RMR 147gr bullets in Glock gen5

[Charlestiller]

Just wanting to see if anybody had any experience or issues with loading the RMR 147gr bullets for a Glock gen5? According to the RMR website there is trouble with the C.O.L. nn these bullets with gen5 Glocks and CZ pistols. Before I order a bunch to try I thought I would check with the group and see if anybody was loading these for a gen5 Glock and if so, are there any issues, and what C.O.L. they are using? Thanks group!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Khaot1c]

They will probably need to be loaded shorter which will change the charge weight. Have the same issue loading for the PPQ. Work up from minimum and find your happy place.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

[nhyrum]

Yeah rmr bullets like to be loaded short due to nose shape

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Charlestiller]

So they can work fine in the gen5’s, but you just can’t rely on what the load data says for C.O.L.?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[iflyskyhigh]

Are you looking at the Match Winners (flat point) or round nose?

I assume Flat point.

I can’t speak to the coal in the newer pistols, but I can speak to their customer service. They have a money back love it or leave it policy.

I ordered some 135 match winners to try and couldn’t get them to shoot well despite multiple powders and coal’s. They took them back and gave me credit towards different bullets. Couldn’t have been easier.

So, maybe just try a few and see. They make excellent projectiles no matter which profile you end up choosing.

Their 115 gr mini match winners are one of my favorite bullets of all time. And I use their 115 JHP in my open gun. Fabulous billets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[K-Texas]

3 hours ago, nhyrum said:

Yeah rmr bullets like to be loaded short due to nose shape

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 

 

And Glock shortened their 9x19mm chambers starting with the Gen 5s. Except for a few brands like the Caniks and 1911s, short chambers are now the norm. CZ has probably been using short chambers longer than any other maker, S&W 3rd generation steel pistols and those that have come after. With HK & Walther you get short and stepped chambers.

 

If you were using the RMR 124 gr. In-House JHP I'd tell you that you could just use data from SIERRA and Lyman who both load the SIERRA 125 gr. JHP to an OACL of 1.075". The bullet shanks are very similar in length, and therefore, the bearing surface.

 

The easiest method for checking is to take a WIN FIRED case, just barely start the bullet into the case, then place the "dummy" in the chamber, then push lightly on the case rim until the case stops moving forward. For 147s with long shanks, that may or may not work. If it does, the barrel's throat/leade will seat the bullet at its Max Possible OACL. Shorten your handloads by .010" and you should be good-to-go. Something else that will help if the 147 appears to be getting seated completely is that the case rim will be about 1mm below the barrel's hood, and not beyond being flush with the hood, or the bullet is not being completely seated in the chamber-length test.

 

I specified WIN cases because I find them to be about the most uniform at around .011" thick within 1mm of the case-mouth. If you happen to be using Starline, or a few other domestic brands they're fine except that the new Style R-P are thicker than the old style.

Edited February 16, 2020 by K-Texas

[Charlestiller]

 
And Glock shortened their 9x19mm chambers starting with the Gen 5s. Except for a few brands like the Caniks and 1911s, short chambers are now the norm. CZ has probably been using short chambers longer than any other maker, S&W 3rd generation steel pistols and those that have come after. With HK & Walther you get short and stepped chambers.
 
If you were using the RMR 124 gr. In-House JHP I'd tell you that you could just use data from SIERRA and Lyman who both load the SIERRA 125 gr. JHP to an OACL of 1.075". The bullet shanks are very similar in length, and therefore, the bearing surface.
 
The easiest method for checking is to take a WIN FIRED case, just barely start the bullet into the case, then place the "dummy" in the chamber, then push lightly on the case rim until the case stops moving forward. For 147s with long shanks, that may or may not work. If it does, the barrel's throat/leade will seat the bullet at its Max Possible OACL. Shorten your handloads by .010" and you should be good-to-go. Something else that will help if the 147 appears to be getting seated completely is that the case rim will be about 1mm below the barrel's hood, and not beyond being flush with the hood, or the bullet is not being completely seated in the chamber-length test.
 
I specified WIN cases because I find them to be about the most uniform at around .011" thick within 1mm of the case-mouth. If you happen to be using Starline, or a few other domestic brands they're fine except that the new Style R-P are thicker than the old style.[emoji6]

That.....is a lot of information. Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[K-Texas]

1 minute ago, Charlestiller said:

 

 

That.....is a lot of information. Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

 

If you need more detail on finding the correct OACL for 9mm jacketed bullets, I did an article a few years back at: https://blog.westernpowders.com/

[jubi351]

Not a RMR bullet but in my G5 34 with a 160 RN I could load as long as 1.160 but settled on 1.150. I recently bought a G5 17 and am in the lands at 1.143. Now I'm loading to 1.130 so I don't have to make gun specific rounds. I heard early guns had short throats but can get any confirmation.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[4n2t0]

You don't have to change the load whatsoever, just shorten your rounds until they plunk and spin in the barrel.

[K-Texas]

13 hours ago, jubi351 said:

Not a RMR bullet but in my G5 34 with a 160 RN I could load as long as 1.160 but settled on 1.150. I recently bought a G5 17 and am in the lands at 1.143. Now I'm loading to 1.130 so I don't have to make gun specific rounds. I heard early guns had short throats but can get any confirmation.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

Maybe the G34 wasn't affected since it's made for competitive shooting? A 160 gr. RN should have a longer and more slender ogive, kinda like the universal 124 gr. NATO FMJ that still has to work in the shorter chambered pistols. If they want NATO certification, anyway. The SAAMI Max for OACL has not changed from 1.169", but if you look at their latest spec for chambers, it will show why the stubbier JHPs have to be loaded shorter, some truncated cone shaped bullets as well.

 

If the Max Possible OACL is 1.160" for the G34, but 1.143" for the G17, that sounds like the chamber is .017" shorter. Not terrible. With pistolmakers using short chambers while factory JHP loads are also shorter, it would seem that Glock didn't believe that there was any benefit for having chambers as long as they were, and decided to shorten the chambers to reduce the "jump" from the case into the rifling to enhance accuracy as one ingredient for their "Marksman" barrels, as they advertise them.
 

Edited February 17, 2020 by K-Texas

[chevrofreak]

13 hours ago, 4n2t0 said:

You don't have to change the load whatsoever, just shorten your rounds until they plunk and spin in the barrel.

Shortening a load can and will increase pressure and velocity. 

[jubi351]

Shortening a load can and will increase pressure and velocity. 

Picked up 20 fps going from 1.15 to 1.13, no other change.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[4n2t0]

6 hours ago, chevrofreak said:

Shortening a load can and will increase pressure and velocity. 

 

Of course but it's not worth mentioning because the difference is negligible.

Edited February 18, 2020 by 4n2t0

[iflyskyhigh]

 

Of course but it's not worth mentioning because the difference is negligible.

 

Agreed. Nothing is true all the time, but the difference really is negligible.

 

I had to shorten some 9 MM major rounds from 1.155” to 1.130” to get them to fit a magazine I wanted to try. My son was shortening the rounds on my 650 for me and the seating die came loose. Some of the rounds got shortened all the way to 1.090”.

 

The increase in velocity was less then 10 FPS tested across about 40 rounds. And that was with a round packed FULL of powder.

 

I was a little surprised it made so little difference.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Glockster1]

I don't have good luck with plated bullets in general for one reason.

 

The plating isn't consistent in thickness  when it's fresh electroplated. They literally force burnish the rough electroplating down with a micro peening process that utilizes millions of stainless steel balls and burnishing liquid agent and that forces the copper plating to be thick and thin over the entire surface area which contributes to an inconsistent overall projectile balance when firing, especially at longer distances.

Edited February 18, 2020 by Glockster1

[nhyrum]

I don't have good luck with plated bullets in general for one reason.
 
The plating isn't consistent in thickness  when it's fresh electroplated. They literally force burnish the rough electroplating down with a micro peening process that utilizes millions of stainless steel balls and burnishing liquid agent and that forces the copper plating to be thick and thin over the entire surface area which contributes to an inconsistent overall projectile balance when firing, especially at longer distances.

Rmr plated is totally different. I've used their 180 plated for hot 10mm with great results. I think the ones he's looking at are jacketed anyway

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Glockster1]

I posted only about electroplated bullets only. RMR swaged FMJ or JHP bullets are far more precision made, but far more expensive too. The only issues I've had with those from that company is that the diameter was either too small or too large for my slugged barrel major groove diameter.

[4n2t0]

1 hour ago, Glockster1 said:

I posted only about electroplated bullets only. RMR swaged FMJ or JHP bullets are far more precision made, but far more expensive too. The only issues I've had with those from that company is that the diameter was either too small or too large for my slugged barrel major groove diameter.

 

It seems like you have a lot of problems, maybe it isn't the bullets.

[nhyrum]

I posted only about electroplated bullets only. RMR swaged FMJ or JHP bullets are far more precision made, but far more expensive too. The only issues I've had with those from that company is that the diameter was either too small or too large for my slugged barrel major groove diameter.

Really? Far too expensive? Per thousand 125 jhp, they're cheaper than precision Delta which is one of the top bullets. And better made too

 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[iflyskyhigh]

I posted only about electroplated bullets only. RMR swaged FMJ or JHP bullets are far more precision made, but far more expensive too. The only issues I've had with those from that company is that the diameter was either too small or too large for my slugged barrel major groove diameter.

They really aren’t that much more expensive. If you buy in bulk, you’re talking maybe $2-3 per thousand. I also only order once or twice every couple years when the top manufacturers are having their big yearly sales. (Everglades, RMR, PD)

I understand that everyone has different personal definitions of cost, but to me that’s why I switched from coated/plated bullets to FMJ/JHP. So much cleaner and accurate for a small increase in price.

As an example, RMR 115 Mini-match winners are 4000/$300(.075/each). One of the most accurate rounds I’ve created in 9MM BTW.

115 RMR plated round nose are available in a max amount of 2000/$152 (.076/round)

RMR’s 115 JHP is billed as a multipurpose round and about $12/thousand more. But RMR’s 1115’s when purchased by the case are only about $6 more per thousand.

I don’t know much about coated but it looks like blue bullets (which I hear are the cats meow) case of 3900 115’s are $247 so you save about $4/thousand. Obviously I haven’t tried the blues but other coated I tried, while cleaner than straight lead, we still a little messy and smokey.

To each his own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[K-Texas]

On 2/17/2020 at 10:47 PM, chevrofreak said:

Shortening a load can and will increase pressure and velocity. 

 

And the best tool you have is your chrono and a chrono can not determine pressure. Quik-load may make pressure predictions, but it's not a tool I'd rely on.

[Alaskapopo]

On 2/16/2020 at 8:07 AM, Charlestiller said:

 

Just wanting to see if anybody had any experience or issues with loading the RMR 147gr bullets for a Glock gen5? According to the RMR website there is trouble with the C.O.L. nn these bullets with gen5 Glocks and CZ pistols. Before I order a bunch to try I thought I would check with the group and see if anybody was loading these for a gen5 Glock and if so, are there any issues, and what C.O.L. they are using? Thanks group!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I loaded some recently at  1.11 for my gen 5 barrel and I reduced the charge.  

147 grain RMR bullet seated short for gen 5 Glock 

 

1.11 OAL

6.2 grains 3N38 

Glock 17 gen 5 

Avg 1007

Spread 106

Standard deviation 40