Why no love for WAC?

[ChuckS]

8 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

I think 2016 was the one I looked at last and it was super heavy in wac, cfe.
And yes it's easy but you under estimate my level of laziness.

Asking the top guys may get you odd answers.
I asked one once and the answer was factory ammo, (not an off the shelf load but the factory made it for them) and it was super hot in their current gun but didnt seem to bother them.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 

2016 oops 2015...

Edited October 1, 2018 by ChuckS

[B_RAD]

3 hours ago, kneelingatlas said:

 

Jason, if you want my opinion Shooters' World Major Pistol (Lovex D037.1) under 115gr Montana Gold bullets is the ticket.  It's cheap, clean and you can load 10+ gr and not overflow the case, it's really similar to AA#7 in the picture below:

 

 

https://www.grafs.com/retail/catalog/product/productId/77203

I'm reading it's temp sensitive?

 

It gets hot where I live. 

[ChuckS]

The real 2016 results:

I remembered this one because "autocomp"  was a hands down winner over "auto comp"...

[kneelingatlas]

2 hours ago, Hi-Power Jack said:

 

Kneeling, you present a great case for the 3N38, but you are recommending Lovex.

 

1.  Any info on the pressure of Lovex vs 3N38 ?

2.  How is muzzle lift of the two, side by side ?

 

When I finish up my horde of WAC, I was going to give 3N38 a try - but, now, I'm trying

to determine if I should go with Lovex instead.

 

Thanks for the info.

 

Two negatives with 3N38:

-it's not very dense, so with 115s it fills the case almost to the brim, when loading short I've actually dented the bullets with the seating die craming them in

-it costs about double what Lovex does

 

Love is very fine, so it doesn't fill the case as much with 10gr as 3N38 does with 9gr.

 

The recoil impulse is very similar, I'm not sure if I could tell the difference in a blind test.

[kneelingatlas]

37 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

I'm reading it's temp sensitive?

 

It gets hot where I live. 

 

I can't provide any input here, I've yet to do any chrono testing with it.

[MikeBurgess]

The real 2016 results:
I remembered this one because "autocomp"  was a hands down winner over "auto comp"...

Thats the one I remembered just had the percentage way off in my head but still 31% for 1 powder is a lot of love.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Hi-Power Jack]

If you add Autocomp and Auto Comp, you get 24% which is the hands down winner

(Beats 3n38 at 23%).        

 

But, the real question is "what did the winners use"?     

[ChuckS]

18 minutes ago, Hi-Power Jack said:

If you add Autocomp and Auto Comp, you get 24% which is the hands down winner

(Beats 3n38 at 23%).        

 

But, the real question is "what did the winners use"?     

They used the best selection of whatever they were paid to use

[kneelingatlas]

1 hour ago, Hi-Power Jack said:

If you add Autocomp and Auto Comp, you get 24% which is the hands down winner

(Beats 3n38 at 23%).        

 

But, the real question is "what did the winners use"?     

 

The purpose of this thread is not answer the question "which powder will make me a national champion?" , but "kneelingatlas, why don't you love Autocomp?"

 

The answer to the first question is whichever powder you burn by the case in practice, and the answer to the second is because it's the fastest of the popular Open powders producing more pressure, more recoil impulse and less gas than slower alternatives.

 

I then through in the tip that 3N38 is one of those slower alternatives which makes major within the parameters of published load data in an effort to dispell the "9mm grenade" fearmongering.

[MikeBurgess]

1 hour ago, Hi-Power Jack said:

If you add Autocomp and Auto Comp, you get 24% which is the hands down winner

(Beats 3n38 at 23%).        

 

But, the real question is "what did the winners use"?     

you have to also add CFE to that as well for 31%     from all accounts including conversations with Hodgdon its the same powder only with the CFE additive.

[LilBunniFuFu]

You also need to remember that the equipment survey doesn't separate what powder by calibre. The majority of that data is used in 38. 

[B_RAD]

Bumping this up to ask what's a good load to start with for 124 gr that doesn't use WAC?

[MemphisMechanic]

49 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

Bumping this up to ask what's a good load to start with for 124 gr that doesn't use WAC?

 

4 grains of Titegroup at 1.125”

 

 

#SmartassProductionAnswers

 

Edited October 14, 2018 by MemphisMechanic

[B_RAD]

24 minutes ago, MemphisMechanic said:

 

4 grains of Titegroup at 1.125”

 

 

#SmartassProductionAnswers

 

[chevrofreak]

1 hour ago, B_RAD said:

Bumping this up to ask what's a good load to start with for 124 gr that doesn't use WAC?

7.8 of HS-6, 6.7 of Silhouette, 8.7 of 3n38, 9.5 of AA7. 

[Bkreutz]

I love WAC, it's all I use for 9 major.

[noylj]

I have never SEEN WAC on the shelf. There are at least 15 other powders I am more interested in any way.

Thank God for the market availability of alternatives.

[Hi-Power Jack]

2 hours ago, noylj said:

I have never SEEN WAC on the shelf. 

 

You'll never find a can labelled WAC ...

 

But, you will find a can labelled    WINCHESTER

                                                           Auto Comp.      

[9146gt]

Maybe this should be a separate thread.

Has anyone sent 9mm major  ammo in for pressure testing...at a company like HP White,and why not? Seems to me that is the only way to answer all the pressure issue questions.

 

Tom

[Hi-Power Jack]

Everyone knows that the pressures in most 9mm Major loads is very high

(Heck, even a 9mm +P+ load is probably very high pressure).

 

BUT, thousands of us have fired tens of thousands of rounds of 9mm Major

in the past dozen years, and Very Few problems considering the extent of

the issue.   Largely due to the pioneering efforts of some very brave souls

a decade ago, and strong pistol construction/ramped barrels.

 

Actually, a lot of the 9mm ammo from WWII used in P-38's was  almost 

as hot as a Major load today - ….   from what I've heard.     

[kneelingatlas]

1 hour ago, 9146gt said:

Maybe this should be a separate thread.

Has anyone sent 9mm major  ammo in for pressure testing...at a company like HP White,and why not? Seems to me that is the only way to answer all the pressure issue questions.

 

Tom

 

I'd be willing to get involved with this project Tom, do you have any contacts?

[kneelingatlas]

40 minutes ago, Hi-Power Jack said:

Everyone knows that the pressures in most 9mm Major loads is very high

(Heck, even a 9mm +P+ load is probably very high pressure).

 

The SAAMI pressure limit for the 9×19mm Parabellum is 35,001 psi, the SAAMI, pressure limit for the 9×19mm Parabellum +P is 38,500 psi, +P+ is a marketing term and means nothing as far as I know.

 

I would be interested in having some loads tested, but I suspect major loads with the slowest powders would fall in the mid to high 30,000s and loads with fast powders like WAC would be in the mid 40,000s.

[9146gt]

16 minutes ago, kneelingatlas said:

 

I'd be willing to get involved with this project Tom, do you have any contacts?

PM sent

[Gooldylocks]

 
The SAAMI pressure limit for the 9×19mm Parabellum is 35,001 psi, the SAAMI, pressure limit for the 9×19mm Parabellum +P is 38,500 psi, +P+ is a marketing term and means nothing as far as I know.
 
I would be interested in having some loads tested, but I suspect major loads with the slowest powders would fall in the mid to high 30,000s and loads with fast powders like WAC would be in the mid 40,000s.

+P+ are any pressures beyond SAAMI +P. Beyond +P it is "unregulated".

[Gooldylocks]

You also need to remember that the equipment survey doesn't separate what powder by calibre. The majority of that data is used in 38. 

It would be much more insightful that way. Because if they had separate columns for 38 and 9mm, I bet the 38 column would be primarily 3n38 and the 9mm column would be primarily WAC. 3n38 in 9mm is a pain to load. Small/dense powder for the win.