Wheeljack

All my guns passed the plunk test, measured with bullet in a fired shell and at 1.160+ all bullets turned and dropped out. I'll be using .378 for the crimp. All bullets passed the case gauge measure. The Tightgroup powder loads I found at the Hodgdon site were from 3.2 to 3.6gr. I have been using 3.4gr.. The COL was for only the XTP bullets. So with all your help, I think I'm in a good place. Thanks

I use the 147 because of the stuff I read about it being subsonic. I could try 124 next. When everything is running right, then I have to try something else. So, I guess an COL of 1.150 should work. The bullet is still .356 or .3555 at the rim and .378 for a crimp. My next buy will be 124 round nose plated and a COL to be announced. Watch out for those falling rockets.

Going thru some manuals and magazines can make you crazy or crazier. Just trying to get a safe, accurate, load for shooting at the range, not competition loads. I think for my 9mm, 147gr plated rounds, Berry's, using TightGroup at 3.4gr that a COL of 1.150 looks safe. I crimp at .376 for the .356 diameter bullet. Checking the barrels of the guns I use, they all will take a 1.150+ COL bullet. What confuses me when looking at the manuals is: Lee in Modern Reloading list the MINIMUM COL at l.160, except if you use Vihtavuori powder. Pat Sweeney lists his Berry's 147gr bullets with a 1.070 COL. Lymans 147gr TMJ bullet, uses a 1.115 COL. That's enough to confuse anyone. I know bullet shape can make a difference but a range of l.115 to 1.160 is confusing, to say the least. So, my question is, whether my COL of 1.150, with a Berry's plated bullet a good length or should I go up or down a little?

Well from reading all the information, I opened the mouth of the shell more. Then I gave up on the seat and crimp at the same time. Seat with one die and crimp with another. My bullet is a 147gr so the straight length extends past he mouth of the shell so do not have to crimp the mouth of the shell. I don't know why I started having problems with the NOE expander, so I'll have to give a try again. Well I'm good to go again. Thanks

I don't know why but the NOE expanders were not doing to well either. Universal expanding dies don't look good to me. I am trying the expanders from the Lee Powder Charger that may work. I'll have to look better at the mouth expansion. Yes some of the shells could use some deburring. Some of the shells have that inside-the-mouth of the shell ring. Thanks, now I have a few places to look to solve the problem. The coated bullets seem to be more accurate, but since I'm not in competition, I may go back to copper plated.

I'm using Acme bullets. I get some scraping when seating the bullets. I worry about opening the mouth too much and working the shell till it splits. So I open the shell mouth to .380 for my .356 bullets. It sounds right but the shells are not always perfectly round and I get scraping. How much can I open the mouth, I use M expander plugs, to prevent scraping and not over working the brass?

MsDV8, I'm glad you found the problem. As to seating the CCI primers deep, I found that out by calling CCI and they told me to seat just below the head stamp. So the suggestion was not mine, it was CCI's.

I thought someone would mention this before, but I guess not. The CCI primer should be below the head stamp. Paint the primer with a colored marker. Run a razor blade across the head stamp. If you scratch the primer, it isn't set deep enough.

The shape of the free floating bullet seating plugs differ. They go from a total flat end to various cone shaped types. Compare the shape of your 2 bullets. I think you will find the Berry's to be more rounded than the Xtreme. I like to match the bullet shape to the seating plug, but then it may be just too much nit picking.

Ops! Until I researched this Bulge Buster thing, the only bulge I knew of was the one in about the center of the shell, due to seating a bullet too deep. The Bulge Buster you are talking about is for bulges near the rim of the case, usually caused by an unsupported chamber, like in some Glocks. We talk about thousandths of an inch when loading and then we measure a shell and find it can be hundredths of an inch in variations. I shoot a Glock 26 and luckily have had no bulges. But, I just ordered a case gauge to be sure. Thanks

Got it. I do like the flare the NOE or M dies give, as it helps me seat the bullet straighter, but I will have to give the flare diameter a minimum seating depth. Then after I seat the bullet, reduce to flare to create a straight shell. Thanks all.

I think we have it now. Details: I'm using .356 plated bullets. I use a NOE expander die. I insert it into the shell .300 deep. The deeper part of the die is .354 and gives the inserted bullet a good grip. But I like the die because it opens the mouth of the shell to .358. It makes inserting the bullet easy and straight, but I do loose tension at the mouth of the shell. So I give the mouth of the shell a small crimp to .377. As you explain the crimp or the lack of it, it works for an expander die with no flare. So because of the NOE die that I use, I have to crimp a little. With other dies, you are right on target, and I understand and agree with what you taught me. Thanks. (I hope the storm misses you)

This is all driving me crazy. If a bullet is .356, and the shell is .011 thick, then without any crimp or any pressure the mouth of the bullet will measure .378. At .378 you should be able to just pull the bullet out with your fingers. The first .300 of the shell is usually straight walled inside. I expand this area to only .354 inside and give the mouth a little more flare. Now, it looks like the .354 expansion area plus wall thickness of .022 would make the shell .376, but, the .356 bullet pushes back and the diameter of the shell is .378 and the bullet is held firmly. Reducing the flare to .378 does not hold the bullet at all. So, would reducing the flare area to .377 sound reasonable enough?

Crimp looks good to me. The shells mouth often has a lip on the inside that causes the line. But, like Bench said, measure.

For a shell expander I use an M die. For a .356 bullet, the die opens the shell to .354 down to .300 from the lip.. That's as deep as you should load a bullet. At the mouth, the M die opens the shell mouth to .358. This is to ease inserting the bullet. My next step is to seat the bullet to the COL I want. It should never be inserted further than .300. For seating, I use a Lee crimp die with the crimp piece removed and a seating plug installed. Since I'm using the Factory Crimp Die, It will also remove any bulge, if there is one. Finally I crimp the shell. Again I am using a Factory Crimp Die set to just remove the bell in the mouth of the shell with just a little crimping. Since the M die only opened the shell to .002 under the bullet diameter, there is tension. Only at the mouth is there any crimping. As long as I don't seat the bullet deeper than it should go, there will be little or no bulging. The carbide ring in the crimp die will only reduce any shell bulging to .382 and no more and this is in a area below where the bullet seats. The Makarov sizing die is probably .390. It will therefore size the 9mm Luger shell to this, or not. It looks like it will only touch the 9mm Luger at its base. I don't see it reducing a bulge unless it is quite large and then only to about .390.. OK, tell me where I'm wrong.

I haven't tried them all, so I can't say. If I do use coated bullets I just automatically run them thru a resizing die.

Yes. Some more than others.

When I used coated bullets, I found the coating to be uneven. If I bought a .356 diameter bullet, I would run them thru a .356 Lee sizing die. Check out your coated bullets at different points along the diameter.

Jcc7x7, it does seem that way. Other things that bother: I measure the COAL for 10 rounds. Write down the measure. Measure the same 10 again & write down the answers. Do this for a 3rd time. For me, the measures differ in almost the bullets. Seat 10 rounds, measure, seat them again and see if the COAL changes. After all this, I realized you have to do the best you can, but it doesn't mean it's going to turn out exactly the way you want. Just work toward a livable average spread. I'd say a .005 difference is fine.

I'm using a Lee set up. I have used Lee Resizing Lubricant, diluted 1:10 with alcohol to lube cases before I resize and remove the primers. The Lee product sound like Hornady Unique Case lube. I have the same COAL "problem". What are your thoughts on spraying the BULLETS with the diluted lubricant and letting them dry and then seat them??? Hurricane Irma will be here tomorrow, so I don't know if I'll be on line for a while.

I guess if it's easy it won't be any fun. Thanks

Is it "simply" the length they used? Thinking of discussions on pressure, I thought the COL listed by a manufacturer was a minimum determined by the pressure, even though the pressure shown was not the SAAMI max. But then is it just a "safe" length the manufacturer uses that will fit most guns? If I load shorter, I reduce the power charge and if I load longer, I can increase the powder. Then I wonder if I should crono these loads to see if the fps remains the same? I feel we are given figures that are very conservative and vague! Longer or shorter is important, then why isn't the length of the bullet posted? Seating depth is more important than COL. The length of a bullet seems to me to be the most variable measure. The diameter and weight are pretty consistent but the length less so. Still when I try loading a new bullet, I compare bullet lengths to determine seating depth and from this the COL. After doing all this measuring to be safe, some good old boy publishes powder loads 20% over what I use as maximum and loves them. All in all, the data I read is for SAAMI and not +P or +P+, so if I'm using a new gun and this data, I'm pretty safe. Isn't this fun?

When a manufacturer lists a COL, isn't it just a minimum length based on a RN bullet or the bullet in the specs?

I use the Lee sizing dies too. I would buy .358 bullets and resize to what I needed. I even run .356 bullets thru the .356 die, just to be sure. I did not like the BBI bullet shape at all. I load to the longest OAL I can. The SNS bullets in flat point have the best shape, a sort of Spitzer shape. The ogive in the FP allows me the longer seating.

Come on guys. You drive me crazy. I'm going for a faster powder, well, say medium range. I don't like too much snap. BULLET: lead, coated, plated or jacketed???? Then you can get back to Newton.