Help With G34 Light Load, Please

[tracecom]

A while back, I posted a request for some load suggestions for my Glock 34. One of the loads suggested was 3.3 grains of TiteGroup behind a 147 grain Berry RN. I tried it and liked it, but it was a little hotter than I needed (950 fps.) So, today, I tried 3.1 grains of TiteGroup and it clocked 900 fps, so the PF is 132; I am after 125, and would like to try 3.0.

The problem however is that the 3.1 won't reliably cycle the slide even with a Glockmeister SS guide rod and a 13 pound ISMI spring.

Any suggestions?

[vluc]

If you want to stay with that load, you'll need to tweak that spring setup. Why so minimal on the PF?

[Jake Di Vita]

Why are you so insistant on getting 125? You are going to want AT LEAST a 5 PF cushion for major matches anyway.

I vote stick with 3.1 or 3.2 grains. That extra percieved recoil is not going to be a big deal. In it's place you get reliability and an extra PF cushion.

[Joe D]

Is the Glockmeister rod the proper size for the ISMI spring? The ISMI springs have a small ID unlike the Wolf springs. I have a G34 with thousands of rounds of 3.0 gr of TG and a 147 gr bullet through it.

[Nik Habicht]

Trace,

Using a 132 PF 147 gr. load myself in a G34, I had to load rounds short -- about 1.110 OAL and trim three coils of the ISMI 13 lb. spring that rides on my THE Accessories Tungsten GuideRod. Prior to shortening OAL from 1.120-1.125 I'd get the occasional hangup on the feedramp. Once I solved that I discovered that if I fired one handed with 10 + 1 rounds in the gun (with a ten round mag) the pressure from the stack of ammo was enough to not reliably cycle the gun until I trimmed the coils off the recoil spring. Now the gun just runs and runs...

[MoNsTeR]

Try 3.4gr N310 instead

[TRG65]

Monster - 3.4grs of 310 might be a bit much of a starting load

tracecom - I can't get my G-34 to consistently cycle below 130-132 pf regardless of recoil spring weight, as a result of this and a few other factors I just just the stock recoil spring assembly. The reason I've come to for the 130 requirement is that there is too much pressure on the slide from the 10rd mags, this might not be a problem if your using 17rd mags. Also I require my loads to work from single hand "retention" as used in IDPA, which requires a good bit more power than just weak hand arm extended shooting.

That being said faster powders seem to require less speed for my 34's. True Blue won't cycle my wife's 34 until about 1000 fps averages. In my gun 310 will cycle at about 885-890 fps avgerages, and the little slower 320 needs about 910-915 fps averages. These are using a 147 Zero JHP.

[Helmut]

in my 34......MG 124gr bullet

4.2 of VV320 ........132PF

3.9 " ".........just barely makes 125PF on a hot day if you are holding your tongue right

[SVI4ME]

I clipped off 5 coils of a 13 pound ISMI with my 3.2 grs. of 310 in my G34. Works great. I have not chronoed them yet. I am guessing low 130's PF.

Rob

[EricW]

You tell'em Jake!

I don't understand the persistent attraction between Glock owners and mousefart loads. The point of owning a Glock is so you can worry about shooting, not jam clearing. A day at the range using Matt Burkett's system of grip analysis will 100X more than fooling around with taming the recoil of the mighty 9mm.

Sorry to seem so acidic, but this getting to be a pet peeve with me. With a proper grip, reacquisition of the sight on a Glock is almost instantaneous. It just snaps into place. You don't have to wait for it like on a highly-sprung 1911. In order to get that "snap" you have to be running a hot enough load to make the gun work for you.

Glocks don't need endless load-smithing to make them work. Find something that's cheap, clean, and reasonably accurate - then leave it the hell alone.

FWIW, I use a 115gr over 5.0 gr of Titegroup. (Yes, I realize it's a max load.)

[Nik Habicht]

Eric,

I think that's terrific --- for you. 147 grain mouse loads do make a difference for me on small steel, tight no-shoot shots, and on the fifty yard line in the Bianchi practical event. I'm still shooting up the last several thousand 115s I have loaded up --- and I can tell when I run into 'em during my practice sessions....

[ErikW]

I think you might get a little more slide-cycling energy out of a slower powder, something medium speed. This also might produce more felt recoil and be less soft.

147s have always been my favorite neener bullet, first over Unique, then over N330. But shooting Open (.38 Super) I have 115 JHPs laying around and I just load those. They make the G17 super fast and snappy feeling, more so than my Limited or Open guns. (Actually I use the load I came up with for my G26, so it's plenty warm in the G17.) If I were to take my G17 to shoot Production at the nationals though, I'd load 147s for pesky Pepper poppers.

I'm sorta with EricW, crank up the neener to near max. Push the 147 to almost 1000 fps, 124 to 1150, 115 to 1200. Poppers left standing suck.

Edit: Oh yeah, a G34. Well, that thing sucks. Its cycling feels all sloppy and goofy with that long, lightened slide. A 147 at a mere 900 fps out of that long barrel is a poofy load. Crank it up to something respectable. And/or try the slower powder I mentioned. G34... marshmallow, bah!

Edited January 5, 2004 by Erik Warren

[George]

Using the stock recoil spring setup (17 or 18 lbs) my 17L (which is gonna run similar to a 34) would run 120-125 pf "mousefart" loads all day long and still run 145-150 pf factory ammo with no problem. I only had to start using a softer spring after I ran the PF up to 170 and put a comp on it for open.

Just put the stock spring set back in, or get an aftermarket one that duplicates the stock one and you should be fine again.

My favorite mousefart 9mm load is a BillyBullets 147gr LSWC over 5.0 grains of AA#7. Goes downrange at 840 for a 123.5 PF. 5.2gr AA7 gives gives 860 fps for 126.5 PF. Your barrel being a tad shorter I would say a tenth grain more will be approximate. AA7 is a great powder for a long bbl pistol. It burns the whole way down the bbl and gives a real soft initial recoil impulse even at fairly stout loadings, and also runs real well in a super under light bullets at high PF. Great powder.

7.2 grs AA7 under a 124 gr JHP does 1018 fps for a 126.2 PF in a Glock 19 with a lot of muzzle flash because the barrel is just too short for that powder. A 34 should put this load downrange nicely minor at more like 6.5 to 6.8 grains of AA7.

--

Regards,

[Flexmoney]

First...as Joe D suggested...I'd check to see if that spring is binding.

One way to check is to put the stock rod and spring back in...then pull the slide back as far as it will go...hold it there...look down from the top and see how far the breech face is behind the back of the mag tunnel (you should see plenty of the shiney trigger bar). Then switch to the replacement rod and spring...repeat...compare.

If you are getting full slide travel, then the mag springs might be holding you back...with too much spring pressure pushing rounds up against the slide. (Most likely with 10 rounders that are fully loaded.)

Finally, I would like to comment on what EricW (and others) have said:

I don't understand the persistent attraction between Glock owners and mousefart loads. The point of owning a Glock is so you can worry about shooting, not jam clearing. A day at the range using Matt Burkett's system of grip analysis will 100X more than fooling around with taming the recoil of the mighty 9mm.

I just could not agree more!

There is nothing wrong with going for a soft load (and 147's with a quick, safe powder are pretty soft). But, if a load with TG at ~135pf isn't soft enough, then a shooter ought to look at their technique. Real hard.

[vluc]

Shooting production (of course) I use Titegroup...4.3 grains with a 124 grain bullet. PF is around 142-143 or so.

I've found with my G34 that it shoots (for me) better with the hotter load than not.

Tried a 129 PF at the Buckeye Blast this last year. The load spanked me a bit on the steel. Found that some hits were just off of the calibration area and the steel would not fall.

Upped the load back to 140 for the Tri State and (assuming the steel was calibrated the same) hits just outside the calibration area put the steel down.

So a hotter load saved me some additional shots and therefore time.

[MoNsTeR]

3.4gr of N310 at 1.165" (which I should have specified) should make about 130pf. Maybe I'm naive but working up to that seems silly. Heck, 3.3gr of Titegroup is listed in the Speer book as "do not reduce"!

[chp5]

FYI - at the 03 GA State, Winchester White Box 115's clocked a 147 PF out of my G34. It doesn't seem that hot, but it's very controlable and I like how it feels. I've had no problems knocking down steel.

I'm going to start reloading 9mm, and I don't think I'll go much below a 140 PF.

[TRG65]

Monster - I get the same pf and pressure signs with about .4grs less 310 in my guns. I load 1.157. If I used 3.4grs of 310 in the gun that gives cratered primers at 3.0, I might easily be wondering why my magazine was just blown out of the gun. Also I only use 3.3 grs of 320 to get 132 pf in the same gun.

It is very easy to get warm loads and especially with 310. That is why you work up. What works for one person doesn't work for another.

[tracecom]

First, thanks to all for the replies.

Next, let me say that I don't really need a load with less recoil. It's just that until I find a load that barely makes the 125pf, I don't know how much I am giving up by being satisfied with 130pf or more. The truth is I don't need a load of any pf any more than I need to shoot competitively. This is just a hobby for me, and experimentation is part of the fun, as is gathering information from those who are more experienced than I. And while it is undoubtedly true that I have a lot to learn about gripping the gun, that doesn't diminish my desire to test the limits of recoil reduction. After all, I have that RL550B and that other stuff that I need to justify by something other than the three or four cents I save per reloaded round.

Now, to address some of your suggestions.

1. Note that even with 3.1 grains of TiteGroup, I have failures to feed and failures to eject. Sometimes the empty just stovepipes, but sometimes it ejects and the next round jams with its nose against the feed ramp and the rim not quite under the extractor. (If this load functioned flawlessly, I could be satisfied with the 130pf.)

2. The recoil spring is a good fit for the rod, however when I do the test suggested by Flexmoney, I see that the rearward slide travel is about 1/16" farther with the stock rod assembly than with the ss rod and 13 pound spring. I don't know if that is because the spring is binding on the rod or simply because the coils of the spring have reached the maximum compression.

3. The OAL (1.162) may be too long. I stretched it out there based on a belief that it would reduce the pressure, but maybe if I seated a little deeper, it would feed more reliably (although I don't think that wouldn't do anything for the ejection problem.)

4. The magazines are essentially brand new, and are undoubtedly tight. Failures occur most often after the first shot in a 10+1 situation, but have also occured further into the mag.

5. The fact that JoeD seems to be able to run the exact same load that I would like to try makes me more determined to puzzle it out. JoeD, would you please post the OAL of your load, primers used, as well as the recoil spring and guide rod details?

Thanks again to all.

[George]

1.150" to 1.155" is about the max OAL that will "usually" run reliably in a Glock magazine. Some bullet profiles will give different results, but generally speaking, 9x19 OAL should be around 1.130"-1.140". Check factory FMJ and you will probably find some as short as 1.15" to 1.120".

If anyone is getting pressure signs in 9x19 at any PF under 140, you better reconsider your bullet weight and/or powder choice. Something ain't right. In a shorter barrel a fairly zippy powder will get the velocity for ya safely with lighter bullets, but in a long bbl pistol a medium rate or slower powder is better, especially under a heavy bullet. The pressure spike of a too fast powder under a too heavy projectile will cause pressure sign at woos PF's. If the powder burns too early, the bullet is coasting down the bore after a real hard hit in the rear. Better to push it all the way to the muzzle if you want reasonable velocity without over-pressure.

--

Regards,

[Flexmoney]

tracecom,

I meant to post a little disclaimer...don't take a lot of these post to heart. They really aren't directed at you (or anyone else). I think it is just that some of us regulars have seen a lot of posts where the shooters are going for the softest load...

By all means...experiment and share the results. That's what all this is about.

OK...back to your situation...

1. Your OAL is too long. You likely need to be under 1.160...better to be under 1.155 (measure the loaded rounds, they could easily vary from what you think they are at from setup).

2. The mag springs are too tight.

3. Your recoil spring is binding (might be the outside of the spring against the tunnel). No good.

[EricW]

Tracecom,

I would argue that you need to find out what you're "missing" by running max loads through that 34. A stock Glock "works" best when the frame flexes under recoil. The only way you can do that in 9mm is to run full power loads. FWIW, I've never shot a piece of steel square with my loads and not had it drop. You won't hear that from people who run around shooting foofers.

There's a lot of 1911 techniques getting misapplied to the Glock. They're different guns. I still think you'll get waaaaaay more mileage from trying different grip tensions while watching your front sight. Matt Burkett's Timing Drills

[MoNsTeR]

FWIW, Berry's 147s loaded to 1.165" feed fine in my G19, with no signs of snugness in the magazines.

[Joe D]

Tracecom, I use 3.0 gr. of Titegroup 147 gr. Rainier or West Coast RN, WSP primers, 1.130" OAL.

I use a 13# ISMI uncut spring. I have several guide rods, the stock captured, a T.H.E. extended tungsten and one I made from D2 steel that is a copy of the T.H.E.

The rod dia. is .245" with a head dia. of .410".

Most other guide rods measure .265" which is too large for the ISMI springs.

My wife shoots this load for IDPA SSP. This is the load that has grouped 5 shots @ 25 yds. that are covered by a nickel. Yep, I do have witnesses.

You do not have to worry about how the sight tracks as it never leaves the target.

HTH

[tracecom]

Rather than start a new thread, I decided to resurrect this one since it is sort of the same subject and those who are interested can see some of the history.

Today, I finally got around to loading some more 9mm and went back to the range. I was lazy and only took one load: 3.5 grains of TiteGroup under Berry 147 grain RN with Federal 100 primers, OAL was 1.164. The loads functioned flawlessly in my G34. I tried all five of my 10 round mags repeatedly with 10 in the mag and one in the gun; I shot two handed, strong hand, weak hand, and had no failures to feed.

I chrono'ed 10 rounds. There was one that clocked 871 fps, but the other nine ranged from 940 to 978 and averaged 957 fps, so that puts the PF at just over 140. Recoil seemed a little snappy, but I was really more interested in reliability, so the recoil evaluation will be more thorough later.

Comments are welcome on the above, but I have two questions.

1. Will I see an improvement on consistency in powder measure if I order and install the extra small powder bar for my RL550B, or is it just a waste of money?

2. For quite some time, I have been using 3.5 grains of TiteGroup behind a 180 grain .40 bullet in my G35. (It worked OK unless I tried to put 10 in the mag and one in the tube; then I would get some feed failures, but I used it anyway.) So, now that I am using the same amount of powder (3.5 grains of TiteGroup) under a 147 grain bullet in my G34, it seems logical that recoil ought to be 18% less (180 minus 147 equals 33, and 33 divided by 180 equals .183.) It's logical, but is it correct?

What say the experts?