S2cazzo Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 In my SF Stock II Xtreme, I was able to plunk and spin a 124gr RN at 1.175" OAL. Needless to say, this gives me a lot of play room to come up with a nice round, but does it need a ream? Also, what length should I start at and go down, 1.165"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S2cazzo Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 Appreciate the info ARy. From your info, my gut says start at 1.16" and drop by 0.01". See what happens and what groupings look like. Tweak from there if needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissionaryMike Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 For those of you on the Beven ream team, what length are you guys running your 147 FP rounds at? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emjei Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 For those of you on the Beven ream team, what length are you guys running your 147 FP rounds at?Flat Nose Bayou 147gr. .... and I think I can go longer Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MemphisMechanic Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 31 minutes ago, MissionaryMike said: For those of you on the Beven ream team, what length are you guys running your 147 FP rounds at? That's going to vary widely. Every bullet profile is going to hit the rifling at a different length. I'm loading a 150gr SWC to 1.160" currently and the Stock III likes it just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MemphisMechanic Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 (edited) The only reason I ran that OAL was to see if the gun would feed it 100%. I haven't done any load development yet. That said, I'm going to have to disagree strongly to your assertion that you can predict the OAL which will be most accurate in my particular gun, using a bullet you've never shot. I have considerable experience developing a load for any number of different guns, and often even consecutive serial numbers liked different ammo. Who knows, however... if you're right, I'll let you know! Edited December 29, 2016 by MemphisMechanic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v1911 Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 Seeing as every other 9mm I own eats 1.150 147gr bullets, I'd probably just stick to that and call it good. For the accuracy needs of the games I play, chasing different OALs for each gun would be unnecessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MemphisMechanic Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 14 minutes ago, v1911 said: Seeing as every other 9mm I own eats 1.150 147gr bullets, I'd probably just stick to that and call it good. For the accuracy needs of the games I play, chasing different OALs for each gun would be unnecessary. Until you're shooting at a 30yd plate rack on the clock, this is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v1911 Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 If you're going to take the time with varying OALs, then could you do me a favor? Take with you, various loads and handguns and see just how much difference there actually is. I'm interested to see if there is any significant difference. This of course would be better suited for the 9/38 reloading subform. I'm sure I'm not the only one that would find this information valuable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MemphisMechanic Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, v1911 said: Take with you various loads and handguns and see just how much difference there actually is. I'm interested to see if there is any significant difference. I've already done that with each gun I've competed with: Glock 34 and M&P 9L. The Glock likes 1.135" with a BBI 135gr bullet, 1.150" and 1.115" weren't as accurate. 3-3.5" groups with those at 25y vs 5" or so. The M&P wouldn't shoot less than a 10" group with any heavy bullet - 135 or 147. It grouped 3.5" or so with 115gr factory. They're notorious for failing with heavy rounds. With an Apex hand-fitted barrel it shoots under 3" with everything I fed it. It shot 1.75" with the same 1.135" the Glock liked... so I quit right there and kept that load. (I'm not a very good group shooter. It takes half a dozen tries for me to shoot a 2-3" group with a gun rested on bags. I keep calling fliers due to operator error, and when that's 3 shots out of 5...) Edited December 30, 2016 by MemphisMechanic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissionaryMike Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 2 hours ago, ARy said: I've run OAL differences in a lf s3, 2 sf s2, 2 sf s3, 4 lf s2... they all showed the same result with what I posted above. Memphis has a point, but when it comes to varying OAL in tanfos... 1.12X runs best. I've done it with 115, 124, 135, 147, and 165 - in rn, fp, and jhp. Were all the barrels in these reamed? Do you think it's b/c of the polygonal rifling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissionaryMike Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 Wait, S3 don't have polygonal rifles barrels, right? Hmm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v1911 Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 Currently I only own 1911/2011s. So I think that may have something to do with the consistency between guns and being able to run the same loads through each of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MemphisMechanic Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 (edited) 8 hours ago, MissionaryMike said: Wait, S3 don't have polygonal rifles barrels, right? Hmm... The newer Stock III's have poly rifling. Mine does. Edited December 30, 2016 by MemphisMechanic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCTaylor Posted January 18, 2017 Author Share Posted January 18, 2017 Well it looks like all of Ary's posts have gone the way of the do do. Meh whatever. Still good info in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronArcher Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 So, I'm wondering if anyone had done anything resembling a serious accuracy test pre, and post-ream. I have heard some say that it will NOT affect accuracy, I have heard others say it will. Do we have any imperial evidence one way or the other? Reason I ask: I don't THINK I need mine reamed for the ammo I run, BUT, I have had failures to extract...but ONLY with CCI Blazer ammo. On any light primer sticker I have had, I don't see any rifling marks. Just wondering if this could be more detriment than helpful in MY case. I can drop my ammo in...tap in into the barrel, turn the barrel over and the ammo falls out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathanb Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 If this thing is more accurate before ream than I don't even know what to think. I'm astonished by how my accuracy has improved from glock 34 to the stock 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emjei Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Mine has no problem putting 2 Alphas at 25yrds with easeSent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MemphisMechanic Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 (edited) @emjei a sloppy-fitted Glock will do that much with ease. The primary reason I wanted to ream mine is because I like to load really fast powders (clays or N310 behind a 147 anyone?) and I like loading at lengths like 1.160 for the extra case volume. And a 147 or 150 SWC at 1.070" is REALLY being shoved down into the brass far enough to cause them to bulge. Just often enough to be annoying when gauging your ammo. I find that loading longer is much easier on the brass and the same well-used cases are far more likely to feed right. Edited January 23, 2017 by MemphisMechanic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegionShooter Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Sent an email out requesting lead time and price. We shall see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GringoBandito Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Glad I ran across this thread. Spoke to Bevin and it looks like he is waiting for a new reamer to be built. 4 weeks at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegionShooter Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Yeah it's gonna be awhile for the ream. In the meantime I loaded up some dummy rounds to check what OAL my...stock...Stock 2 likes. Survey says 1.11. 1.12 was about 8 out of 10 that would pass the plunk test. So I think I'll load up some 1.11 and chrono, then just run with the best recipe until the Bevin is ready to go with new equipment. I'm running N320 and Acme 124gr coated RN if anyone has a recipe to share. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Single Stack Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 Any word if Bevin is up and running again with his new reamer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnbu Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 Don't know about Bevin, but Joe at Patriot Defense is up and reaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gixxerjunky Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 I have a Shadow, P01 and a P09. I wonder how much and where to get them reamed to accept longer loads. Currently loading 147's at 1.100 without any issue though. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 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