BrianKr Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 (edited) Anyone else playing around with that combo? (Bayou Bullets 160s and Power Pistol) I like the 147s that I load and have begun shooting in my M&P, but I figured I'd take it further to see just how much I can tame the 9mm. I did consider using 231 but I wanted a slower powder for the sake of safety so I bought some Power Pistol. Very preliminary results, as all I did was load for function. The first load was 3.8 grains and a COAL of 1.150. It gave a bit more energetic ejection than I get from other bullets with plenty of oomph. So I lowered the charge to 3.7gr* and that was more like the ejection I get from other lighter bulleted loads. As I wrote, very preliminary results. I stopped there for the day. I have yet to chrono' them or shoot for accuracy. I'm looking for approx' 800fps to make minor pf. 800fps is a pf of 128, 790fps is 126. I'm doing this to get rid of the snappy 9mm recoil and both of those loads were more of a push. I like the feel of them. I swapped to 147s and that helped, this is just more of what I like with the 147s. But I want to shoot a bunch of these before deciding anything. * Yeah, I know that's backwards, but I thought 3.8 grains would be a low enough starting point. It was a safe load, just not what I wanted. Edited March 3, 2016 by BrianKr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batmo Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 3.8 gr. of Power Pistol pushing a 147 gain lead bullet is the load I shoot competitively in my XDM 5.25. It makes a pf of 131.9. I started off with the recommended load of 4.1 gr. in the Lyman 4th addition manual and found it a bit HOT....994 fps and a pf 146.1. After testing loads from 3.5 gr to 3.9 gr. I've settled on the 3.8 gr of Power Pistol. All the loads shot very well....sub 1 inch 5 shot groups at 15 yards but the 3.5 gr load started to get dirty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianKr Posted March 3, 2016 Author Share Posted March 3, 2016 Thanks for the feedback Batmo. I found groups tighten with the 147s that I tested. That was one of the factors that prompted me to try the 160s. I actually intended to start below the load range and not have the gun cycle at all and work up, but instead it appears I just lucked onto the "proper" load range. I'm also thinking that the heavier bullet will knock over steel better than a light fast mover. Do you find that to be the case with the 147s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batmo Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I'm also thinking that the heavier bullet will knock over steel better than a light fast mover. Do you find that to be the case with the 147s? I'd like to think so...I haven't had any problems knocking over steel if and when I hit it. You know sometimes it's the shooter and not the bullet. I just didn't like the recoil or accuracy of the lighter bullet. Let us know how things work out with the 160's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thermobollocks Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I've not had promising results downloading with Power Pistol. People going out of their way to use 160s will generally also go for a much faster powder -- "safety" is making sure you work up your load, not making sure you use a slow-burning powder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianKr Posted March 3, 2016 Author Share Posted March 3, 2016 I've not had promising results downloading with Power Pistol. People going out of their way to use 160s will generally also go for a much faster powder -- "safety" is making sure you work up your load, not making sure you use a slow-burning powder. :-) Yeah, I got that. The data I had told me that my starting load was reduced. I just didn't reduce it enough so that I could work up from where I wanted to start. A few tenths less would have gotten me closer to where I wanted to start out. But small powder spaces, fast powder, and heavy bullets just make absolutely no sense to me. That seems like a pressure spike waiting to happen for the smallest of conditions and I think it's foolhardy. Remember bullet setback when using Bullseye and all of the blown up guns of what was it? 20, 30 years ago? Everyone blamed all sorts of things (detonation is the one theory that I remember best) when all it was was the powder space getting smaller from bullet setback (revolver) and when the fast powder ignited, the pressure spike blew it up. So when I move to a heavier bullet, in this case a very heavy bullet for the cartridge, I'll also move to a slower powder. Not having a pressure barrel I'd rather not guess about what the chamber pressure is but err on the side of safety with slower powder. As I already wrote, I thought I had a reduced load, but my data was meager. Clearly it wasn't a dangerous load, just more velocity than I wanted. I want a target/competition load; I'm not trying for max' energy. Yeah, I just checked and I should be able to safely load more powder, but I don't want to. I'm happy with ejection at this point. The action of the weight of the slide and the spring tell me that I'm pretty close to what I want. But I need more data so I'll put it across the chrono' to see what I actually have. I also need to check for accuracy. It would be nice to have the data of other folks doing this also, but it's no big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjfisher Posted March 6, 2016 Share Posted March 6, 2016 I use that combo in a S&W 929. 3.6 grains at 1.160 gets me an average of 820fps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianKr Posted March 6, 2016 Author Share Posted March 6, 2016 Excellent! Thanx for the feedback RJ. I hope to get an even lower velocity if my gun will still cycle. I suppose I can play with springs if it doesn't. Or I can just accept the velocity where it will cycle. BTW, I'm loading for a 5" M&P. One of the bennies of shooting minor is the lack of recoil. I want to push that just as far as I can. That makes up in small measure for the handicap in scoring that goes along with minor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianKr Posted March 10, 2016 Author Share Posted March 10, 2016 (edited) Right now I'm going to load 3.2 grains of Power Pistol and do a bunch of testing. That load gives me 800fps. I don't remember more of the data precisely, but all chrono'ed loads (15) were above the PF. 3.1 grains did NOT make PF. One potential "problem" is that the load is sooty. I'll play with COAL to see if I can fix it just by fiddling with powder space and w/o screwing up accuracy. There is sufficient accuracy for action pistol and possibly more accurate than I can shoot a striker fired handgun. The M&P is no 1911. :-) As far as recoil it's just a push and not at all snappy. A real powder puff load. Cycling was 100% and the brass was all in a small area to my right. If I can't get the load to be cleaner burning I'm thinking of switching to 231. But that's just a brain fart at this point. Edited March 10, 2016 by BrianKr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianKr Posted March 17, 2016 Author Share Posted March 17, 2016 (edited) Just an update for those who might be interested... With a proper two handed hold it's no problem whatsoever to stay right on target even during recoil with this load. There is virtually no barrel flip at all. I see where Black Bullets has a coated 160 and they will custom size them. Just another option. Edited March 17, 2016 by BrianKr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamiethesquid Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Hey Brian, I drop tested some of the xtreme 165's tonight and my CZ P-09 seemed to like them all the way out to a max OAL of about 1.190". Here on Benos, I have distilled a sweet spot of approx 1.150"ish with 2.8gr of Titegroup giving about 130 PF. I hand cycled the rounds at 1.190" down to 1.140" and they cycled fine so I think that my starting loads will be with 2.8 of TG at 1.170", 1.160", and 1.150" and then the same at 2.7gn of TG. I hope to chrono this Friday. But I will definitely function fire them. Talk soon. Jamie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sloboataz Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 (edited) Mr Thesquid, how long are those bullets. The couple of 147's I have are .465ish already. How deep are you seating them at .150? Edited March 23, 2016 by sloboataz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianKr Posted March 23, 2016 Author Share Posted March 23, 2016 I have some fudge factor on COAL also Jamie; at least as far as the magazine goes. I never did try different lengths with the BB 160s to see if they would feed into the chamber, but other loads and lengths make me think that the gun is not very sensitive to COAL. I think I mentioned that they might be a bit sooty. To correct it, before I add more powder I think I'll load them a bit shorter to let the powder get cozy with the neighbors and up the initial chamber pressure. You might not have any problems with burning with a faster powder. Please be sure to let me know how you like them. Do you have any plans for Sunday? It appears that it's going to be a decent day and I might be able to open my range. No promises as I don't know what's going on yet (honeydo list). Too, I have a lot of bottling and packaging to do. Trying to get ready for the warm weather so that I don't need to use summer for the business. But when it comes to shooting I've been known to just go shooting and do the work some other time. :-) 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