JonF Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 Hi all, i am hoping some of you can help me determine if my 9mm starting load recipe is safe. I recently decided to start loading 9mm and picked up a case of MG 124gr JHP bullets to be loaded with Titegoup. Looking through my Hornady and Lyman manual, i came up with 2 starting loads to experiment with and now after reading through some posts here, i think my COAL (1.080") is a bit on the short side. I dont know if there is a safety issue with the length i chose, or if it just for accuracy WRT the jump to the rifling, but most of the data i've seen here loads to a much longer length (1.120" on average). My Hornady and lyman manual stated 1.065 and 1.090 for the COAL of a 125g JHP (speer and hornady specific), but since i'm using MG, i thought it was comparable and split the difference to start. My powder loads are on the lower end of the range for TG to start. I actually loaded a box of two combo's to measure, are these safe or should i pull and start over? 124g MG JHP, mixed case, 4.2g Titegroup, 1.080" COAL 124g MG JHP, mixed case, 3.8g Titegroup, 1.080" COAL Thanks, Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMartens Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 I use 1.090" OAL with the MG 124 JHP and you will probably end up around 4.2 gr of TG. This OAL will work in just about any 9mm chamber. Some load it longer but, you will need to find what will fit and feed in your gun. I have a couple of 9mm production guns that will feed and chamber 1.125" OAL with no issues. Just need to see what works in your gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kv501 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 I load that bullet at 1.125, over 4.2 grains of TiteGroup and it makes 135 power factor out of my M&P9L. 1.200-1.250ish is a very common OAL with that bullet and powder; you will find it listed here quite often. Here is a thread which covers non-Major 9mm loads in depth and you will find a lot of info on the combo you are using. http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=89264 You don't say its purpose or what gun you are shooting it out of, but that 3.8 charge you listed most likely won't make minor if you are shooting production. Is there a reason you want/need to load that short when there are proven loads around 1.200? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CeeZer Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 You should make a dummy round and keep dropping it into barrel, seating bullet deeper and checking if it touches rifling to determine greatest OAL YOUR gun will take. Greater OAL - greater accuracy. Very short OAL - high pressure or/and compressed load. Also, make sure magazines can feed rounds with that OAL reliably and chambering is 100% (after you determine OAL, make 10 dummies - no primer no powder). OAL of 1.09" should work in most every gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
45 Raven Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 Jon: I load the MG 124 gr. JHP to an OAL of 1.115" over 4.2 grains of Hodgdon Titegroup. I get these results: Glock G19 with 4" barrel = 1121 FPS / 139 PF Springfield XD(m) with 4.5" barrel = 1149 FPS / 142 PF Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonF Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share Posted January 25, 2011 To answer some of the questions, I am loading for some of the local leagues were power factor isn't a requirement. For now I'm just going to find a minimal functional load to develop. I had no target oal to start from and was just going with the book values since this is my first venture in 9mm reloading and needed a baseline. I was mostly concerned that this oal wasnt actually dangerous to fire, pressure wise. It should be ok, right? I use a Cz sp01 custom for matches and sometimes a g19. After searching around here a bit more, I can see the methodology for reducing the gap to the rifling as much as possible for accuracy. I'll definitely pursue that on my future loads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CeeZer Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 CZ will def ask for shortest OAL out of the rest of the guns. Also, you should draw a line where your loaded ammo should cycle every gun reliably (low charge - stovepipes or so). PF130 should work with every gun. You need at least chrono to measure velocity. BUT, since you are quite new to reloading, I'd strongly advise AGAINST loading for other people!!! Think of legal terms, powder overcharge, squib, anything wrong - and YOU may get someone injured and get sued too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrell Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 My Shadow will take MG 124 JHP out to 1.120, but I get the best accuracy at 1.080 with 4.0 grs of T.G. for a PF of 133. Here in Louisiana, I've noticed that it takes about .2 less powder than most people use on this forum to get the same results. Could be Temp, humidity, and the fact that we are at sea level. MG 121 IFP's work great at 1.120 in the shadow, but I use 5 grs of N340 for that load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collateral Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Jon I saw your post, noticed short a OAL and fast powder and it got my attention. Quickload came back with a pressure north of 43000 PSI on one of them which is way beyond SAAMI max. I like Titegroup along with many others on the forum, but it is a fast powder and what seems like a very small change to OAL or a .1 grain change in powder has a huge effect on pressure therefore safety. I would pull them and start over. P.S. It was shocking to me how big of deal little changes in OAL affect pressure in 9MM when you try different combos in Quickload. Even the length of the same weight bullet can be pretty significant. What kv501 said in his post is on the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonF Posted January 27, 2011 Author Share Posted January 27, 2011 I went back to the drawing board to figure out a more optimal OAL for my CZ SP01 and came up with 1.110". I'm reloading mixed brass and measured about 50 cases of the most predominant headstamps and came up with a spread of .005" across the majority of the cases. I set the OAL such that it will still allow a case from the short end of the spectrum to still drop freely into the chamber and just barely clear the rifling. Actually .112 was the max that would still drop freely but I gave a small buffer of a few thousanths for the few cases that are yet shorter than my measured range low point. I figure if a freak round is sitting on or just barely engaging the rifling, its as minimized as possible. The OAL seems to be slightly shorter than the values a lot of you guys recommended, but this chamber seems slightly short. Does this sound like a good plan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordonm1 Posted January 27, 2011 Share Posted January 27, 2011 For a new guy I would suggest staying 20 thousandths of the lands or more. You will eventually get some variation that will contact the lands and pressure will go up. This is alot less likely if you seat a little deeper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonF Posted January 28, 2011 Author Share Posted January 28, 2011 So you're saying go to 1.090" OAL then? that's only .010" longer than my original 1.080", but much shorter than all the commonly cited values if nearly 1.125" i see thrown around. I know my chamber is dictating the ultimate value, but is it still pressure safe or is this bullet profile going to be problematic for me? I took some measurements of one of my loaded rounds at 1.110" and a factory Magtech 124gr FMJ to see the difference in case volume. I meaasures the OAL of both, pulled the bullets, measured bullet length and subtracted to get the position of the bullet base in the case. The position in question is not now deep its seated from the case mouth, rather the distance of the bullet base from the case head. If the cases are fairly uniform (and i know they're not), this should give an indication of difference in loaded case volume. My MG 124g JHP COAL - 1.110" MG 124g JHP bullet len - .578" = .532" bullet base position from case head Magtech 124g FMJ COAL - 1.150" Magtech 124g FMJ bullet len - .606" = .544" bullet base position from case head loaded with 6.7gr of unknown small ball powder mfr claimed velocity of 1109 fps calculated PF of 137.5 So we can see that the MAgtech factory FMJ has .012" additional internal space compared to my load. If i were able to add that value to my COAL, i'd be at the figure most here recommend but then i have the issue of engaging the rifling for sure. I also don't know the powder used but thier claimed velocity and PF would be slightly higher than my minimum loading of Titegrop that i'll be using. I've seen other posters here using the MG 124g JHP/4.2g Titegroup combo to produce somewhere in the neighborhood of 130-135 PF so i'm in the ballpark of this factory load. Considering the data, is there any useful comparison than can be made? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordonm1 Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 I suggested 20 thou off the lands based on my precision rifle reloading research. I've read the pressure chracteristics of the load start to change when you get closer than 20 thou. Meaning the pressure peaks at a different place in the barrel at a different, usually higher pressure. I was also suggesting this col assuming things will change when your gun gets fouled and pressure will probably go up also. Higher pressures after your testing may shoot differently and be harder on your brass. A definite jump to the lands on every shot is more likely to stay consistent like your testing. Definitely engauging the rifling every time is also consistent but generally not done on pistols as far as I know except in bullseye competition. Ten thou off may also stay consistent but 20 is more likely and safer given you work up a load from low charge weight to max. You are free to do what you wish. FYI I have been loading 4.3 tightgroup with MG 124g jhp but initial chrono work makes me think I will be able to drop to 4.2 with a safe pf cushion over 125. Its cold here now and my chrono reads high so I have alot of guestimating to do to predict what will happen in the summer. I am loading at 1.160 for my sig 226 and this also works in my sti spartan when it feeds. 1.160 is ten thou off my sig roughly and most accurate but I can't recommend this practice to another until I have more rounds down range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAFO Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 I'm using 124gr Zero FMJs instead of MG JHPs, but I'm also using TG and loading to ~1.161" OAL in my 226 (chamber is also around 1.17" max). I was getting 130PF from 4.2gr of TG, but I wanted a little more distance from the Minor floor. I bumped it to 4.4gr, which is giving me 135PF at the same OAL, but when shot from a sandbag the accuracy wasn't great (6" groups at 15 yds ). I'm going to recheck my crimp die to make sure I'm not overcrimping it, but I was also going to test some shorter OALs. Now that I know small OAL changes make fairly large differences, I'll be sure to make changes 0.01" at a time. I do have some MG 124gr HPs, has anyone seen better accuracy with HPs over FMJs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CeeZer Posted January 28, 2011 Share Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) HP bullets should have better accuracy over FMJ. Edited January 29, 2011 by CeeZer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonF Posted January 28, 2011 Author Share Posted January 28, 2011 Thanks Gordon, you post was very informative, i appreciate it and all the other help you guys are lending. I understand the safety margin you're discussing and it makes sense. I'm going to switch to a 4.0g TG charge and use the 1.090" OAL as a start point for this load. Despite the commonly adopted longer values seen here, my chamber wont support the long OAL's and the loading manuals do corroborate the slightly shorter OAL's for various bullets and powders so I think i'm ok, pressure-wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collateral Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) Jon The chrono will not tell the whole story. The last load you mentioned is still in +P territory at the 1.09 OAL. To get to normal pressures you will have to keep dropping the amount of powder to the point where velocity suffers. If you are forced to have a very short OAL you may want to invest in Quickload (trust me is is worth it)if you are committed to using fast powders like Tightgroup. Tightgroup seems to react more in a more linear fashion when you get to OAL's like 1.125 or greater. Loaded short TG is flat out unforgiving. At short OAL's with TG there is no working up, you go from ok, to hot to dangerous in one or two tenths of a grain. There is a big difference in how this powder acts at 1.09 vs 1.125 OAL. I am not trying to rain on your parade, I just saw trouble on the horizon and wanted to help you avoid it. Another thought would be a switch to a lighter, shorter bullet which would increase the amount of combustion space in the brass. This would help a little bit. By the way a slower powder like Power Pistol which is very accurate in a lot of 9mm pistols is much more forgiving with the OAL's you are at. One last thought is ask for suggestions on the Brian Enos Factory Pistol CZ section of the forum. The CZ shooters have a lot of experience in dealing with very short OAL's and could likely help. Good luck & be safe Edited January 31, 2011 by Collateral Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-ManBart Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Jon The chrono will not tell the whole story. The last load you mentioned is still in +P territory at the 1.09 OAL. How do you figure that? Hodgdon's data for the Sierra 125gr FMJ at 1.090" shows a starting load of 4.1gr and a max of 4.4gr. He's using a different bullet, so there will likely be some difference in the case volume used, but it shouldn't be radical enough to push a load that starts at only 4.0gr to be dangerous. Sierra lists the same max for the 125gr FMJ at 1.090", as well as their 125gr JHP at 1.075". Again, they are different bullets, but when you consider the shorter OAL of the Sierra JHP, and same max charge, it's hard to imagine such a huge difference to the MG 124gr JHP. R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collateral Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 G-Man Bart you have a valid point as I didn't have the load data that you had. Actual load data trumps a software algorithim. He mentioned being a begining reloader, it wouldn't take much bullet setback or variance in the measured charge before things got interesting with this powder so I advocated a conservative approach. On the other hand if a person can put out consistant reloads that follow published data then there is little to worry about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-ManBart Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 G-Man Bart you have a valid point as I didn't have the load data that you had. Actual load data trumps a software algorithim. He mentioned being a begining reloader, it wouldn't take much bullet setback or variance in the measured charge before things got interesting with this powder so I advocated a conservative approach. On the other hand if a person can put out consistant reloads that follow published data then there is little to worry about. Fair enough...just thought I was missing something! R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CeeZer Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 My Shadow will take MG 124 JHP out to 1.120, but I get the best accuracy at 1.080 with 4.0 grs of T.G. for a PF of 133. Here in Louisiana, I've noticed that it takes about .2 less powder than most people use on this forum to get the same results. Could be Temp, humidity, and the fact that we are at sea level. MG 121 IFP's work great at 1.120 in the shadow, but I use 5 grs of N340 for that load. Oh man, I can eat that Cajun food every day... there was one time I had at least every second item on Blue Dog's menu... coudn't get in my car for 15-20 minutes ... ha ha ha, and I'm only 175 lbs light Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now