9mm loads for Blue Bullets

[CZlouie]

I just bought three 9mm sample packs from Blue Bullets to try in my CZ Shadow-2. They are the 125gr round nose, 135gr TC and 147 gr round nose. They are all .355 in diameter.  I have a couple of pounds of HP38 and a little Titegroup . According to Blue bullets I should use recipes based on lead bullets that is the same size. Does anyone have any recipes that I can use as a good starting point with the min and max loads.

[StuckinMS]

You should be fine using the charge weights listed in Hogdens manual.  I use CFE pistol powder and used their data for my starting point.   The Blue Bullets are faster through the barrel than any other bullet I have run including cast, plated, or other coated bullets.  

[George16]

 

4.1 Gr RN Blue 1.076-1.079	Velocity
	1076
	1071
	1067
	1076
	1064
	1070
PF	132
High	1076
Low	1064
Average	1070
ES	12
SD	4

 

These are my data for 124 Gr RN blue bullets with Winchester 231 for my shadow 2 and TSO.

[David.Hylton]

3.7 grains TG loaded at 1.120 long for about 130 PF out of a Glock 34 factory barrel.

[bjones6686]

If the Shadow 2 is like other CZ guns it might have a short chamber and require you to load the ammo shorter than normal. You can get on some powder manufacturers websites and find load data for lead bullets. Hodgdon list lead data on their website.

 

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol

Edited May 20, 2018 by bjones6686

[Smitty79]

I just loaded 2000 3.4gn HP38, 1.12 OAL Blue Bullets 147 FP.    Mixed brass Fed primers.   They run 138 in my Shadow.  I loaded hot so I’d also make power factor in a 4” gun. 

[Beef15]

135s run well over 3.3gr of ClayDot, 3.5gr of CleanShot. I'd probably start at 3.4 with Titegroup, never tried it.

147s the ol' standby of 3.2gr Titegroup does pretty good.

 

[floater]

135's over 3.4 titegroup at 1.125" works well for me in a Glock 17 and 19, if I remember right it was at 135 power factor in the 17 and 132 in the 19. Been testing Gallant 135 round nose .356" and at 1.135, 3.4 of titegroup today was 130 power factor in the G17, Blue bullets have always ran faster.

[mont1120]

With the 147 grn I use 3.0 of TG and with the same bullett I use 3.4 grn of WSF and both run at 130 PF out of my SP-01 Shadow.

 

700X works great with the 135 grn.

 

[Stymie12000]

I really like 4.2gr alliant sport pistol 125rn @ 1.120. Gives me about 1090fps out of my g17. Nice recoil response.  Not to harsh but stout enough to knock down steel. 

 

The sport pistol meters well and is clean. 

[Darrell]

11 hours ago, Stymie12000 said:

I really like 4.2gr alliant sport pistol 125rn @ 1.120. Gives me about 1090fps out of my g17. Nice recoil response.  Not to harsh but stout enough to knock down steel. 

 

The sport pistol meters well and is clean. 

I'm running 3.8 Alliant Sport Pistol with Bayou 125 RN @ 1.120 for 1029 fps in CZ Shadow and TS Orange for PF of 128-129. Not as accurate as my Tightgroup load though. I will have to bump it up and see.

[Stymie12000]

2 hours ago, Darrell said:

I'm running 3.8 Alliant Sport Pistol with Bayou 125 RN @ 1.120 for 1029 fps in CZ Shadow and TS Orange for PF of 128-129. Not as accurate as my Tightgroup load though. I will have to bump it up and see.

I found better accuracy around 4.1 and best @ 4.2. At lighter loads the accuracy wasn't there. Your barrel may be different, so you might have different results. Also this load is for gssf. So I have to run stock recoil spring and i like the 4.2 recoil. Seems to move the slide a little quicker. 

[olstyn]

Blue Bullets 125 gr TC @ 1.125" over 4.0 grains of N320 with a CCI 500 primer in Federal brass made 130 PF for me.  I'm finding that I get a slightly higher case gauge reject rate than I'd like at that OAL, but that nearly every reject passes if I shorten it up a bit, so I'm thinking of dropping it down to 1.120" in order to get a little bit more margin for error there, but otherwise I'm happy with the load.  My understanding is that Titegroup and N320 usually have very similar charge weights, so given that your gun's barrel is a bit longer than mine (I'm loading for a Walther P99AS, which is a 4" gun), you're probably looking at 3.8 or 3.9 grains of TG to make 130 or so PF with the 125 grain bullets.  Obviously start below that and work up, but I bet that's where you'll end up.

[malobukov]

On 5/29/2018 at 7:02 PM, Darrell said:

I'm running 3.8 Alliant Sport Pistol with Bayou 125 RN @ 1.120 for 1029 fps in CZ Shadow and TS Orange for PF of 128-129. Not as accurate as my Tightgroup load though. I will have to bump it up and see.

I'm using 4.0 grains of Alliant Sport Pistol with 125 grain round nose Blue Bullets at COAL 1.120 for PF of 130 out of Tanfoglio Stock 2.

[ender]

125grain blue bullet truncated cone.

 

3.6 Grains Titegroup

mixed brass

Federal Primers

shadow 2

12lb recoil spring

130 PF from multiple 10 round sample.

72 degrees Cloudy Day

29.9 barometric pressure

1.125 COL

.377 crimp

 

 

at 25 yards i was getting about a 3 inch group.

Edited June 11, 2018 by ender

[SteelCityShooter]

OK, another recipe here.  

 

Mixed brass

Blue Bullet 125 gr RN 

4.0 gr Titegroup

WSP primer

1.148" OAL

 

Velocity from a 5" M&P2.0 =1136 fps  PF = 142

Velocity from a 16.25" Ruger PC Carbine = 1244  PF = 155

 

[Force]

I just got in a 1200 rd box of the newer 125 gr blue bullet round nose. I’d been shooting up my stockpile of the older bluebullet 125gr round nose. The newer 125 gr seem to have a better coating but don’t have the step that the older bullets had. 

Nothing has changed on my Dillon 550b ,but the newer bullets loaded at 1.150 will not pass the plunk test in my LoneWolf barreled open G17. I’m using the same amount of bell and crimp as the older bluebullets and plated bullets, which chambered fine at 1.150! 

The newer bullets measure the same at .355. 

I tried seating to 1.120 and it’s getting closer to chambering. 1.120 seems kinda short. 

What the fak is going on with these newer bullets? Anyone have any ideas ?

 

[Jfitz427]

On 10/7/2018 at 7:59 PM, Force said:

I just got in a 1200 rd box of the newer 125 gr blue bullet round nose. I’d been shooting up my stockpile of the older bluebullet 125gr round nose. The newer 125 gr seem to have a better coating but don’t have the step that the older bullets had. 

Nothing has changed on my Dillon 550b ,but the newer bullets loaded at 1.150 will not pass the plunk test in my LoneWolf barreled open G17. I’m using the same amount of bell and crimp as the older bluebullets and plated bullets, which chambered fine at 1.150! 

The newer bullets measure the same at .355. 

I tried seating to 1.120 and it’s getting closer to chambering. 1.120 seems kinda short. 

What the fak is going on with these newer bullets? Anyone have any ideas ?

 

I’m loading those right now. Well not this minute but that’s my current stash. Also for an open Glock but with a s3f barrel, carver comp. I load them long for major, 1.15-1.165.  I can’t imagine why your having issues.  I’ve ran 1000s of these with great success. By far my favorite bullet.  The lot in currently loading is the new ones. I like that they don’t get my fingers as blue lol. But I haven’t noticed any difference in performance. 

 

Im actually having problems with the blue 180g 40 bullets not passing the plunk test in another gun. No issues with Berry’s plated 180g. It’s weird. I got 800 of them loaded up and half fail the plunk test. 

[Jfitz427]

One of my favorite loads, ridiculously light recoiling and still cycles a g34 with stock recoil spring. 

 

147g blue bullet  

2.9g titegroup 

1.145

 

Out of my g34 before the adding the comp it was like shooting a 22. Great for my wife too. She Didn’t like 9mm, but with this load it was less snappy by far then her factory 380 loads. Makes minor pf too. 

[Force]

7 hours ago, Jfitz427 said:

I’m loading those right now. Well not this minute but that’s my current stash. Also for an open Glock but with a s3f barrel, carver comp. I load them long for major, 1.15-1.165.  I can’t imagine why your having issues.  I’ve ran 1000s of these with great success. By far my favorite bullet.  The lot in currently loading is the new ones. I like that they don’t get my fingers as blue lol. But I haven’t noticed any difference in performance. 

 

Im actually having problems with the blue 180g 40 bullets not passing the plunk test in another gun. No issues with Berry’s plated 180g. It’s weird. I got 800 of them loaded up and half fail the plunk test. 

I emailed BluBullets and they said it could be my LW barrel. They run a bit tighter than other barrels. I’m also running a Carver comp.

They suggest using the 125gr Truncated bullets.The old BlueBullets I had been shooting measured .355 then stepped down before the ogive to .353.

The new bullets do pass the plunk test in a factory g17 barrel and in a LW 40-9 conversion barrel. In the photo you can see on the new bullet ( on the right) where it was hitting the lands.

old style 125gr rn on the left. Disregard the heavy crimp on the one on the right. I was seeing if more crimp would help. It doesn’t.

ordered some truncated to try. I guess I’ll use the 125 gr rn for steel with the factory barrel.

 

 

 

[tdp88]

Last week we ran some of my BB 147gr loaded to 1.15 with 3.2 gr of Titegroup out of a friends Shadow 2 without a problem. I think he typically loads 124 to a shorter OAL and wanted to see if the longer loads would work in the S2. If I remember right they didn’t run in his Shadow 1 last year. The 147 was a lot softer than the 124.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mont1120]

On 10/9/2018 at 4:31 AM, Force said:

I emailed BluBullets and they said it could be my LW barrel. They run a bit tighter than other barrels. I’m also running a Carver comp.

They suggest using the 125gr Truncated bullets.The old BlueBullets I had been shooting measured .355 then stepped down before the ogive to .353.

The new bullets do pass the plunk test in a factory g17 barrel and in a LW 40-9 conversion barrel. In the photo you can see on the new bullet ( on the right) where it was hitting the lands.

old style 125gr rn on the left. Disregard the heavy crimp on the one on the right. I was seeing if more crimp would help. It doesn’t.

ordered some truncated to try. I guess I’ll use the 125 gr rn for steel with the factory barrel.

 

 

 

Looking at the bullets side by side, the one at the right looks thicker near the nose of the bullets, thus the cause for them not seating like the older version did. I am running into several variable issues with different bullets of the same weight. My SP-01 Shadow is so picky I will be getting the bullet opened up to work with a better OAL length. I suspect you are having the same problem.

 

[Force]

1 hour ago, mont1120 said:

Looking at the bullets side by side, the one at the right looks thicker near the nose of the bullets, thus the cause for them not seating like the older version did. I am running into several variable issues with different bullets of the same weight. My SP-01 Shadow is so picky I will be getting the bullet opened up to work with a better OAL length. I suspect you are having the same problem

 

Has nothing to do with the nose of the bullet. It’s more in the ogive area and below. You can see the mark on the round on the right where I spun it in the chamber to see where it was hitting.

This particular LW 9mm barrel is tighter than my others. The BB 125 gr RN work in all my other factory and LW barrels at an OAL of 1.150 and longer.

The fix was to switch to the BB 125 gr Truncated bullets. I’m loading them to an OAL of 1.150 and they work perfectly in this LW barrel now.

[emjei]

On 5/28/2018 at 7:19 PM, floater said:

135's over 3.4 titegroup at 1.125" works well for me in a Glock 17 and 19, if I remember right it was at 135 power factor in the 17 and 132 in the 19. Been testing Gallant 135 round nose .356" and at 1.135, 3.4 of titegroup today was 130 power factor in the G17, Blue bullets have always ran faster.

Same load I use 

[IDescribe]

Guys, when the cartridge won't plunk and spin freely, 99% of the time, the bullet is loaded too long for that barrel.  It's pretty much that simple.  You need to load that bullet shorter until it plunks.

We should check the max OAL of every bullet with every barrel we plan to load it into, then load shorter than that -- .015 shorter is a common reduction.

If you are loading a bunch of cartridges TO some OAL, then finding "Hey, these don't plunk" -- then you're doing it backwards.  Determine your max OAL first.  When you order a new batch of bullets, do it again -- sometimes something at the manufacturer changes.

ALWAYS check max OAL for every bullet in every chamber -- it will prevent a lot of head scratching.