Mousefart Challenge

[Flexmoney]

Thanks guys. Interesting results.

[Bill Nesbitt]

I took the mousefart challenge.

We're only interested in the difference in how fast we get off the next aimed shot, right? Well, I decided to do a bunch of Bill drills. I recorded everything, but will only share my splits. You don't want to hear about my sloth-like draws.

My loads are more like rat farts instead of mouse farts. I load to power factor with a nice cushion. My 147 grain 9mm loads are loaded with Bullseye to a 133 power factor. I didn't have much factory ammo on hand but did have a small quantity of 115 jhp reloads that are also a 133 power factor. I also had 11 rounds of Blazer and 50 rounds of AMerc 115 fmj. Unknown power factors for the factory stuff.

I shot a total of 22 Bill drills with the various loads. The results: Yep, Flex is right. It doesn't make much difference. In fact the light bullets were a tiny bit faster, but I don't know if that was because I was warmed up from shooting the 147's first or not.

I was shooting my old Glock 17 with a Dawson fiber front, Heinie slantpro rear, 15 # recoil spring and 2 1/2 # trigger out of a Blade-Tech holster. I was shooting at an IDPA target and had minus zero on all strings except 2 or 3. My splits with the 147's averaged .221. My splits with the 115's averaged .214. The AMerc felt a little hotter and the splits were .2265. (edited to correct decimal place)

I guess Flex was right. It doesn't make any difference. I do find the heavy bullets to be more pleasant to shoot.

Bill Nesbitt

[Bill Nesbitt]

I've changed my mind twice since posting yesterday.

I realized I hadn't really answered Flex's question. He wanted to know about mousefart loads and I compared ratfart loads. So I got out my old chrono records and loaded some true 125 power factor mousefart loads and went back to the range. I used 147 fmj bullets and enough Bullseye powder to just make a 125 power factor. I have fired 50 Bill Drills over the 2 days. It helps that I am on vacation and I wanted to shoot anyway.

My splits were shorter. I thought; Aha, mousefart loads are the best.

Then I decided to do the math to see just how much better I was going to do by using less powder.

I used the 2004 IDPA Nationals match as an example. I would see just how much better someones score would be using mousefart loads. There were 108 splits in the match if no extra shots were fired. The average split for a bunch of Bill Drills was .2322 seconds for 115 fmj ball. It was .1986 seconds for the mousefart loads. Looks like a clear advantage doesn't it? The difference in the loads figures out to only 1.77 seconds over the whole match. That is certainly enough to win or lose the match but not the overwhelming difference I thought it would be.

So, for me the answer is; yes mousefart loads are better but not much. I do think the mousefart loads are more pleasant to shoot. With the 115's my gun was bouncing all over the place. There is more potential to drop points from using 115's in my opinion.

I think fast splits are overrated. You can drop too many points by shooting too fast.

I guess I will just continue to shoot my 133 PF loads. I ain't scared of no chrono.

Bill Nesbitt

[Flexmoney]

Bill, somehow I missed your last post. Thanks for running those numbers.

It is interesting that you didn't find the 1.77 seconds over the course of the match to be worth changing the load for (Mousefart loaders take note...Bill shoots to win).

OK...back on track.

It's proabably obvious that I am a bit biased. My thought was that people were spending waaay too much time trying to get as close to the bottom of the power factor floor as possible (in Minor). Often, they risk not having the gun run well by doing so.

I gotta teel ya...going in to this, I thought the mousefart loaders would be pulling rabbits out of their hats to justify their loads. I am suprised that we haven't seen that.

So far, three shooters have taken the challenge (reporting raw data). By my read, their testing showed that the results are too close to call.

Where are the rest of you mousefart loaders?!?!?

Squeak up!!!!

(Yeah...I'm trying to prod you along with a red-hot poker...show me some numbers!)

[Bill Nesbitt]

First, I just realized the decimal places were wrong in my first post. They have been edited.

Yes, I shoot to win. I will take any legal advantage but I won't cheat.

I had loaded up a few hundred of the mousefart loads for more testing. I had set up an IDPA stage and was running it over and over trying different techniques to find better ways to win. I was using the mousefart loads just because I had them. About halfway through the practice session I had a stovepipe - - - - - in a Glock!!! Whoa!! That never happened before. That would certainly wipe out the 1.77 second advantage I had gained. I realized if I was going to shoot these things in matches then I would have to respring my gun that has shot without malfunctions for thousands of rounds. Not worth it to me.

I realized years ago that a shooter can lose more points at Chrono than any other stage. I have found that there are too many variables to trust a low power factor load at any match. Little things like temperture, true bullet weight, etc can cause you to go minor or worse, go no score if you were already shooting minor. For years I have loaded to power factor plus five. I have never had a problem at Chrono. I will continue to load heavy bullets to ratfart velocities.

I'm Bill Nesbitt and I approve this message.

[Dalmas]

In Denmark we are limited to 9mm (.40 not legal) so I did this test this summer because its becoming hard to get our normal ammo.

My normal ammo is a 119 grain bullet that on average produce a PF of 145. I bought some 124gr S&B and MMS that barely made the min PF, and my HF went down 10-20%.

I shot a SVI full duster, bull barrel. And lesser power of the S&B and MMS did not fit my gun very well, sluggish operation and I had to "wait" for the gun to get back to battary.

[chp5]

No hard #'s, but I shot Production for a few months this year. I could not stand my 130 pf loads. It just felt sluggish and I had no timing.

I found myself loading hot 9mm just to like the feel. Gun was a Glock 34. Shooting minor loads just isn't much fun for me for some reason. Went back to LTD . . .

[Jake Di Vita]

The only reason I haven't recorded any hard data is because I lack a place to live fire practice at.

[driver8M3]

There were 108 splits in the match if no extra shots were fired. The average split for a bunch of Bill Drills was .2322 seconds for 115 fmj ball. It was .1986 seconds for the mousefart loads. Looks like a clear advantage doesn't it? The difference in the loads figures out to only 1.77 seconds over the whole match

how do you come up with 1.77 seconds? when i run your #s, i get 3.63 seconds (.2322-.1986= .0336 x 108 = 3.6288).

[Bill Nesbitt]

When I was in high school I considered becoming a math teacher. Good thing I work for the phone company isn't it? I was wrong one other time too.

After checking my math I got the same thing as you did, 3.6288 seconds over the match. I never did like 115 grain bullets in a 9mm. This convinces me that mousefart loads are better if you can pass the chrono test. And the reliability test. There Flex, what do you say about that???

Bill Nesbitt

[Ron Ankeny]

OK, I took the challenge too. I shot a whole bunch of drills, IDPA type stuff. Walking toward three targets, suprised delay start, move laterally. Backing out, delayed start, etc. Several Bill Drills, and a few El Presidente's. I didn't include the draw times in any comparisons, only the trigger time.

Ammo used was Wally World white box vs. 147 Zero over 3.1 of Tite Group. Oh man what a difference. Blazing speed and better points with the mouse fart loads as opposed to uncontrollable spraying all around the targets with the high potency loads.

Seriously, there was virtually no difference in the time and accuracy. We knew that before the question was asked. However, these old arthritic hands and elbows much prefer the impulse of the heavier bullet and that alone is enough reason to stick with the mouse fart loads. For safety at the chorno, I might bump them up to rat fart loads. FWIW, I have a chipmunk fart load that functions 100% reliably. It's a 125 Zero HP .38 Super (.356) over the top of 3.4 grains of TG. Doesn't even make minor but it's sure fun to hose with.

[Duane Thomas]

as those of you who have good grip know produciton guns don't really have sight "lift" they have sight "retraction"

Steve, could you expand on that a bit?

[Harmon]

B class USPSA, glock 34, uncle mike kydex holster.

winnie white box 115s on a bill drill first run, 2.33 seconds, six As

second run, 2.12 4 As, 1 C and 1 B.(silly head shot)

third run, 2.26 with 5 As and one C.

same gear, 3.2 grains of bullseye, berrys 147 plated bullets gives 133 pf/

bill drill times were:

2.17 6 A's gun feels slower...but softer.

2.06 with 5 A's and one C (really close to an A)

1.89 with three As(in the body) one charlie and one head alpha, one bravo...that was the run where i got on the gas...and it shows.

all and all i think the mouse fart 9mm load is good for about a 3-5 percent increase in score for me...plus it gives me something to do with spare time...

the load im currently using is a 125 grain master blaster bullet and accurate arms number seven, not real soft but its flat and makes 146 pf in the glock..the have about the same feel as winchester white box and they are more accurate.

right now im at find a load that works, and dont change...

[Duane Thomas]

The problem I see with the "challenge" is that there's so little difference between "mouse fart" 9mm reloads and factory stuff. I've always shot (pun intended) for power factor plus 5 for a nice cushion. For Minor that means 130 pf. When my 147-gr. reloads came in at 132 pf, I called that good enough. Thing is, a typical factory 9mm hardball load, 115-gr. at 1,150 fps, also gives a 132 pf. The two classics "types" of recoil for our sort of shooting are "fast and snappy" versus "slow and heavy." But with 9mm mf reloads versus factory ball, it's like "fast and light" versus "slow and light" - and you're really getting down into gnat splitting time on that choice!

[Sam]

I'm with Duane, a 9mm is simply a Mousefart cartridge! We're just trying to tell the difference in the level of gusto.

I can see a pretty good difference when downloading a cartridge like a .45, that has a fart like a pack-mule. I can surely go faster with my .45 if the wollop is less. But when I shoot light stuff in the 9mm, it just feels like it's batteries are low.

[Harmon]

glock 34, 9mm 5.32 inch barrel

winchester 115 grain FMJ...

average velocity(10 shots) 1268 fps.

average power factor..145.8

in a 23 oz glock 34, the recoil feels more harsh than my 40+ oz 45 shooting 170 pf ammo.

while the recoil of the 9mm isnt really bad, the mouse fart loads DO feel softer and do promote better shooting, i have found this especially true with female shooters and youngstersl...

now for us seasoned pistol shooters, i feel practice is a far more powerful match-winning tool than some magic load.

when the buzzer goes off, i really cant tell the difference between 147s and 115 remchester fmjs.. it all feels the same.

[Flexmoney]

harmongreer,

Thanks for posting your times. You are the first to post times/hits that might have some impact on the scores.

I'm a bit curious, I wonder if you would get the same results if you mixed the firing sequence up a bit. A mag of the soft stuff, then a mag of the regular, etc. ?

(Is everyong else having the Winchester 115's come in at 145pf? I haven't tested any in a while, but I thought they were closer to the low 130's in pf ?)

[Jake Di Vita]

In my case through my Beretta they are in the mid 130s.

I don't think switching between soft and regular would be very accurate since it would throw your timing WAY off.

[SRT Driver]

Flex,

White Box through my 34 is 139 PF. This box is about a year old.

[Flexmoney]

I don't think switching between soft and regular would be very accurate since it would throw your timing WAY off.

Are you thinking that timing and practice might be more important?

(Just looking for a way to keep the testing on even footing. I know that I warm-up a bit when shooting Bill Drills. And, the draw is half the drill...so breaking out the splits might be more useful data as well.)

[dv8]

No numbers here, sorry.

I've been shooting a 9mm CZ with 147 gr bullets over 3.2 gr N310 loads (135 PF) for a few months before switching to G35 shooting 180 gr bullets over 3.2 gr N310 loads ( 142 PF). My first impression when swithing to the G35 was that the front sight lifts faster and higher but it comes back more predictably in a straight line with no wobbling. Some of that can be attributed to G35 lighter weght than CZ.

Next thing I tried was another CZ chambered in 40 SW. Same minor loads gave me almost entirely flat shooting, BTW it was a rental gun with a stock recoil spring. Whatever front sight lift remains is in straight line and it is very quick. It was VERY good. It was so good that I immediately ordered the gun.

And finally, I've been shooting my CZ Standard IPSC gun for a couple weeks, and as you'd expect that meant 2 matches as well. I loaded 180 gr bullets over 4.7 gr TG to around 170 PF, and it was my first time shooting major PF in many months. First 100 rounds felt pretty intence, but then my hands adjusted, the grip tightened up a little and now it feels absolutely normal. The match scores in combined division version did not show anything unexpected either.

All this makes me agree with harmongreer that practice means a lot more than type of load I am using. Softer ammo is pleasant to shoot and it can result in higher HF, but not by much. Besides, so much depends on skills of a particular shooter - what one shooter will be able to use to his advantage, another shooter may not even notice, and some other shooter may not even need this kind of advantage...

Now, when I finally get my hands on that new CZ I ordered, I may change my mind, but something tells me my A card ain't coming any sooner because of it.

Vlad D

[Harmon]

flex, it appears the glock factory barrel in my 34 must be a fast one!

aluminum cased blazers run 1220 fps brass cased blazer ammo is a touch hotter(same powder charge, but it appears the case is thicker. thus reducing case capacity and increasing pressure) the brass cased rounds are about 1245 fps avg. Remmie 115 fmjs run right at 1190 fps and the winchesters have on two different chronographs shot at a touch over 1260 fps.

The hottest 9mm (non +p, or +p+) was WOLF.. in the middle of texas summer, it ran 1290 ish...i had another lot that was quite a bit slower.

another thing to mention was winchesters SXT 127 grian +P+ load...major power at 172 PF!!

so heres a run down on chrono results.

blazer 115 aluminum, 140pf

blazer 115 brass case, 143pf

winchester white box(WCC04 headstamp) 145pf

rem-umc 115s, 136pf

winchester 127 SXT+p+, 172 pf!

wolfie 9mm 115 fmj, 148pf.

I shot about 500 rounds of Sellier and Bellot 9mm, but never chronographed it..its pretty hot, loaded to 9mm NATO specs but wasnt all that accurate and the brass is a real pain to reprime as the primer pocket has NO radius on it..

I shot a match or two with those mousefart 9mms and i found the only thing they do different in a match than trusty ole winchesters is they knock the steel over more slowly.

right now im shooting 124s and 147s, they both shoot good and i can tell very little difference in the scores with either load. both are loaded to 140-145 pf and are ready for uncalibrated pepper poppers at club matches

honestly i dont see any real need(unless your training youngsters) to load 9mms down to the 125 pf.

to roughly quote our section coordinator on clays in a major 40,"If you expect a load to make that much of a difference in you scores, you either need to practice more, or this(USPSA) isnt the sport for you."

After this sundays match, ill play around with some store bought 9mms, my 124 grain handloads(master blaster bullets actually 128grn) and my 147s..

ill report back...

[Ron Ankeny]

honestly i dont see any real need(unless your training youngsters) to load 9mms down to the 125 pf.

and

If you expect a load to make that much of a difference in your scores, you either need to practice more, or this(USPSA) isnt the sport for you.

I wouldn't "need" a 130 pf load but I want a 130 pf load. These worn out joints like mousefart loads. As for the second remark, I know it is out of context, etc., but that sure seems judgemental and counter productive. Maybe I am just sensitive because I shoot weenie loads oout of a Production gun when I am not hosing with a foo-foo gun.

[Flexmoney]

Ron, the question here is why you want a low pf load?

It sounds like you are after the feel. Which is cool. I'm just tryuing to find out if there is an actual difference in scores with the light loads. While I do come into this with an opinion (I think many shooters waste too much time worrying about their load), I want to see as much raw data as possible...to prove, or disprove my belief.

If a load was just plain uncomfortable for a shooter, I would think that would be good reason to seek out a custom load that was easy on the bones.

[Ron Ankeny]

Flex:

Yeah, I want the light load just cause I am a wimp. Same reason I dumped the shorty open blaster for a boat anchor.

Visually, I actually prefer a lighter bullet for a snappier load. In the world of feel or kinesthetics I prefer the heavier bullet for that push feeling.

Here's some data for you. When I got my CZ I wasn't even going to bother loading because I can buy Winchester White Box in bulk so cheap. I shot a 4 classifier special with 115 Winchester and my scores were, 30% (ooops), 87%, 87%, and 90%. I then went to reloading trying various loads like 125 Zero with Clays, 125's with Titegroup, 147's with TG, and 147's with Clays. My mouse fart classifiers with various loadings are 85%, 68%, 86%, and 100%. Obviously there is no difference in match performance. That what you are looking for?