Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Reloading 135 gr. RN (DG Bullets)


Slowgoing31
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hey folks, I’ve been a lurker for a long while but the time has come to post and ask a question. I’m sitting a bunch of DG Bullets, specifically, 135 gr. Round nose. I’ve been searching here and bunch of other forums for data that I can experiment with but with little luck. Most OAL I’ve seen state 1.155 to 1.150. My pistols have short chambers I guess since I cannot pass the cartridges when I do plunk tests until I hit less than 1.1310 or slightly shorter (1.1240) depending on the brass. 

 

My questions is, does anyone else here have experience loading cartridges using 135 gr. DG Bullets with a compact pistol such as G19 Gen5 and CZ P10C? I’m fairly new to reloading so I’m a little gun shy about too far from proven recipes. I have access to WSF and AAC#2 powders.

 

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never used 135gr bullets, but I do load a lot of 147s and that oal would be long for me. Using Brazos 147s I load to 1.095” oal, and with Blues I had load all the way down to 1.050” oal. Have you actually loaded any of these up yet or just loaded dummy rounds for the plunk test? At an oal of 1.13” you will be more than fine loading to the min load recommended in your loading manuals and from the powder manufacturers. I don’t use either of those powders so I can’t tell you what I personally have used.

I personally use Titegroup powder and at a min load I haven’t noticed much difference when changing the seating depth too much. For example, the deep seated blue bullet load has basically the same velocity as a SNS FP bullet loaded at 1.13. Between the different profile and oal, there is much less case capacity in the blue Bullets load, yet with the same powder charge I get the same velocities.

I would say load some up at a minimum charge using your books as a reference, and at which ever oal will safely and consistently plunk in the guns you will be using. Hope this makes sense


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback looking4reloadingdeals,

 

I have loaded a few dummy rounds - no primer, powder. I do have some new brass (Star Line) and some mixed (SIG, FC, Geco). Between the mixed brass, Geco was pretty inconsistent. The cartridges passed the plunk test anywhere from 1.1351 to 1.1280. SIGs sucked, they seem to have trouble accommodating the bullets and I cannot even use the cartridge gauge to test them so I've put them aside for now. The FC brass has measured from 1.1285 to 1.1240 to pass the plunk test. Taking my inexperience into account, I think I'll stick with new brass for now just for the sake of sanity and consistency. So far, the Star Line brass has been pretty consistent in required OAL to pass the plunk test at about 1.1250 - 1.1240.

 

I've so far, looked up loading data in the Lyman manual, Hornady Manual, Sierra, Hodgdon (not a fan of their redesigned loading data site), Western Powders and Bayou Bullets testing data a user shared on this forum. I think I'll start with a low 3.3 to 3.5 charge of AAC #2 and seat the bullet at 1.1250-ish. That's a bit low but it should at the very least be safe and I'll check the brass and spent primer for pressure signs. I found a user on this forum by the name of onebadeye (I think) that used AAC #2 at 3.3 grains with a 1.125 OAL to reach 125.9 pf. If that works, I think I'll be happy to start there.

 

If anyone else has any feedback or thoughts or personal experience, I welcome it. I never start anything without an open mind and willingness to learn. Thanks all.

Edited by Slowgoing31
added a thank you note
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback looking4reloadingdeals,
 
I have loaded a few dummy rounds - no primer, powder. I do have some new brass (Star Line) and some mixed (SIG, FC, Geco). Between the mixed brass, Geco was pretty inconsistent. The cartridges passed the plunk test anywhere from 1.1351 to 1.1280. SIGs sucked, they seem to have trouble accommodating the bullets and I cannot even use the cartridge gauge to test them so I've put them aside for now. The FC brass has measured from 1.1285 to 1.1240 to pass the plunk test. Taking my inexperience into account, I think I'll stick with new brass for now just for the sake of sanity and consistency. So far, the Star Line brass has been pretty consistent in required OAL to pass the plunk test at about 1.1250 - 1.1240.
 
I've so far, looked up loading data in the Lyman manual, Hornady Manual, Sierra, Hodgdon (not a fan of their redesigned loading data site), Western Powders and Bayou Bullets testing data a user shared on this forum. I think I'll start with a low 3.3 to 3.5 charge of AAC #2 and seat the bullet at 1.1250-ish. That's a bit low but it should at the very least be safe and I'll check the brass and spent primer for pressure signs. I found a user on this forum by the name of onebadeye (I think) that used AAC #2 at 3.3 grains with a 1.125 OAL to reach 125.9 pf. If that works, I think I'll be happy to start there.
 
If anyone else has any feedback or thoughts or personal experience, I welcome it. I never start anything without an open mind and willingness to learn. Thanks all.

When I first started loading I used a lot of gauges to test the finished rounds. This works well for traditionally sized .355” bullets but as soon as you start using over sized lead bullets it becomes a little harder. I still use the case gauges to set up the reloading dies for the first time and check the “headspace” of the resized cases, but finished rounds get checked in my tightest barrel to check for fit (I process brass and load in two different steps). You can do this because the gauges are undersized today make sure that the rounds will fit in all chambers, but in reality your personal fun is all that matters since that is what the round will be fired in.

So, if you start using only your barrel as a gauge you will see a lot more rounds “pass” and you’re not tossing as many rounds. At first I would test in both barrels and eventually you find which one is tighter and you can only use that one (fails in one barrel and passes the other). This may help you use more of the brass you think is bad. I haven’t used a lot of Geco brass, but have used some random pick ups without any major incident and I do remember having some problems with SIG brass, but again, nothing major. If you continue to have problems with your brass I would assume you’re not resizing the case all the way, and either not flaring enough or flaring too much.

Also with coated bullets you want to make sure you don’t over crimp. There should barely be a line going around the bullet after crimping, too much more and it can tear the coating causing leading. So make sure you pull a couple rounds to make sure there isn’t too much crimp.

Are you loading for shooting sports like uspsa? If so you want to load around 130PF to give yourself a little wiggle room when shooting a match. Say it’s a cold day or you’re shooting somewhere at a different altitude and you lose a couple FPS, then your ammo will no longer make PF and you’re shooting for no score now.

In the end I personally think that plated bullets are much easier to deal with and IV always had less problems with them. Other guys do not have the same problem and find coated bullets to be no problem to load at all. If you continue to have problems after reducing your oal my suggestion would be to grab some plated/FMJ bullets purely to get the hang of loading and build some confidence so you’re not constantly messing around with it. But once you lower your oal a little (so it always passes plunk) you should see a lot less problems. Good luck!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks again for the advice. I'm definitely aware of issues with overcrimping as I have been pressing dummy cartridges and adjusting the seating/crimping die (I'm using Lee 3 set dies). I've backed out the die to allow for the belling to flatten but that's it and it seems to be working fine. When I pulled, there was barely a faint line and no impression in the bullet after pulling them. I'm also using a Lyman 9mm gauge to check for headspace along with the Glock, CZ and HK barrels. I'm playing everything safe until I'm more comfortable about getting creative with my loads.

 

I've shot a few USPSA matches in the Production class last year. I missed the big classifier match back in July and I was hoping to do it this year but with the pandemic, chances are slim. My location and availability of ranges makes shooting sports a difficult hobby to freely enjoy.

 

I'll keep your feedback in mind. I've come up with a few ideas while reading your replies. To the garage!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3.7 AA2 with hand cast Hi-Tek coated 133 grain tc bullets gave me my first ever 4.5 SD.  I love Accurate, so consistent. The 3.7 grn load is just barely making minor in my Sig p320 x5 Legion, so I bumped it up to 3.9, we'll see how that does.  ( Already ladder tested, but I want to use a larger quantity and get a more thorough impression)  My COALs will be irrelevant, since I have to load the truncated cones a lot shorter. 

 

  I ran into that same thing, where there just isn't a lot of published load info for 135's. I used forum info cautiously and interpolated between published data for 125 and 147.

 

WSF is a pretty close second favourite for me, 3.4 grains under an SnS casting 147 is a sweet shooting round. 

 

DG seems to have pretty good prices, how do you like their bullets? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jubi351 said:

3.6 AA2 @ 1.130 with a Summers 135gr RN gave me 133PF out of a Gen5 34. Probably be right around 130 with the 19.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 

 

Based on your data, I’ll see if I can create a comparable load and hopefully test it out this weekend at the range. Thank you!

 

29 minutes ago, Lesliet said:

3.7 AA2 with hand cast Hi-Tek coated 133 grain tc bullets gave me my first ever 4.5 SD.  I love Accurate, so consistent. The 3.7 grn load is just barely making minor in my Sig p320 x5 Legion, so I bumped it up to 3.9, we'll see how that does.  ( Already ladder tested, but I want to use a larger quantity and get a more thorough impression)  My COALs will be irrelevant, since I have to load the truncated cones a lot shorter. 

 

  I ran into that same thing, where there just isn't a lot of published load info for 135's. I used forum info cautiously and interpolated between published data for 125 and 147.

 

WSF is a pretty close second favourite for me, 3.4 grains under an SnS casting 147 is a sweet shooting round. 

 

DG seems to have pretty good prices, how do you like their bullets? 

 

So far I like the look at feel of the DG Bullets. The bullets I checked out of the bag seem pretty consistent. I’ve noted nothing in the way of casting issues. Here are some specs for the 135 grain bullets:

 

Diameter at base: 0.3555

Height from Base to tip: 0.6230

Weight: 136.0, 135.7, 135.8 <- checked 3 bullets

I’m not entirely sure what’s acceptable in terms of weight of the casted and coated bullets.

 

I’ve also not had the chance to shoot any as of yet. I’m still in the process of figuring out a stable and favorite load. I’ll have to wait until the weekend to do so. That’s good however, since I want to spend the time between now and then to load a few up, label them, and have them ready to go. I’ll look into some of those 147 grain bullets as well. I may also use the 147 data’s max, cut out like 10% and use that as the starting load. I’ve read that somewhere in this forum...I’ll search for it before I go off trying to blow my barrel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do your best guess using data from different sources to calculate high, low, and target charge. Generally you can find a bullet similar to yours with your powder. If you cant find a powder charge its probably not suitable for the application.  There are only a few powders that are unsafe to reduce. Those are slow magnum powders, or some I havent heard of. 
You can always use data for a heavier bullet if you have to. 135 is kinda an oddball weight for 9mm.
Far as load development.. Honestly IMO that watch brass and primers for signs of pressure is a load of bunk. You're better off watching tea leaves and goat entrails. You will be WAY over before you ever see physical signs. Like a 70's oil pressure idiot light that comes on right before your engine locks up.  Fortunately most guns can contain over, doesnt mean they arnt still over Spec. Ive read some studies on this where actual pressure readings were taken and compared to primer signs,,,, Anyway off my soap box.

If you are going off the reservation of exact match publish data, you must have a decent chrono. Generally powder charge increases in the normal pressure range will give you linear increase in velocity.. IE every .2 grs, gives you 30fps,,,(not real numbers)   If your load ladder velocity plateaus, or spikes, pretty much at your max.  Thats assuming you have decent SD. 

 

Another thing to watch is your standard deviation. At light charges it will be high. As you increase charge they tend to get smaller for suitable for app components. Again big jump again as you work up is a sign you are at max.

Another tip,,, look at your manuals. If the book says a max charge is 5.5 grs for 1000 fps,, and you hit 1000 fps at 5.2 grs,, then 5.2 grs is max for your set of components. ( adjusted some for barrel length).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do your best guess using data from different sources to calculate high, low, and target charge. Generally you can find a bullet similar to yours with your powder. If you cant find a powder charge its probably not suitable for the application.  There are only a few powders that are unsafe to reduce. Those are slow magnum powders, or some I havent heard of. 
You can always use data for a heavier bullet if you have to. 135 is kinda an oddball weight for 9mm.
Far as load development.. Honestly IMO that watch brass and primers for signs of pressure is a load of bunk. You're better off watching tea leaves and goat entrails. You will be WAY over before you ever see physical signs. Like a 70's oil pressure idiot light that comes on right before your engine locks up.  Fortunately most guns can contain over, doesnt mean they arnt still over Spec. Ive read some studies on this where actual pressure readings were taken and compared to primer signs,,,, Anyway off my soap box.

If you are going off the reservation of exact match publish data, you must have a decent chrono. Generally powder charge increases in the normal pressure range will give you linear increase in velocity.. IE every .2 grs, gives you 30fps,,,(not real numbers)   If your load ladder velocity plateaus, or spikes, pretty much at your max.  Thats assuming you have decent SD. 
 
Another thing to watch is your standard deviation. At light charges it will be high. As you increase charge they tend to get smaller for suitable for app components. Again big jump again as you work up is a sign you are at max.

Another tip,,, look at your manuals. If the book says a max charge is 5.5 grs for 1000 fps,, and you hit 1000 fps at 5.2 grs,, then 5.2 grs is max for your set of components. ( adjusted some for barrel length).

 

If you’re not looking at primers or ejector marks on the brass what other “physical” signs are you looking for? Because those two are the only thing IV used in conjunction with my chrono


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, looking4reloadingdeals said:


If you’re not looking at primers or ejector marks on the brass what other “physical” signs are you looking for? Because those two are the only thing IV used in conjunction with my chrono


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Bah, sorry for the confusion. Besides using a borrowed chrono, that's it.

 

1 hour ago, Joe4d said:

Do your best guess using data from different sources to calculate high, low, and target charge. Generally you can find a bullet similar to yours with your powder. If you cant find a powder charge its probably not suitable for the application.  There are only a few powders that are unsafe to reduce. Those are slow magnum powders, or some I havent heard of. 
You can always use data for a heavier bullet if you have to. 135 is kinda an oddball weight for 9mm.
Far as load development.. Honestly IMO that watch brass and primers for signs of pressure is a load of bunk. You're better off watching tea leaves and goat entrails. You will be WAY over before you ever see physical signs. Like a 70's oil pressure idiot light that comes on right before your engine locks up.  Fortunately most guns can contain over, doesnt mean they arnt still over Spec. Ive read some studies on this where actual pressure readings were taken and compared to primer signs,,,, Anyway off my soap box.

If you are going off the reservation of exact match publish data, you must have a decent chrono. Generally powder charge increases in the normal pressure range will give you linear increase in velocity.. IE every .2 grs, gives you 30fps,,,(not real numbers)   If your load ladder velocity plateaus, or spikes, pretty much at your max.  Thats assuming you have decent SD. 

 

Another thing to watch is your standard deviation. At light charges it will be high. As you increase charge they tend to get smaller for suitable for app components. Again big jump again as you work up is a sign you are at max.

Another tip,,, look at your manuals. If the book says a max charge is 5.5 grs for 1000 fps,, and you hit 1000 fps at 5.2 grs,, then 5.2 grs is max for your set of components. ( adjusted some for barrel length).

 

 

Thanks for the heads up. I have read opinion pieces contradicting each other and I thought to myself - better safe than sorry - and taking a look at the case and spent primer is something I do anyway so it's not a big deal. I guess my big takeaway from this post is that I should really get someone reliable I can borrow a chorno from or just bite the bullet and buy one!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also looking for " how far does the brass eject", and how hard is the recoil.  I had some rounds in a ladder test with HS-6, using published data in a Lee manual.  Shot the lowest loading, and it was way up on velocity, and stung my hand a bit to shoot.  Didn't look at primers or cases, just figured that was a LOT hotter than it was supposed to be, so I disassembled the rest of them. If/when I mess with that powder again for that load, I'll start considerably lower.  My favorite loads typically deposit the brass in  a neat pile about a meter to my right. The chrono is critical gear, even if you just get a cheap one like the basic Caldwell. I kinda wish I'd gotten the bluetooth one, though, so I could have all my numbers recorded for me instead of scribbling them down between shots. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

loading short for a short throat is no problem, just maybe a slight powder change to meet your PF expectations

 

My Tanfo's love being under 1.100, so I keep them at 1.095, with zero issues on 147 RN.

 

135 RN shouldnt be an issue as well. Glock throats are LONG, as I have loaded for my 34, at 1.155. Can defiitely see the CZ liking them short though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 99mpower said:

loading short for a short throat is no problem, just maybe a slight powder change to meet your PF expectations

 

My Tanfo's love being under 1.100, so I keep them at 1.095, with zero issues on 147 RN.

 

135 RN shouldnt be an issue as well. Glock throats are LONG, as I have loaded for my 34, at 1.155. Can defiitely see the CZ liking them short though

 

My G19 is what's giving me a headache. I managed to play with the expander and seating die to a point where the cartridge finally passes the plunk test. Funny enough, the CZ P10C and HK VP9 have no problems with longer OAL cartridges.

 

8 hours ago, Lesliet said:

I'm also looking for " how far does the brass eject", and how hard is the recoil.  I had some rounds in a ladder test with HS-6, using published data in a Lee manual.  Shot the lowest loading, and it was way up on velocity, and stung my hand a bit to shoot.  Didn't look at primers or cases, just figured that was a LOT hotter than it was supposed to be, so I disassembled the rest of them. If/when I mess with that powder again for that load, I'll start considerably lower.  My favorite loads typically deposit the brass in  a neat pile about a meter to my right. The chrono is critical gear, even if you just get a cheap one like the basic Caldwell. I kinda wish I'd gotten the bluetooth one, though, so I could have all my numbers recorded for me instead of scribbling them down between shots. 

 

So obvious. Yes, I'll keep an eye on that. I'll make sure I shoot from bench rest position and take note of where the brass lands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Slowgoing31 said:

My G19 is what's giving me a headache. I managed to play with the expander and seating die to a point where the cartridge finally passes the plunk test. Funny enough, the CZ P10C and HK VP9 have no problems with longer OAL cartridges.

 

Your G19 is a Gen 5.  The Gen 5 have a short leade.  Have to load short, which is no big deal, or ream the throat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...