powder mfr says 9mm major exceeds all known gun recommedations

[Braxton1]

I've chronographed some of the Winchester 127 gr. 9mm +P+ SXT loads. They make major all day long out of a 5.5 inch and come darned close out of a G-17.

[Foxbat]

I've chronographed some of the Winchester 127 gr. 9mm +P+ SXT loads. They make major all day long out of a 5.5 inch and come darned close out of a G-17.

That is fine, but first of all such loads are not recommended for many pistols chambered 9x19mm, and furthermore, how about loads making major out of a 4.25" shorty with popple holes? Those loads go much further.

The issue here is - there is no officially recognized caliber 9 Major.

[shred]

Way back in the 175 PF days, I remember somebody sent a then-popular Open Super load to be pressure tested. Came back at 50K+PSI, well into rifle territory.

[G-ManBart]

The 9x19 cartridge is over a hundred years old. Meaning that some guns that are chambered in the cartridge are at least that old. In the past 100 years metallurgy has made leaps and bounds in different alloys and strength of steel.

I'm not surprised the powder manufacturer told you that. Like Graham Smith said, if you put a 9 major pressure load in an old Luger, its chamber is probably not as strong as a modern barrel.

They have to spec based on the weakest link.

You know, you'd think that, but it's absolutely not a safe assumption to make. First off, a standard factory 9mm load will rarely make a Luger function...they were designed around what is at least what we now call +P pressures.

The weakest link would almost certainly be an inexpensive modern gun, not something like a Luger, P-38, early Hi-Power etc.

Second, steel used in guns (and anything else) isn't necessarily better now than it was 100 years ago. In many cases, it's nowhere near as good as it was. My father and I did a lot of car work when I was younger. He has tools that he got when he was a teenager that were given to him from his uncle (my great uncle, who was a blacksmith). They were quality brands like Williams, Snap-On, but some early Sears Craftsman stuff as well. I can't count how many new Snap-On and Craftsman tools we broke...sockets that split, extensions that sheared in half. Not once did we ever break one of the old tools, and I specifically recall one extremely thin-walled socket (in a very common size) that was made specifically for a particular bolt on Flathead Ford engines. That thing is thin, and my father joked "yeah, I've been trying to break it for 40 years and haven't managed to yet". German steel, specifically, from the turn of the century, as used by Mauser, Luger, etc was extremely high quality, and probably better than stuff like 416 stainless we see most commonly today. R,

[GrumpyOne]

The 9x19 cartridge is over a hundred years old. Meaning that some guns that are chambered in the cartridge are at least that old. In the past 100 years metallurgy has made leaps and bounds in different alloys and strength of steel.

I'm not surprised the powder manufacturer told you that. Like Graham Smith said, if you put a 9 major pressure load in an old Luger, its chamber is probably not as strong as a modern barrel.

They have to spec based on the weakest link.

You know, you'd think that, but it's absolutely not a safe assumption to make. First off, a standard factory 9mm load will rarely make a Luger function...they were designed around what is at least what we now call +P pressures.

The weakest link would almost certainly be an inexpensive modern gun, not something like a Luger, P-38, early Hi-Power etc.

Second, steel used in guns (and anything else) isn't necessarily better now than it was 100 years ago. In many cases, it's nowhere near as good as it was. My father and I did a lot of car work when I was younger. He has tools that he got when he was a teenager that were given to him from his uncle (my great uncle, who was a blacksmith). They were quality brands like Williams, Snap-On, but some early Sears Craftsman stuff as well. I can't count how many new Snap-On and Craftsman tools we broke...sockets that split, extensions that sheared in half. Not once did we ever break one of the old tools, and I specifically recall one extremely thin-walled socket (in a very common size) that was made specifically for a particular bolt on Flathead Ford engines. That thing is thin, and my father joked "yeah, I've been trying to break it for 40 years and haven't managed to yet". German steel, specifically, from the turn of the century, as used by Mauser, Luger, etc was extremely high quality, and probably better than stuff like 416 stainless we see most commonly today. R,

+1 Just because it's old, doesn't mean it's inferior.

[Foxbat]

+1 Just because it's old, doesn't mean it's inferior.

In reality it doesn't mean much. There was old junk and old good quality goods, same as today, but this has no significance for the sake of this discussion. It makes no sense to speculate, what we know is that Open guns in 9 Major are well made with enough margin - as result I have not heard of one case of catastrophic failure. According to some sources the test pressure for most modern volume production guns is twice the maximum cartridge pressure.

As far as old guns are concerned, it is good policy to always be very careful with them. There is such thing as metal fatigue. I had a screw break in two in an old rifle from the load well below maximum. Just like modern guns they are subject to stress and breakages. Chances of meeting a tired part are much higher with old guns.

Edited January 23, 2011 by Foxbat

[Joe4d]

The 9x19 cartridge is over a hundred years old. Meaning that some guns that are chambered in the cartridge are at least that old. In the past 100 years metallurgy has made leaps and bounds in different alloys and strength of steel.

I'm not surprised the powder manufacturer told you that. Like Graham Smith said, if you put a 9 major pressure load in an old Luger, its chamber is probably not as strong as a modern barrel.

They have to spec based on the weakest link.

You know, you'd think that, but it's absolutely not a safe assumption to make. First off, a standard factory 9mm load will rarely make a Luger function...they were designed around what is at least what we now call +P pressures.

The weakest link would almost certainly be an inexpensive modern gun, not something like a Luger, P-38, early Hi-Power etc.

Second, steel used in guns (and anything else) isn't necessarily better now than it was 100 years ago. In many cases, it's nowhere near as good as it was. My father and I did a lot of car work when I was younger. He has tools that he got when he was a teenager that were given to him from his uncle (my great uncle, who was a blacksmith). They were quality brands like Williams, Snap-On, but some early Sears Craftsman stuff as well. I can't count how many new Snap-On and Craftsman tools we broke...sockets that split, extensions that sheared in half. Not once did we ever break one of the old tools, and I specifically recall one extremely thin-walled socket (in a very common size) that was made specifically for a particular bolt on Flathead Ford engines. That thing is thin, and my father joked "yeah, I've been trying to break it for 40 years and haven't managed to yet". German steel, specifically, from the turn of the century, as used by Mauser, Luger, etc was extremely high quality, and probably better than stuff like 416 stainless we see most commonly today. R,

+1 Just because it's old, doesn't mean it's inferior.

Yeh that's what I keep telling the girls at the sports bar,, doesnt seem to be working for me.

[Jeff P]

I started this thread so I will give my results. Apparently I am reinveting the wheel. Nonetheless, as I re-enter the sport, I hear of shooters no longer practicing because the ammo is too expensive since the great recession.

With 7.7 gr of HS-6 my G 17 Lone Wolf 5 inch barrel with comp makes a PF of 167 at avg velocity of 1,343 FPS with a 124 Montana Gold FMJ OAL 1.165 (same as factory ammo).

My once-used brass shows zero signs of pressure. No pressure signs on the primers.

The gun shoots flatter. It sounds a little louder than factory ammo but I could probably not tell the difference between factory and major if I smixed the ammo.

Glock tells me the g17 was designed for combat NATO rounds fired at full automatic mode. NATO rounds are unspecified, and up to the country making the round. NATO rounds are +p++ and Glock is fine with that.

I have found no instance of a G17 going kb. Correct me if I am wrong.

The main kb problems appear with the other Glock models.

These days, I find it not surprising that newer products are not as good as older products.

[gm iprod]

You know, you'd think that, but it's absolutely not a safe assumption to make. First off, a standard factory 9mm load will rarely make a Luger function...they were designed around what is at least what we now call +P pressures.

The weakest link would almost certainly be an inexpensive modern gun, not something like a Luger, P-38, early Hi-Power etc.

Second, steel used in guns (and anything else) isn't necessarily better now than it was 100 years ago. In many cases, it's nowhere near as good as it was. My father and I did a lot of car work when I was younger. He has tools that he got when he was a teenager that were given to him from his uncle (my great uncle, who was a blacksmith). They were quality brands like Williams, Snap-On, but some early Sears Craftsman stuff as well. I can't count how many new Snap-On and Craftsman tools we broke...sockets that split, extensions that sheared in half. Not once did we ever break one of the old tools, and I specifically recall one extremely thin-walled socket (in a very common size) that was made specifically for a particular bolt on Flathead Ford engines. That thing is thin, and my father joked "yeah, I've been trying to break it for 40 years and haven't managed to yet". German steel, specifically, from the turn of the century, as used by Mauser, Luger, etc was extremely high quality, and probably better than stuff like 416 stainless we see most commonly today. R,

You forgot one important fact. Price!!

Guns nowadays are made to a price. That the likes of you and I can afford. Back in 1908 (Luger) was made for the Military, but mainly for the officers. The military had the money (someone elses) to buy these things. Anyone who wanted to purchase one for himself had better be well healed. Steel that cars are made of today is better quality steel than that used in the 30's 40's and 50's, but they use a shit load less of it, and it is designed to bend and stay bent. Cars back then would batter the test wall down and kill everything in it's path (not neccessarily a bad thing).

Leave a Luger in the rain for a week and see if it will still function. Leave a Ruger 1022 out and see which is still going. Personally I miss the way they made old things, there was some pride put into what they produced. Now, with very few exceptions and they are going to cost you the price of a large car to own, most firearms are just whacked together by someone who sees it as a job. As much as the modern gunmaker goes on about quality etc etc, generally the modern gun is better because we have the experience gained form making the old ones, learning what works and what doesn't and making things better.

I honestly think that the average 9mm handgun turned out today is a better alround product, more affordable and more accessible.

TAlking with the older guys when I started shooting you had to go through a few rifles of any given brand and calibre to find one that grouped well and then spent a bucket fo time finetuning the rifle with home loads. Now I bet you could go into Bass Pro grab a good quality 308, pull a box of good ammo (US or Western European made) and put up a close on 1 MOA group without too much effort.

Aplogies for hijacking the thread.

9mm Hot Loads.

Just because someone says that is a little dangerous does';t mean it won't work, look at marriage. I think a good long diet of 9mm Major would have done in the Luger handgun sooner rather than later. I suspect that many P-09 Lugers spent an enormous amount of time tucked nicely up in a leather holster tied carefully to some Prussians trouser belt and did not see great long shooting sessions of what passed for MilSpec 125gr Ball back in the day. I have handled some Lugers that would give a canasta a run for rattling when shaken, I bet they saw some service.

That said I suspect my Glock would probably be not too flash on 20K plus of that early ammo either. Is the Glock an inferior gun to the P-08. Unfair comparison given the nearly 80years separation in design knowledge. I would take both into a fight in their respective eras and be adequately armed and hope like hell I will never find out, but that would not stop me from being preparred.

Instances of Glock going KB, 5 that I am aware of and have seen the resultant dead handgun, once I was in the bay next door.

2 x 9mm, both guns were destroyed by Norinco 124gr JHP ammo. This ammo is brass cased and boxer primed and loaded like it came out of the Manhatten Project. I have never chronographed it. I will not ever put it in my guns. Both Glocks were near new but made and blew up two years apart. In both cases the ammo was checked by the local expert and deemed to be well over loaded. Both guns lost the hood over the chamber and part of the slide. We all think that the gun just failed because of the constant thumping with over pressure ammo that they had consumed, 1000 rounds or more that the owners had put through the handguns.

1 x 9mm, using that above used brass for reloads, and he was not trying to make major, but his loads were considered brisk. We think he was constantly loading fast powders to about 145pf, and the case just failed. I examined some brass that he had yet to reload and after cutting one side out we decided that it was somewhat thinner (can"t remember the numbers) than some new Remington and once fired Winchester brass we had at the time. Especially through the web forward of the head. It tapered down real quick.

2 x 45ACP. Both again with Norinco Ammo. Brass cased, the guns blew up within a week of each other as it happened. Both owners had purchased the ammo from the same supplier and were both from the same case of 1000 I think. Both cases failed above the feed ramp and blew the magazine out, barrel was bulged just forward of the chamber and had evidence of cracks in the barrel when checked. Barrels may have been faulty. Either way no one wanted to admit it was their problem.

I have heard of two more using older 45ACP Norinco brass, but seeing as the brass had been reloaded a number of times we are of the opinion that you could not fairly blame the brass maker. But just to be sure I sort and discard all Norinco brass.

Edited February 6, 2011 by gm iprod

[98sr20ve]

Take a look at the 9X21mm load data in the Lyman 49 manual. All the 9X21mm is basically the same as loading 9x19mm to max OAL. Lyman shows a 147 gr AA#7 load @ 180PF. So if you load your 9mm to 1.169 you can reach major a lot more safely.

[Patrick Sweeney]

A few observations on all this:

Just because you haven't been seeing pressure signs in your 9mmMajor load, doesn't mean they aren't there. Things like flattened primers and such don't even make their appearance until you're well into the 50K+ territory.

A comparison: the guns many of us are shooting are the equivalent of racing engines. Balanced pistons, tuned and blueprinted. So, we can run them at 9,000 rpm, and they work. Now, imagine some guy showing up at the racetrack, and hearing us talk about running at 8,500 rpm all race long. He's going to take his street engine out, and in a couple of laps, there will be smoke coming out of the fenders.

The ballisticians know that if they publish it, people will use it. If they were to publish 9mmMajor, some guy would load it up, and stoke his soft steel Inglis, or some other unsuitable blaster, full of this ammo.

Then there is the little matter of statistics. let's suppose you managed to find a load that delivers major at 38,499, just under the max of 9mm+P. Not every shot is going to post 38,499 as its pressure. Depending on how variable your particular load is, it is going to produce a spread of pressures. That spread is measured by the standard deviation. The bigger the sD, the higher the max-pressure outlier will be.

So, your 9mmMajor load, that "only" pushes things to 51,000PSI, will probably regularly produce an occasional 55-56,000PSI round, and one in a hundred will edge scarily close to 60K.

That's what keeps the ballisticians awake at night; the outliers. When guys who do it for a living say "That's close enough" I tend to believe them.

[Codycoyote]

Side of a 9-Major Open Gun:

"WARNING! Contents Under Extreme Pressure!"

JeffWard

If I ever have a 9mm major open gun built, I will have this engraved in the slide. That is just hilarious!

[Foxbat]

Things like flattened primers and such don't even make their appearance until you're well into the 50K+ territory.

How about these ones? (Range pickups)

[diehli]

Things like flattened primers and such don't even make their appearance until you're well into the 50K+ territory.

How about these ones? (Range pickups)

"Houston...."

[Merlin Orr]

I've chronographed some of the Winchester 127 gr. 9mm +P+ SXT loads. They make major all day long out of a 5.5 inch and come darned close out of a G-17.

170-173 from my 6" Fat Free that I had Benny build me for 3 gun....

Oh yea - I do not use this load for 3 gun...

[calishootr]

whoa...havent that flat of a primer in a looong time....yikes...

[Alaskapopo]

I've chronographed some of the Winchester 127 gr. 9mm +P+ SXT loads. They make major all day long out of a 5.5 inch and come darned close out of a G-17.

That is fine, but first of all such loads are not recommended for many pistols chambered 9x19mm, and furthermore, how about loads making major out of a 4.25" shorty with popple holes? Those loads go much further.

The issue here is - there is no officially recognized caliber 9 Major.

I don't know of any major makers (Glock, Sig, Beretta, HK, ETC) that don't recommend +p+ ammo in thier guns.

Pat

[Patrick Sweeney]

+P is a known pressure level,listed by SAAMI and one that all makers can adhere to.

+P+ is not. What it boils down to is; a law enforcement agency comes to an ammo maker and says "We want your bullet, but we want it at X over the usual velocity." The ammo maker looks at their load data, consults the lawyers, and replies: "No problem, provided you sign this binding, no-wiggle agreement of understanding" Said agreement is simple: the ammo maker is not responsible for anything that happens with that ammo. Guns blow up, wear out, sights fall off, bullets disintegrate halfway downrange, it is all on the LE agency.

And, the LE agency doesn't break the agreement, because they know if they do, they'll never have anyone answer their bids for ammo, ever again. The Chief/Sheriff/Head Fred will be reduced to going down to a big-box store and buying ammo at retail.

All for an extra 100 fps, when what the agency really needs is range time and a no-excuses qualification policy.

[G-ManBart]

Things like flattened primers and such don't even make their appearance until you're well into the 50K+ territory.

How about these ones? (Range pickups)

Those are on the bad side, but I've seen much worse. R,

[G-ManBart]

All for an extra 100 fps, when what the agency really needs is range time and a no-excuses qualification policy.

My God man, the implications of that are awful. Personal accountability, as a policy?

[Flexmoney]

Take a look at the 9X21mm load data in the Lyman 49 manual. All the 9X21mm is basically the same as loading 9x19mm to max OAL. Lyman shows a 147 gr AA#7 load @ 180PF. So if you load your 9mm to 1.169 you can reach major a lot more safely.

To add to that...

I have posted before about 3 book loads out of my Sierra manual (4th ed) that make major in 9x21.

125g at 1.165 oal, doing 1350 fps

[Foxbat]

Take a look at the 9X21mm load data in the Lyman 49 manual. All the 9X21mm is basically the same as loading 9x19mm to max OAL. Lyman shows a 147 gr AA#7 load @ 180PF. So if you load your 9mm to 1.169 you can reach major a lot more safely.

To add to that...

I have posted before about 3 book loads out of my Sierra manual (4th ed) that make major in 9x21.

125g at 1.165 oal, doing 1350 fps

Of course, there is no surprise. A quick simulation shows that extending the case by "just" 2mm drops the peak pressure for a particular load from 50,000psi to around 40,000psi.

Edited February 9, 2011 by Foxbat

[olp73]

From VV home page. The load is for 9X21, but COAL is even shorter than what many use for 9major. If this is ok, how can 9x19 loaded to major be dangerous. It can't matter if the case is longer when COAL is the same??

123 FMJTC Fiocchi 1.161

N340 0,32 4.9 330 1083 0,37 5.7 398 1306

3N37 0,38 5.9 345 1132 0,43 6.6 384 1260

3N38 0,46 7.1 353 1158 0,53 8.2 406 1332

Edited May 2, 2011 by olp73

[usmc1974]

If we followed all the manuf. specs and guidelines we would still be throwing rocks at targets...

+1 yep sounds like something I might say.

[maineshootah]

Anyone tried their 9 Major ammo in their Glocks?

All day long....