hurley326

Id like to add my name to the list for 9mm once fired matching headstamp. Thank you

No mine is fine same lot Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

This is in regards to both slide mounted optics, no frame mounted comparison. Slide milled direct for optic versus slide milled with a plate adapter system for optic. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

this is also worth a shot at looking at. But to make sure your scale is calibrated. Probably the least likely but worth a look.

I use AA7 mostly but have been playing with the SWM. In fact i have 16pounds of AA7 arriving today. I find the SWM a tiny bit softer but it seems much fiber powder and was giving me consistency issues with my powder measure. I don’t know for sure if it is fact finer but it appears that way, i would have to measure two charges side by side. The powder measure issue may be related to other issues though I haven’t diagnosed yet. The AA7 has been very reliable for me and I don’t think you can go wrong either way. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Your doing all the right things then! Many times people aren’t and that’s usually where the problem starts. Extra kudos shooting from the rest for a straight bullet path, that’s a true chrono pro tip lol. I am shooting out of a PT Honcho with no Popple holes. The barrel is 4.25” and then 2 1/8” of comp. Running OAL at 1.165 and 124gn JHP from Precision Delta. Being that my barrel is 3/4” shorter than yours I think it’s normal that I would have almost a 7-10% reduction in velocity. Hence I need more powder to make PF. This is consistent with other Honcho owners and many other open gun owners in this thread shooting about 10.0 +/- grains of SWM to make about 170 +/- PF with a 124gn bullet. Guys running 5”+ guns prolly are able to use a few grains less due to increased velocity from longer barrel. In summary there is absolutely nothing wrong with the batch of powder I received. It appears only the one shooter who got the powder with the wrong label is experiencing a problem with his powder. I just want to clarify that because anyone reading this thread seeing a few of us go back and forth about velocity are going to get the wrong impression and assume there is some widespread problem with this powder if they don’t read every post and I just don’t think that’s the case. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

They are very backed up. I have always had a reliable experience with them. I ordered mid March and got my shipment just 3 days ago so they are about 3 weeks from order to delivery due to COVID. Great bullets and great price. They will sort it out for you. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Can you post your specs? It looks like two other guys have this lot now too but havnt heard anything bad about it from them. It seems to fine for me.

What do you mean so much powder? I am using 10.1 for 124 bullet. I incorrectly stated my PF it’s at 169 for that load and it’s at 171 for my previous load at 10.2. I think that’s normal. Heavier bullets typically require less powder due to longer length. Other factors come into play tho like what gun are you shooting, what barrel length, and do you have popple holes? I am in NJ and my last chrono session was at 53F for the temp and 30.4 for the barometric pressure. How far is your chrono from the end of your barrel? Mine is exactly 10 feet away I measure with tape measure every time. If your estimating or going 10-15ft away your going to get some differences. This is usually the case I find when there is discrepancy with different guys running close to the same load. Also I make sure to chrono when I have nice overcast exactly what the chrono calls for, but if your chrono in direct sunlight without the sun shields or overcast and using the diffuser then you may not have the appropriate amount of light. If you have overcast then don’t use the diffuser for more accurate chrono.

10.1 grains gets me to about 171 PF under a 124 precision delta JHP. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Here is the lot I received. This was from Powder Valley about 2 months ago I think. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

This is just comparing both slide mounted options. Direct milling into slide and then adapter plate on slide. Frame mounted is a different ballpark. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

this is a very interesting variable that I did not think of! Thanks for sharing

In full disclosure this is related to slide mounted optics opposed to a true open pistol. I didn’t find a carry optic topic so figured could go here. Currently debating a statement a fellow shooter made, “several instructors report that they see most slide mounted optic failures, on steel framed guns with a direct milled optic compared to plate mounted systems on polymer guns (think MOS). Because of this they believe that the plate mounted systems last longer due to the plate providing a buffer mitigating “harmonics” aspect of recoil and thus increased wear on the optic.“ I disagree and think it’s a very weak theory implying that correlation equals causation. I believe it’s more likely that there are higher failure rates on direct milled slides due to those guns seeing significantly higher round counts than plated systems like on a Glock MOS. Someone who pays to have their slide milled likely shoots more than the casual shooter who picks up a OEM plate mounted option. Not always but i think it’s fairly accurate. I’m not an engineer so I am not denying that a plate could provide some buffer from “harmonics” as they said but I doubt that aspect contributes to the wear and tear anywhere near the level of reciprocating force that is applied in both options. Also on the claim they made on steel frame vs polymer, I would think a steel framed gun would have less recoil due to the weight than a polymer framed gun further refuting their claim above. I reached out to Trijicon who stated it is the recoil that wears out these optics and that their testing shows that there is no difference in a modular system like the MOS vs a direct milled option. They also rate their optics based on a direct milled testing method resulting in 30k+ round lifetime. So what does everyone else think? Which one is more likely, that failures are due to harmonics wear or mostly dependent on round count? How much, if any merit does the plate mitigating harmonics wear and tear have? Is there any merit to the claim that a steel framed gun will put more wear on a slide mounted optic than a polymer frame mounted optic? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I have used AA7 and SWMP for 9 major and the SWMP does feel flatter than AA7 but that’s for 9major, I never used it for 38sc. What’s your load? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro