Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Napalmsticks

Members
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Napalmsticks

  • Rank
    Looks for Range

Profile Information

  • Real Name
    Robert Cormier

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Will do, I will check TPT again tonight. I'll shorten the OAL and work back up from 4.2 gr if needed.
  2. Well I just got back from the range, all fingers and toes intact. The W572 worked great! No malfunctions of any kind, all rounds fired flawlessly, and no over-pressure signs. The only downfall that I see currently is that the load is pretty dirty; though I haven't cleaned the pistol in over ~1,500 rounds, this shooting session seems to have left quite a bit of residue in the barrel and the frame. I plan to load up more 4.8 gr rounds, clean the gun, and make anther visit to the range this week to see just how dirty the rounds are. Data from the loads is as follows: 4.2 gr W572 Low velocity - 893 fps High Velocity - 1017 fps Average velocity - 972.8 fps Extreme velocity spread - 124 fps Standard deviation - 40 4.5 gr W572 Low velocity - 946 fps High Velocity - 1062 fps Average velocity - 1014.9 fps Extreme velocity spread - 116 fps Standard deviation - 32 4.8 gr W572 Low velocity - 1041 fps High Velocity - 1110 fps Average velocity - 1073.8 fps Extreme velocity spread - 69 fps Standard deviation - 17 The 4.8 gr load grouped the best out of all the loads tested. At 15 yards using a 5" M&P CORE with a 6.5 MOA RMR red dot and pistol supported on a rolled up piece of carpet I was able to shoot the 30 round group below. Target is printed on standard letter paper for size reference. The only issue I had with the load is that after chambering a round the slide is difficult to to pull back and eject the chambered round. At 1.155" coal if I drop a round in the barrel I get the plunk noise and I'm able to spin the round in the chamber easily, but when I chamber a round with the barrel in the gun the round seems to lodge itself in the chamber. I might try to shorten the coal a bit closer to the 125 gr FMJ specs, my velocity findings seem to be fairly close to the 125 gr FMJ load data provided above. I'm tempted to bump the powder up to 5.0 gr to see if I can get the SD to single digits.
  3. I loaded some 124gr coated LRN today at 4.2gr, 4.5gr and 4.8gr; COAL of 1.155". Heading to the range tomorrow morning. Will update with what I find.
  4. I have that feeling also. Should have gotten W231...
  5. I plan to work up a load for 147gr next. 137 pf is 932 fps right? That would be good for subsonic plinking. Eta: erratic meaning SD and velocity spread right?
  6. LOL, yup! So I looked at 115gr data LRN vs FMJ and the lead load starts lower than the FMJ load. I'm tempted to contact Hodgdon and ask for 124gr LRN load data.
  7. Got it. For instances like this where no lead load data is avalible should I start below the start load? I've read to start 10% lower than the FMJ data.
  8. Ok, that makes sense. Thanks for the explaination! So I could feasibly use either load and be safely within the pressure limits of 9mm?
  9. Actually, I'm using the loads for all of the above reasons you have specified. My main hesitance with the 124gr data is that it's for a hollow base bullet. The shape of the 125gr FMJ is much more similar to my coated lead bullets and I would assume that the extra volume from the hollow base bullet could be the reason for the higher associated powder charge. The minimum COAL of the 124gr hollow base load is also specified longer than the 125gr FMJ at 1.150" vs 1.09". Is it safe to use the higher load data from the 124gr hollow base bullet on a bullet shaped similar to a 124gr FMJ? Before I posted I was planning to use the 125gr data and reduce the start load by 10% due to the lead bullet. Just didn't want to run into unsafe reduced powder loads. Also, just went out to the garage and did some testing. W572 seems to look like a flattened ball powder I think. A full 9mm shell casing holds 11.2 gr of W572. I pressed a bullet into one of the empty shell casings to a coal of 1.155" without sizing to mark the bullet depth in the case then pulled the bullet. I filled the case up to the mark on the inside of the case left by the bullet with W572, total case capacity with a bullet seated seems to be somewhere between ~ 7.8 to 8.2 gr so I think anything over 4.0 gr would fill the case ~ 50%.
  10. I absolutely will use a chrono. Start at 4.5 and use the max load and target velocities from the 124gr or the 125gr load data? For my purposes the lower the PF the better, though I might be stuck with a higher PF value due to the powder choice? Eta: I was seating bullets in empty cartridges earlier, listening for the plunk then spinning in the chamber to ensure the bullet doesn't catch on the lands. Trying to stay between the max for 9mm and the min for the listed load.
  11. Hello all! New to the forums and to handgun reloading, I've been reloading .223 for about 6 months but pistol reloading seems to be a different animal completely. I'm here to ask a question about Winchester 572. I recently picked up 8 lbs of W572 and 3000 Acme 124gr coated LRN bullets to begin reloading. I chose W572 because of cost and given the fact that the Hodgdon website has numerous 9mm loads listed for the powder. There are a few loads listed for 124gr and 125gr bullets but no data for 124gr LRN. I recently posted on a different forum requesting assistance with starting loads but I received feedback that W572 is far too slow burning powder for use in 9mm at the given load data provided from Hodgdon. The load data that Hodgdon has listed are as follows: BULLET WEIGHT 124 GR. BERB HBRN TP MANUFACTURER Winchester POWDER 572 BULLET DIAM. .355" C.O.L. 1.150" STARTING LOADS GRS.VEL.(FT/S)PRESS. 5.3. 1,131. 27,200 PSI MAXIMUM LOADS GRS.VEL.(FT/S)PRESS. 5.8. 1212. 32,600 PSIBULLET WEIGHT 125 GR. SIE FMJ MANUFACTURER Winchester POWDER 572 BULLET DIAM. .355" C.O.L. 1.090" STARTING LOADS GRS.VEL.(FT/S)PRESS. 4.3. 1,001. 25,600 PSI MAXIMUM LOADS GRS.VEL.(FT/S)PRESS. 4.9. 1119. 31,600 PSI My questions are as follows: 1 - Is W572 too slow for the loads listed above for general use in a 5" barrel? If it is indeed too slow why would Hodgdon list loads using W572 powder for 9mm? This to me is a quandary, the maker of the powder lists a load for 9mm but people on a different forum are saying that the above loads will not burn fully in a 5" barrel and will foul the firearm quickly. Is this true? 2 - Why is the load data for the 125gr FMJ so much lower that the 124gr Barry's hollow base round nose plated bullet? The 124gr load actually mirrors the listed 115gr W572 FMJ load data in powder grains, velocity, and pressure, I though as a general rule as bullet weight goes up powder load will go down to keep pressure below max? Is the 124gr load data a typo? How can a 124gr plated bullet over 5.8 gr of W572 produce nearly the same pressure as a 125gr FMJ bullet over 4.9 gr of W572? 3 - Should I use the higher powder drop from the 124gr Berry's load data or lower drop from the 125gr FMJ? Is the 124gr data higher due to the hollow base bullet? 4 - I have read that it is possible to use FMJ load data so long as the starting load is reduced by ~10% in the absence of lead data, is this a true and safe practice? Would starting at 4.0 grains of W572 (125gr FMJ drop minus 10%) and a coated LRN bullet be too low of a start load? I have read in my reloading manual that reduced loads can also be dangerous so I don't want to go too low. 5 - I plan to reload 147gr Acme LRN bullets also in the future, would W572 be a good choice for this heavier bullet. Eta: I just want to ensure I'm not doing something dumb or unsafe; at the end of the day I want to learn about handgun reloading and reduce my cost per round so I can shoot more. Thanks! -Rob
×
×
  • Create New...