forthright with that. All he said was with their first try, they saw inconsistent velocity/pressure and decided to dump it. To me, that sounds like a behavior (pressure, erratic property, etc) that is beyond anything they even want to explore and so, the quick decision to kill it.

It's a typical CYA behavior when a corporation can smell anything that even mildly resembles a legal issue.

The response from Winchester/Hodgdon was dropped into my Inbox bright and early this morning. Unfortunately, it is a restricted email so I cannot slap it in here in full. But, I can summarize/paraphrase it: Yes, we do not publish data for WST to be used for 9mm Luger. We also do not publish data for many other powder for the 9mm. Since there are many unsuitable powders for the 9mm Luger, it is impossible for us to publish reasons for their exclusion. A thinking person who is doing reloading should know that it is not wise to use a powder for a cartridge when the powder is excluded from the list for that cartridge. And, this response came from manager for their CS dept.

40SW and 45ACP with WST is fine: there are lots of published data for these cartridges. I have not seen data from old manuals (which some of you have) that included 9mm with WST but such data are all pulled out in the current manuals.

Here's another thread quoting from one more phone call to Hodgdon ... http://smith-wessonforum.com/reloading/236392-question-wst-users.html I am pretty sure there are hundreds of people out there loading WST into their 9mm Luger cartridges. Who knows what they are doing: whether their loads are soft plinking loads or loads meeting majors or +P loads. Personally, I believe I have enough evidence and I will use the rest of my WST for 45ACP. I can shoot 15,000 rounds without a hitch but I only need one unfriendly discharge to ruin the day. And, why do I want to take that risk when the manufacturer already told me not to? Like many have said, there are so many other powders listed with published data. Is WST in 9mm Luger the only powder that will help me win the national title or take down an assailant?

What you said made sense. Thinking through the whole process of a discharge led me to suspect that these 2 properties of WST added together may have contributed to its unsuitability for the 9mm Luger cartridge: load density: WST occupies a lot of physical space. In order to load it enough for the speed I want, the case is pretty close to full. This means the load density is high and we all know that high load density produces higher pressure. On a Pressure/Time curve, I believe it pushes the peak higher; i.e. the curve peaks higher on the Y-axis. Other fast powders tends to be loaded with low load-density; e.g. Titegroup (TG) or Bullseye (BE). I do not need to fill the case up with BE or TG to get the speed I want. So, the peaks of their Pressure/Time curve is lower. burnt-rate: The burnt-rate of WST is considered fast. This means its Pressure/Time curve is shifted to the left on X-axis, compared to slower powder; that is to say the pressure spike is swift and it take a lot shorter time to reach the peak. Now, if you compare this property to powders that fill the case up for 9mm, they are not considered fast powder. So their Pressure/Time curve is not shifted so much to the left along the X-axis. I think [1] is what compounded the discharge characteristics of WST in 9mm Luger cases. I bet the powders that are published with data for the 9mm Luger do not possess these 2 properties together; i.e. they either have one of these properties or the other but not both.

Yes, if I wanted to reach certain speeds, the cases were, indeed, quite full; possibly slightly compressed.

Thanks for your quote from Hodgdon, it's quite illuminating.

I'm hesitant to share my loads but what the heck ... here they are: !!!!!!! USUAL DISCLAIMER: USE AT YOUR OWN RISKS !!!!!!!!! 124gr FMJ: 4.8-5.0gr (1048-1113fps): OAL=1.15" !!!!!!! USUAL DISCLAIMER: USE AT YOUR OWN RISKS !!!!!!!!! Reasonably above average in accuracy but I'm still exploring.

May be my eyes are playing tricks on me but the burn rate chart published by Hodgdon seems to say otherwise about the group of powders in your list in comparison to WST http://www.hodgdon.com/burn-rate.html

Not longer ago, a friend of mine, who competes in IDPA, swears by WST for his 9mm luger cartridges. I got curious and tried some of the loads he recommended and they were quite good but I had problems getting consistency. I am still testing the loads for accuracy. Well, I got more curious when I noticed that across 5 of my loading manuals, not a single one has any published data for the WST + 9mm Luger combination. So, I Googled a little and found someone saying that he wrote to Winchester and they repeatedly told him the lab cannot find safe loading data that can be published. I have written to Winchester and will let you all know what they say when they respond. In the meantime, are we taking too much risks slapping WST into 9mm Luger cartridges when: No major manuals released any data for WST and 9mm Luger that I know of the manufacturer did not release any loading data for such a popular cartridge as 9mm Luger What are your thoughts on this? Did they see some unusual behavior in that combination that halted them from publishing any data? Any one know of any internal gossips and theories?