PhillySoldier

Yes it is my gun and results only that i was sharing. For as much as it was recommended; I expected it would do better. At double the price, im kinda glad it didn't. In my testing; CFE outperformed it. I enjoy ransom rest testing and will continue to test different things. So far CFE has shown to do best (in my gun) but i will switch to something else if that proves better.

I recently ransom rest tested n320. I wasnt impressed by it specially at the increased price point.

Usually I would agree but testing the same load previously except w fmj's; my best shot groups were at like 1080 fps.

Grrr started at a low 5.0g and velocity started at 1150 fps. I tested the 5.0 - 5.9 but gotta go load from 4.5 - 4.9 now to finish the test

Starting to build a new reloading bench. Counter will be 10' 5" long. Im considering if i should use the t-track system and trying to research info on it now. Haven't seen much in the way of YouTube videos. I really like the concept but the entire purpose of rebuilding my bench is for something sturdier than i have now. When bulk loading i can go pretty fast and forcefully. How sturdy are these honestly? Any advice on it would be much appreciated. Also by chance do you have a video clip of it in use? Thanks in advance

I agree but its 70-100lbs of gear im carting and about an hour to get set up plus 20 settling rounds; as well as the extra day and range trip to finish. Its just easier for me to waste the extra rounds and load everything. Ill shoot it in 0.2-0.3g to start. Then switch to the lower increments when i see what area is working best. All the left over ammo ill just shoot at the end or put away for plinkers

I know Atlanta Arms sells some that marked as meeting major power factor requirements - not sure about minor PF. There's another company too but im struggling to remember the name. I remember they color stripe their cases and sold like sample ladder packs of ammo at varying charge weights; if that rings a bell with anyone

Yeah I seem to have a hell of a time trying to figure out my starting points. If I start low, then I wind up needing to go home and load more higher and vice versa. Last test I ran, my OAL was longer than the published data and I still winded up running higher in velocity that it and having to go home and load another batch lower. Cant seem to win with that... I loaded the XTP's last night; 20 rnds each of every 0.1g increment from 5.0-5.9g. After plunk testing the XTP's I had to lower the OAL to 1.075". Wow I dont even want to know how much more I would have to reduce that to fit my CZ's. I probably shouldve started with an even lower charge weight. I really gotta start just making a couple "targeting rounds" and running over the chrono to get my starting point(s). But Im always trying to run and complete my tests in single trip rather than multiple sessions. (it usually winds up multiple sessions anyway). As mentioned I made up 200 rounds; 20 in every 0.1g increment. I'll shoot it in 0.2g increments though till the results narrow down whats working best and then switch to the 0.1g increments. Thats my attempt at getting it all done in 1 session rather than 2. I'll just shoot off whatever's left over at the end of the test. As to the comment on reducing recoil; there is a test I want to run soon to compare different weighted recoil springs and recoil reducers. With the ransom rest there is a pivot hinge on it that allows the gun to be pushed back (flipped up is probably a better description) when fired. I wanna measure how far its pushed back and compare the results and see if there is any noticeable difference as well as see if it changes shot group size or not. Ive tried recoil reducers in the past and whereas I definitely noticed a difference in a smaller 3" barrel I honestly couldnt tell if there was a difference in a longer barreled / full sized gun or if it was just more of a placebo affect. Anyway I have the 115 HAP's to load tonight still.

I previously had the same problem w the case feeder and could only get 100-200 cases in at a time. After a lot of internet surfing on the subject I found a reference in a much older case feeder manual that mentioned that the clutch should be adjusted to 5 lbs. I got out a gauged inch/pounds torque wrench I have and tightened it to exactly 5 inch / lbs and that seems to be the magical spot and works great. I can hold the plate down w my finger and cause the clutch to slip like its supposed too so its not over tightened but it does hold much much more now I may of over exaggerated saying it will run w 1k rounds though. I actually tried that last night w a new 1k bag of brass. It runs w 1k but is very sluggish and slow. I couldve swore I ran w 1k previously. Perhaps I need to re-torque it. I did just run dirty brass through it last weekend so it may also just need a good cleaning. It definitely have ran at 700 previously without any problems - I remember weighing them all out for that test. As I said previously though; I usually put 500 in at a time though just so its even w what I put in the bullet feeder.

Thanks all.

I was just looking to see if there were any known min to max charge weights for the hap and xtp projectiles or use the same data as the fmj's

I have tested 115 FMJ's from 5.0 - 5.9g of CFE. Shooting 20 rounds of each increment - two 10 rnd shot groups @ 25 yards from a ransom rest and measuring the different shot group sizes. I want to run similar tests with HAP's & XTP's. Im just wondering if I should keep load the exact same weight ranges of 5.0 - 5.9g or if perhaps the hollow points tend to have some difference and I should be starting lower or higher. Just looking for a starting charge weight to use.

Am I the only one that doesn’t think highly of “Ladder Testing”. Granite I use the term incorrectly often to describe any type of type of testing that that has incremental changes in it. But in the terms of testing 10 rounds each at different charge weights looking for some supposed “flat spot” in velocity First of all single round of anything I think is pretty useless. You cant confirm your results or even have anything to compare the results too. The more data you have the more you can compare the results. As for the magical “flat spot/node”; lets face it if you are increasing your charge weights and the pressure you should also see an increase in velocity. So I fail to see what supposed “flat spot/node” everyone is looking for. There should always be a difference in velocity between differing charge weights. Just my thoughts but I would find it to be more of a problem if differing charge weights had the same velocities. If we shot and chronoed 10 rounds of the exact same charge weight, how many will be the exact same velocity? We would still have seen a varying SD/ES let alone comparing varying charge weights. And none of this shows and compares the actual results of the bullets accuracy or how tight the shot groups might be. Just that you can get away with some variance in powder weights and supposedly keep a low SD in velocity

My current load is 5.0g CFE with Hornady 115 FMJ's. I want to start working up some test loads so I can compare against Hornday 115 HAP's and XTP's. Im gonna do a full ladder of each but wondering if there is an offset adjustment for each projectile type to use? For example with the FMJ's I tested from 5.0g to 5.9g. Should I stick to this same weight range for both the HAP's & XTP's or is there a +/- adjustment range I should use?

Whats everyone consider too much to horde? I now have 20 boxes and shoot 1-2k per month. I feel like I have a lot but wondering if I should keep stocking up on them while I have the chance since they can near disappear for 1-2 years at a time

What is the revolution?

There is something called the Dilon PRESS MONITOR that you can search on youtube. Its basically an expensive round counter but it puts multiple sensors on different stations, keeps round count, tells ya if you skip a step, do anything out of order, including not priming or if you short stroke anything. The round counter itself also displays rounds per hour and other statistics. Anyway ya sound like someone thats putting thought into your production time and its output. Thought it might interest you. Im usually doing smaller test loads so its not too often i get to check a full 1k run but my last results was that i was running at 1,200 rounds per hour but w stops i ended at 1,000. This included filling primers as i went and i felt i could increase my rate in the future but like you i still had a few things that needed to be adjusted better before i get to that point. Mathematically i see 1,500 - 1,800 rounds per hour as achievable. If everything is running smooth it should only take 1 - 1.3 seconds per round. The stoppages is really the defining factor. For me right now just stopping for 30-60 seconds every hundred rounds to refill the primer tube is the biggest slowdown Also i don't know how many cases your able to fill in your case feeder but most seem to have a problem with not adjusting theirs correctly and can only put a couple hundred in at a time. After ajusting mine properly i can get 700-1000 9mm in at a time. Though i usually keep it to 500 each for both the case and bullet feeder.

The bullet feeder can be adjusted to the point you rarely get anf failures. Theres is two points to adjust on the case feeder itself to prevent the flipped bullets. I can help more if you want but there is also videos that explain it on the company site, though they tend to overly complicate it. As for the missed drop that is either the die needs to be adjusted down a little further or you happened to short stroke it on the press Just something id suggest to consider for the future is the rf100 primer filler. Its really a boost to production time if you consider that time its taking you to prefill those primer tubes.

When i was considering getting the ransom rest I had asked opinions about it on some fb reloading forums. I winded up w a few people msging me offering to sell theirs. I saved a bit getting it used. So id suggest that if anyone might be looking for one. And sorry for side tracking the thread which wasn't my intent

Haaa that sounds like me and im stealing that opening line of yours. When i first got my ransom rest i was using a very normal and popular load of tightgroup and precision delta 124s and cheap brass. I was both happy and disturbed to find the best it could do was 5.5" groupings @ 25 yards. Happy cause it meant my shooting wasn't as bad as i had thought. After a lot of testing im now down to averaging around 1" groupings from the better loads and being able to actually practice regularly at shooting at 25 yards now and actually hitting it consistently. Now working on improving groups at that distance

Glad to help

I was running a series of tests and happened to switch brass brands the one day. Not specifically to test brass differences (I didnt expect there to be any since I had all separated by brand) I just ran out of clean brass of the one brand. I was pretty surprised when there was though so I did follow up with an additional test just to confirm the results. I had switched from Starline to Blazer Brass and then back to Starline. I was testing Power Pistol powder at the time between 1050 - 1200 fps, using hornady 115 fmj's. Gun is a Sig P226 Legion 9mm, 4.5" barrel, Barsto match barrel 1:16 twist As for the Ransom Rest - dont do it.... It has totally unhinged me and emptied my wallet. Now Im obsessed with nothing but testing and throwing out what I was perfectly happy with for years before ever getting it Now I have like 10 gallons worth of blazer brass I wont use And yes groups went from 1.1" to 1.6"

Groups opened up half to three quarters of an inch which was about a 60% increase.

I tested 20 rounds of each 0.1g increment 2 10 round shot groups @ 25 yards from a ransom rest. N320 Powder was 4.0-4.5g. 115 fmj's, 1.15" OAL. Shot groups averaged 2-3". Not the worst powder that ive tried but I get much better results with Power Pistol and CFE. I have not tested N330 to say how it compares with that.

Agreed I dont think it matters much for pistol ammo other than it bothers me a bit to not fully clean. Not to the point Ill ever go back to single station depriming ever again. But if it only takes me a few minutes to dump all in the case feeder and crank on through as well as the lubed casings being cleaned off in the sonic after being sized, I figure I'll give the 2nd toolhead a try