rtp Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 With a reasonable stack of primers and projectiles, and powder availability being what it's been, my list of 'buy it if I find any' powders has expanded a bit, like probably many of us. I don't shoot Major, mainly shoot in outlaw/local competitions currently. I've been loading 4.9gr of WSF, 124gr MG JHP, 1.065" OAL, ~1100FPS, and have been happy with that load, but haven't seen WSF come into stock anywhere in a year or so now.. I jumped on some Silhouette and AutoComp, the Silhouette due to recalling a few people saying it's similar to WSF, although I'm seeing both Sil. and AC are right next to each other in Hodgdon's burn chart, and slower than WSF now.. Any advice out there on loading either of these for minor with MGs? I'd like to stick to ~130PF or slightly higher as I do plan to expand my competitions in the future, so not looking for powder puff loads (and expect either powder wouldn't be all that well suited to them, either). Will work up and chrono either way, but sometimes there seems to be a highly recommended load within published load charges that stands out for accuracy, etc.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kneelingatlas Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I'm guessing you're not shooting a compensated pistol? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I loaded some minor rounds with WAC just to see if I could get by without buying another powder. It was OK but nothing like some of the more accepted "good" minor powders. It seemed a little harsh and dirty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWFAN Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Have a buddy who uses Autocomp for minor 9mm. Works fine. Tried to use it in .45 ACP, but it's filthy with tons of unburnt powder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtp Posted January 7, 2014 Author Share Posted January 7, 2014 I'm guessing you're not shooting a compensated pistol? This is correct. Walther PPQ or Glock 19, unported. The irony isn't lost on me that both powders are likely great candidates for Open/Major, but - gotta use what you can get lately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtp Posted January 7, 2014 Author Share Posted January 7, 2014 I loaded some minor rounds with WAC just to see if I could get by without buying another powder. It was OK but nothing like some of the more accepted "good" minor powders. It seemed a little harsh and dirty. Thanks - I've only got 1# of AC coming, was more a 'it's here, get the most I can from Hazmat + shipping,' vs 12# of Silhouette. I guess I'll see what there is to see on both the WAC and Silhouette, and possibly be on the lookout for a local trade of 8# of the Silhouette as it's in 4# jugs, if I'm unhappy w/it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cecil Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I shoot 9mm MINOR in my STI Steel Masters & Edge... 5.6 gr AUTOCOMP -- 124 gr Montana Gold bullets -- with a COL of 1.16 -- 141 PF with my chrono.. spp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kneelingatlas Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I loaded some minor rounds with WAC just to see if I could get by without buying another powder. It was OK but nothing like some of the more accepted "good" minor powders. It seemed a little harsh and dirty. Thanks - I've only got 1# of AC coming, was more a 'it's here, get the most I can from Hazmat + shipping,' vs 12# of Silhouette. I guess I'll see what there is to see on both the WAC and Silhouette, and possibly be on the lookout for a local trade of 8# of the Silhouette as it's in 4# jugs, if I'm unhappy w/it. Trade it all to an Open shooter for some Clays, WST, Titegroup, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
szhttm Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 I have been using Ramshot Silouette for 9mm minor out of my Springfield Armory EMP and XDM 4.5 because that was the only powder I could find. I used the Load Data available on the Ramshot web site: www.ramshot.comGood Luck And Be Safe!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Therealkoop Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Ive tried 5.3g of autocomp at 1.155 before (124g). Dont remember the velocity offhand, but it was a very accurate load. Recoil felt heavier than my similar loads with WSF/Bullseye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtp Posted January 8, 2014 Author Share Posted January 8, 2014 Anyone happen to have a Hornady manual covering 124gr XTPs w/WAC? (as the closest to a 124gr MG JHP..) Looking at my annuals and mfgr online data, Lymans, Loadbooks USA 9mm, I'm coming up with a bit of range on load data for WAC mainly...think I'm good to go on the Silhouette. What I've got at the moment: Bullet: Powder: Min: Max: 125gr Sierra FMJ WAC 4.7 5.2 - Hornady/Loadbooks 125gr Sierra Sil 4.6 6.1 - Sierra/Loadbooks 124gr Horn XTP Sil 4.6 5.4 - Western #5 125gr HAP WAC 3.6 4.1 - Hodgdon online 125gr Sierra WAC 4.7 5.2 - Hodgdon online The last two are the most surprising, pretty big gaps from Hodgdon on the same weight projectile.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justsomeguy Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Silhouette is a pretty good powder in several calibers and one of my favorites. It has low flash, shoots pretty soft at the mid-range on up, and burns cooler than most other powders so it works well even with lead bullets producing little smoke. You will probably find that you will need something north of 135PF to light it up completely, but you will need that anyway to run a gun with stock springs. If you modified the springs and go lighter than that it will still shoot pretty well but leave a few gold flecks in the barrel. At the correct pressures Silhouette is the most consistent powder I have used, normally generating very good ES figures and single digit SD figures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtp Posted January 9, 2014 Author Share Posted January 9, 2014 Silhouette is a pretty good powder in several calibers and one of my favorites. It has low flash, shoots pretty soft at the mid-range on up, and burns cooler than most other powders so it works well even with lead bullets producing little smoke. You will probably find that you will need something north of 135PF to light it up completely, but you will need that anyway to run a gun with stock springs. If you modified the springs and go lighter than that it will still shoot pretty well but leave a few gold flecks in the barrel. At the correct pressures Silhouette is the most consistent powder I have used, normally generating very good ES figures and single digit SD figures. Thanks for that; the comment on PF vs burn on Silhouette is very helpful. That's about where I've been loading with WSF and I've been pretty happy with it (feel, accuracy, ..). Stock recoil and firing pin springs - my main goal is to get better with carry/home weapons, not build a race gun. If I ever find myself in the top 5% consistently locally, I may rethink that, but for now, no race parts or non-carry advised parts. Usual polish and minor trigger stuff on the Glock (polished - connector, stronger trigger spring) but nothing else, and nothing except sights needed on the PPQ. Can anyone shed any light on the conflicting data for the AutoComp? 125gr HAP WAC 3.6 4.1 - Hodgdon online 125gr Sierra WAC 4.7 5.2 - Hodgdon online and Hodgdon annual Looking at what I have on hand in load data, e.g. similar weight projectiles in .38 special, velocity, etc..I'm thinking the 4.7gr-5.2gr is likely the correct one, but can't figure why such a low range for the HAP, which is more or less an XTP, which is more or less similar data to MG JHPs.. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justsomeguy Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 That conflicting data may have to do with the length of the bearing surfaces on the two bullets and the resulting amount of effort and higher pressure generated by one being longer. It could also be the relative hardness of the jacketing adding to it, but I think that is less of a factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atbarr Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Can anyone shed any light on the conflicting data for the AutoComp? 125gr HAP WAC 3.6 4.1 - Hodgdon online 125gr Sierra WAC 4.7 5.2 - Hodgdon online and Hodgdon annual Are the OAL the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtp Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 Can anyone shed any light on the conflicting data for the AutoComp? 125gr HAP WAC 3.6 4.1 - Hodgdon online 125gr Sierra WAC 4.7 5.2 - Hodgdon online and Hodgdon annual Are the OAL the same? HAP 1.069" vs Sierra FMJ 1.090". I did note they claim bullet diameter of .356" for the HAP, vs .355" for the Sierra. RE: Bearing surfaces - the HAP probably is longer at the same weight being a hollow point type, but that sure is a significant charge difference in my book. The AC loads aren't urgent, as I've got some WSF left on hand, then the 12# of Silhouette to get through, so will keep poking around, but certainly would like to resolve 'which is the saner load' with such a difference.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Can anyone shed any light on the conflicting data for the AutoComp? 125gr HAP WAC 3.6 4.1 - Hodgdon online 125gr Sierra WAC 4.7 5.2 - Hodgdon online and Hodgdon annual Are the OAL the same? HAP 1.069" vs Sierra FMJ 1.090". I did note they claim bullet diameter of .356" for the HAP, vs .355" for the Sierra. RE: Bearing surfaces - the HAP probably is longer at the same weight being a hollow point type, but that sure is a significant charge difference in my book. The AC loads aren't urgent, as I've got some WSF left on hand, then the 12# of Silhouette to get through, so will keep poking around, but certainly would like to resolve 'which is the saner load' with such a difference.. I ended up in the 5.0 range with MG 124 CMJ's at about 1.13. I predict 5.+ to make a good minor cushion load. You probably won't need to load them as short as the book says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtp Posted January 11, 2014 Author Share Posted January 11, 2014 Can anyone shed any light on the conflicting data for the AutoComp? 125gr HAP WAC 3.6 4.1 - Hodgdon online 125gr Sierra WAC 4.7 5.2 - Hodgdon online and Hodgdon annual Are the OAL the same? HAP 1.069" vs Sierra FMJ 1.090". I did note they claim bullet diameter of .356" for the HAP, vs .355" for the Sierra. RE: Bearing surfaces - the HAP probably is longer at the same weight being a hollow point type, but that sure is a significant charge difference in my book. The AC loads aren't urgent, as I've got some WSF left on hand, then the 12# of Silhouette to get through, so will keep poking around, but certainly would like to resolve 'which is the saner load' with such a difference.. I ended up in the 5.0 range with MG 124 CMJ's at about 1.13. I predict 5.+ to make a good minor cushion load. You probably won't need to load them as short as the book says. Thanks Sarge, this is helpful. Will look a bit more, but I think the second line of load data (4.7-5.2) is likely to be 'the right one' in this case, moreso with your load mentioned above. If nothing else, I can load a very few from 4gr upwards, but I think I'm pretty confident now. Looking at loads I'm familiar with and what I've loaded them with WSF, versus other AC data, seems their charges are pretty similar, so that 3.x load just doesn't make sense. Will report back once I load and chrono some - maybe we'll all get lucky and powder availability will improve significantly, but if not, I'm sure someone else will wind up grabbing 'whatever they can' and may need some WAC 9mm minor info.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chanman Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Anyone using WAC with 115grn lead or plated rounds with any sucess in a,1911 9mm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWThomas Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 I've tried Power Pistol, Bullseye, SR-4756, and Silhouette. I fell in love with Sil and use it in both 9MM and 40. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justsomeguy Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 For SD type loadings I think you will find that, like Sarge mentioned, depending on your OAL and bullet type, you will be using 5.5 to a bit over 6grns of Silhouette with 124/125grn bullets. 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