Justsomeguy

While a squib is entirely possible and a "leading suspect" it is also possible that a bullet was loaded long or had crept forward from recoil and thus hitting the lands increasing the pressure exponentially which could also cause the swollen barrel at that point. You should have noticed the squib if there was one, but a bullet touching the lands caused by "creep" from recoil in the magazine with a case that has less than expected case tension is also a possibility and would have not given any clue prior to firing it.

Those ARE nice, but I wonder what kind of holster you have to use because of the "gas pedals" on those things?

I like the grips too... what are those?

Zeros are jacketed and indeed will generally run a bit faster than MG JHPs in my experience in 40cal. So the same load you used with the MG will most likely make the same or a bit better power factor when using the Zeros.

I side with RDA on this one. Ultimately it's either a "good shoot" or it isn't. The type of ammo you used is not going to enter into it. You were either justified or you weren't. As to bullets, no one ever got fired for buying Gold Dots. Coupled with a low flash powder like Silhouette or 3N37 you could cobble up some pretty good defense rounds. There are some other pretty good bullets out there that are available... the Sierras come to mind along with the bonded Golden Sabers. They don't have the vaunted reputation of Gold Dots but are certainly "good enough" and may be available if you can't find Gold Dots. The thing is to make sure, whatever powder and bullet you wind up using, that you have put the bullet into its best performance envelope... that is, you have given it the velocity that is most likely to make it perform as per specification in the gun you will use. Too much speed and it may open up prematurely and not penetrate to the desired depth. Too little and you may as well be shooting hard ball as it won't open up at all.

I think the OP was referring to the possibility of the rare but not unheard of "detonation" event which has been linked to very small loadings of very fast pistol powders... like below .2grn in a pistol case with powders in the speed range of Bullseye or faster. This is not something most people will have to worry about in that to qualify for "minor" or even to knock down steel you will need more powder than that. Powder manufacturers list both minimums and maximums on the charts for a reason. Just as too much can lead to problems, too little can also, so it pays to not stray too far from listed data for good reasons.

As an aside, most people will now refer to Universal Clays as just Universal as it avoids problems of other persons confusing the faster Clays with Universal which could be catastrophic. Even Hodgdon now refers to it generally as "Universal".

As RTP pointed out, OAL is definitely gun and bullet specific. You seem to be right on the edge of what your gun will accept with MG bullets at your present OAL. If you shorten it a bit and are not at a maximum load at present it won't matter much, but if you are at or near a max load everything matters and you might have to reduce your powder charge a tenth grain or more depending on how deeply you must seat vs. the recommended powder charge. If the difference is not too great and they feed now they should still feed at the required OAL. There is always the option of getting a throating reamer and opening up the chamber length some at the throat. With barrels with standard rifling this is a matter of a few minutes and a little cutting oil. It is an "in hand" operation requiring no machinery.

I too found that 3.6grns of WST under an 180grn SNS cast bullet (regular lead with lube) worked well, but produced a bit higher PF for me in an XD40 Tactical. I tried both the stock springs and a reduced power 15# and both ran 100% so it just depends on the "feel" you like as to whether or not you might need a reduced power recoil spring in your gun or you can reduce the load a bit more. I have found in the past that my XDs and Glocks generally like the same loads related to PF as far as function goes. My power factor was mid 140-ish with the 3.6 load @ 69 degrees on a slightly overcast day.

Made it to the range yesterday before the ice storm hit and did a little more shooting with e3. I'm switching from traditional lead to coated lead projectiles and have it narrowed down to either thebluebullets or bayous in 147 gr most likely. With 147 gr I have found 3.36 gr of e3 to be the cleanest and most accurate, today I tried that as well as 3.58 gr of e3, didn't see any improvement, if anything accuracy may have been slightly less. Spent primers didn't look bad, but I'm not taking it any further. Interestingly the recoil is virtually the same from 2.9 gr to 3.5. All rounds shot out of an XDM 5.25. When you say you didn't notice any IMPROVEMENT and then mention accuracy I assume that is what you were looking for. I would be interested in any velocity differences at that point since I acquired some e3 last fall but the weather here turned on me and shooting outdoors has become unpleasant. What I am looking for, data wise, is LINEARITY of e3 at different pressure/velocity ranges to see where it might be turning "squirrely" or less linear... that is, at what point does an increase in powder NOT produce a more or less expected increase in velocity. So if you can post your velocity results from the last test at nearly 3.6grns of e3 in comparison with those obtained with it at 3.36grns that would be helpful to me. Thanks.

I have tried several times to calculate a "rule of thumb" for OAL changes and powders because of being asked by newer reloaders for just that. I have never been successful as there are too many variables and few powders are linear enough to follow assumptions and bullet types matter too. That said, smaller cases like the 9mm will show a more drastic change in pressure/velocity for even small shortenings of the OAL than .40 or .45. Lengthening the OAL will generally decrease pressure/velocity in most rounds, but like others have found this is not a certainty either, so the old advice to load in increments and test, test, test is still the most valid and should be followed. I might add that for a particular powder in a particular gun in a particular caliber some assumptions can be made, but since this is all load and gun specific only YOU can make those assumptions based on YOUR data achieved by YOUR testing.

Oh Phew! I thought I was going blind since I did not see the line for 2400 in the first chart but you had a call-out in your summary for it. It does seem strange to me that True Blue produces more muzzle pressure than Silhouette since in most applications True Blue would seem to be a faster powder than Silhouette. Also, though hard to get at this time, Power Pistol looks like a good all around bet for a compensated gun yet few people here report using it... wonder why?

Few firing parts are "drop in". A sear and hammer along with a safety usually need some work. Hopefully your gunsmith is someone who recognizes this and the gun will be as per specification when you receive it back.

Uhmm... you said this "Recently, went back to my G22 with stock barrel configured exactly like my duty gun (Glock 3.5# connector with NY-1 trigger spring). I loaded up some of the Berry's I recently ordered with the above recipe and lo and behold....tumbling!!!" Soooo... since you said you were using the stock Glock barrel, which is by default a polygonal barrel, I wrote what I did about using lead, and should have included a specific mention of plated which do not like to be "reshaped" with a polygonal barrel since it can break the plating. But if I misread this, my apologies.

You're right. I sent an email last night and he called me this morning to say it was boxed up and all he needed was my CC# and my OK to send it out. About as good a service as you can get! Thanks for the recommendation Torogi.

A good suggestion plus you have a reason to get some pizza!

If you are using the "stock" Glock polygonal bore barrel with lead you can have problems including tumbling. The polygonal bore has no place for any lead sloughing to go and the bullets may slide weirdly in the barrel. It is also possible to get increased pressures using the polygonal bore for the same reason. Go back to the standard rifled barrel you have if using lead. Forcing a round shaped bullet into a polygonal shaped bore is one of the reasons I don't like poly barrels. Some people have decent luck with them, but even Glock does not recommend lead in their stock barrels because of pressure issues.

Errp... maybe we should have kept this stuff on the "down low". Another decent powder out of stock!

Thanks... I'll try it now.

What... no love for the 9X23? They feed and eject just fine using 38 Super magazines and power factor is not a problem with room to spare with no pressure issues.

Uhmm... I don't do facebook and am unable to distinguish between the various Shooter Ready sites when I look those up. So please, if you have a contact number for this Jim Bodkin fellow I would appreciate it if you could post it here if there are no objections.

I have found LongShot to be one of those "underrated" powders with more general use than many seem to acknowledge. In .40 it produces very good velocities at lower than expected pressure with 180grn bullets and in 9mm is very good with the 147s I have tested it with. I have no doubt that it will launch 124/125grn bullets faster than most without excessive pressure. It burns pretty cool too, so using it with lead is pretty much smokeless. In 9mm I would say it burns a bit faster than AA7 (though in 40 it is slower) and maybe just a touch slower than Blue Dot in 9mm but in the same neighborhood, being a couple ticks slower than Silhouette as well. It is certainly worth experimenting with. I would not use it for really low powered loads though as it requires some pressure to light up completely, but from the mid range on up anyone should find some uses for it.

Is it possible for you to post a pic or two of what you are trying to do? Some of your descriptions don't really paint a picture for me. Perhaps there is something I'm missing from the text, but what you are trying to do shouldn't be this hard.

Uhhmmm... how're you gonna rack the slide?

Yes, balancing the various reports from reloaders who are conscientious and experienced, I too have noticed a trend towards 3.8grns of e3 with 124grn bullets @ 1.122-1.125 or so OAL as being the "preferred" load in that caliber. I haven't been able to try any yet as the weather here is still too brisk for reliable data that can be used throughout the rest of the year, but that is about the level I will be trying when weather permits.