infinity Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 Hi Guys, i've read some thread regarding this but haven't really found what i was looking for. i started out with a Taurus Pt92 and my cousin loads for me. he was using VV N310 and a 115gr forgot what the powder load was. but my question is this, why isn't the N310 suitable for 9mm? second, what loads can u suggest would work for a taurus pt 92? i load 45(n310) and soon 40.(n320) any suggestions would be much appreciated. Thanks JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRG65 Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 first I'm not sure what you didn't find in the 310 discussions, comparing it to 320 or TG has been beaten pretty good. Most of the discussions boil down to one idea, for most people: pressure is too high with 310 at loads that make power factor second never shot a taurus product but there has been data posted on 320 loads with the 9 using a variety of bullet weights. I would start at 3.2 grs 320 with a 147 bullet. I use 3.3 in my 34 and 3.5 in my 17 for 900 fps 1.150 OAL, Zero JHP This range is pretty standard with the 147. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lneel Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 My son and I both shoot 9mm with: 147gr Berry's or Rainer RN 3.1gr VV N310 1.160 OAL .377 Crimp Very consistent 875fps from both his Gen1 Glock 17 factory barrel and my G34 with a KKM barrel. No high pressure signs...I am sure this is due to the long OAL and would not shorten it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinity Posted June 2, 2005 Author Share Posted June 2, 2005 Seth, Hi! the thing that i don't get is that why can't a fast burning powder be used for the 9mm...so far all i've read was fast bruning powders shouldn't used for the that cal. i'm not planning on reloading 9mm full time but somehow i'm looking for something that i can co-share a powder with, either a 45(n310) or a 40(320)....comments and suggestions would be much appreciated. Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRG65 Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 infinity 320 you can share 310 can be loaded but the pressure comes up very quickly and for most pf loads the pressure is over max or very very close. lneel FWIW, When I run your load through quickload, 1.160 OAL, 3.1 grs of 310, and a plated bullet (I used speer). I got 35600 psi for the pressure with a HP design and 37300 psi with a TMJ (RN) style. According to QL, both would be over max pressure, but from the last line of your post you realized you at least would be very close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Anderson Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 HTRN is right...titegroup is 95% as soft and much much safer. Also, I saw my scores rise and times drop after using a higher power factor as a test just yesterday. May be a trick of the day...but it's worth another look. SA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lneel Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 HTRN, Totally agree that even though no high pressure signs are shown (flat or blown primers) that this load is MAX. That is why I specifically stated no shorter OAL than 1.160 and specifcally a copper plated (i.e. soft) bullet. I would not even try this load with a FMJ or HP. Thanks for the QL review. Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Redneck, steve & lee have it right. Why NOT use 310? 1) Quickload tells us its way over STANDARD (SAAMI) industry pressure w/ 147s. 2) The primer appearance confirms this 3) V V's own data will not list it for any bullet over 90 grns and most important of all: while it may work for me w/ my careful reloading techniques, there are shooters out there who's techniques will allow a bullet set- back. Considering the high pressures NORMALLY generated, a set-back would probably be catastrophic. I would not dream of ever, EVER loading N-310 without BOTH a Lee brand U or Undersized die AND a Lee factory crimp die & I would NEVER go above 3.2 grns nor shorter than 1.140". If you are not using these exact Lee dies, forget about it. Do you think everyone will follow these safety guidelines? Unlikely. This is why I have, at times, tried to steer people towards TG instead. V V publishes N310 data for .45 ACP. Feel free to follow their book loads; it is an excellent powder. Regards, D.C. Johnson www.shootersparadise.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougCarden Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Ditto what everyone else has said. If you are going to use 310 in the 9mm you better know what you are doing and err on the side of Caution Having said that, I use VV310 in 9mm,40, and 45 exclusively. I spent last year learning how to load 9mm for steel and Bianchi.. I will load VV310 in 9x19 with jacketed bullets for steel loads, Titegroup for the Lead heads I practice with. Anything over 130-135PF with VV310 and pressure goes too high even for me(reformed Pin Load shooter... If you are new to reloading then VV320 and Titegroup should be your friends, FWIW. Have fun and remember experimentation is half the fun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoNsTeR Posted June 2, 2005 Share Posted June 2, 2005 Quickload is more voodoo than science. Primers tell you approximately nothing. Powder manufacturers are completely out of touch with IPSC shooters' needs (3N38 notwithstanding). N310 in 9mm minor is "ragged edge," but so is nearly everything we do. It's definitely not a no-brainier load, but I use it and recommend it to everyone who asks (which is a lot, these loads turn heads). Load long, start low, and be careful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revchuck Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 JJ - I think it might be a better idea to ask, WHY USE 310? Even the more adventureous among us feel that it's on the ragged edge. You can find more easily available powders that are cheaper and work better (i.e., Titegroup) without getting near the pressure limitations of that caliber. There's nothing magical about that powder - it's good, but there are better ones available for 9x19. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinity Posted June 3, 2005 Author Share Posted June 3, 2005 ok guys, what about this...i'm planning on using a 124GR Copper Coated..on a 3.5gr 310....comments please!! thanks in advance!! Regards, JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bufit323 Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 ok guys, what about this...i'm planning on using a 124GR Copper Coated..on a 3.5gr 310....comments please!! thanks in advance!!Regards, JJ <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That sounds awefully HOT to me. I do not think that 3.5 in ANY 9mm load is a good idea! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougCarden Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 3.7 VV310 with 115jhp 1.050 OAL= 132PF in my guns, and is safe, having shot over 5K of this. Works fine in the stock gun, but wont run the open steel gun reliably due to sharp recoil impulse. Please dont knock it until you try it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinity Posted June 3, 2005 Author Share Posted June 3, 2005 doug, what r ur guns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougCarden Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 STI frames/lightened slides with ramped supported barrels. One with comp, the other stock. The loads work well in my stock 5in XD and G34 as well..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bufit323 Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 3.7 VV310 with 115jhp 1.050 OAL= 132PF in my guns, and is safe, having shot over 5K of this. Works fine in the stock gun, but wont run the open steel gun reliably due to sharp recoil impulse. Please dont knock it until you try it... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I stand corrected (regarding your load) as for the other load, he may load as he wishes, just my opinion given to someone who asked for it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinity Posted June 3, 2005 Author Share Posted June 3, 2005 i think i'll just stand on the safe side and load my 9's with n320....it's cheaper to go that way than to blow up barrels and guns..... thanks for all the replies and comments and suggestions. i really appreciate it so much!! Regards, JJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bufit323 Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 i think i'll just stand on the safe side and load my 9's with n320....it's cheaper to go that way than to blow up barrels and guns..... thanks for all the replies and comments and suggestions. i really appreciate it so much!!Regards, JJ <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That's what I do, 3.2gr N320 over a 147 Cast @1.155, gets me about a 128 average PF, but I of course suggest you start lower and do your own testing to confirm data specific to your pistol. . . Good Luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harmon Posted June 5, 2005 Share Posted June 5, 2005 i have had good luck with Universal clays, Win 231 and titegroup with the berrys 147 plated round nose. all things being equal, i think the 231 loads kicked the least, and shot the most accurate. it was also the most dirty. Universal clays shot great, but seemed to be more "flippy" than other loads. Titegroup is cheap, accurate and somewhat clean..for a new shooter, titegroup is probably the answer(if you can get it where your at) BTW, i never saw any inprovement in scores with 125 power factor loads VS 145 power factor. My pet load shoots a 147 at 990 fps from my glock 34 and is as soft as i would want it to be. the point im trying to make is instead of going to the ends of the earth to try and find the softest minor 9 load, you could be practicing...for its practice, not foo-foo ammo thats going to win a match Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bufit323 Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 BTW, i never saw any inprovement in scores with 125 power factor loads VS 145 power factor.My pet load shoots a 147 at 990 fps from my glock 34 and is as soft as i would want it to be. the point im trying to make is instead of going to the ends of the earth to try and find the softest minor 9 load, you could be practicing...for its practice, not foo-foo ammo thats going to win a match <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree with you, to an extent, I know that if I give my gun to a GM with a 125 PF or a 155 PF (both minor) he can probably shoot either just as well. So this raises the question, why do noobs like me and others try to load just up to the required PF. Here is my logic, please correct me where I go lose my way : The way to get fast is to really be able to see everything: see the gun move, see it move in recoil, see it return, see it cycle, et cetera. As a beginner, I am fighting to see these things, and with a softer shooting gun, I feel like I have a better chance to focus on these occurences. While it may be faster for the studs to shoot a faster cycling gun, or a higher PF for their rythm, I feel like I am not there yet, and until I improve vastly I would be better off shooting a more controlable load. I would love some opinions on this noob theory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infinity Posted June 6, 2005 Author Share Posted June 6, 2005 just a follow up...i was able to get VV's loading data and it also shows that they don't recommend the N320 for the 40 with heads below 180gr. what do u guys think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 Here is my logic, please correct me where I go lose my way :The way to get fast is to really be able to see everything: see the gun move, see it move in recoil, see it return, see it cycle, et cetera. As a beginner, I am fighting to see these things, and with a softer shooting gun, I feel like I have a better chance to focus on these occurences. I would love some opinions on this noob theory <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Honestly, I think noob's in general can't tell the difference between a good 120 PF load and a good 140 PF load, especially not when the clock's running. Reasonably soft is good. Chasing the 'ultimate' load is a waste of time for at least 95% of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 just a follow up...i was able to get VV's loading data and it also shows that they don't recommend the N320 for the 40 with heads below 180gr. what do u guys think? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I think knowing what powder works safely and well in what application is their job. Sure it's possible to 'get away' with something outside the books, sometimes, but why bother? Travis shoots 180's and N320 and he's not giving anything up to anybody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.40AET Posted June 6, 2005 Share Posted June 6, 2005 I have been shooting 5.0g of N320 over a MG CMJ for 3 years and love it. I won't be beating Travis any time soon, but I feel that I have the best load for my tastes. If I were experimenting I'd try the 200g bullets to see if they are even softer. 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