?? For CZ Reloaders............

[HOGRIDER]

As this Shadow 2 is a completely new platform for me, I'm having to relearn my reloading practices to deal with the shorter OALs that are required.  

 

I've reviewed the USPSA 2020 Production Equipment Survey, and see that the top bullet weight being used (as reported) was 147g by Blue Bullets.  124g/125g was a close second.  And Titegroup was #1 used powder with N320 in second.  Not sure how truly representative these results are, but I do respect them.

 

What I have a plentiful supply of is N320 along with Zero 147g JHP bullets.  I've pretty much settled on using an OAL of 1.125"  So, at this point, I'm wondering if any reloaders here might have some ladder results using the same or similar components that I can refer to for my first ladder of starting loads?  My goal is a 133-135PF with accuracy my number one priority.

 

Thanks for your help!  

 

HR

[m700]

I just adjusted my loadfrom the load I used for my 320s.i dropped length to 1.095 which passes plunk

[boatdoc173]

I had issue s  getting ammo to load in a CZ A01SD due to the tight chamber. ended up with a OAL of 1.140" which seems to work in EVERY gun I own.

 

the S+B ammo I tried before my reloads  would  jam up every 4-5 rounds. I do not htin S+B used a tight enough crimp ad it  was the lightly crimped cases that were the issue--not the OAL as with my reloads

[rowdyb]

At a certain level nothing we tell you matters and it is entirely your components, your press, your barrel and your chronograph.

 

If starting from scratch with previously unused components and gun I

• set overall length off of what the barrel tells me, aka plunk and spin. this way my seating die is set.
• set crimp off bullet diameter and case wall thickness. this way my crimp die is set.
• going in 0.1 grain increments I make 20 rounds at my length and crimp from the previous sets. usually over a total of 4 to 5 steps, like 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and so on.
• I shoot these over the chrono and check all of that data and pick one charge weight.
• with all of that data I make 100 rounds of this ammo and shoot it for function and accuracy from 3 yards to 30 yards.
• if that all works out I write it all down in my load book, make notes of the settings on my press and go into production. if it doesn't work then  I start adjusting from step one and go forward.

Edited April 21, 2021 by rowdyb

[motosapiens]

1.125 is way too long for blue RN bullets in my shadow2. I prefer the 115gr RN for faster cycling and quicker return of the sights (and more bullets per $), and I load them to 1.08-ish.

[Squirrel45]

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

1.125 is way too long for blue RN bullets in my shadow2. I prefer the 115gr RN for faster cycling and quicker return of the sights (and more bullets per $), and I load them to 1.08-ish.

Im in this camp as well. I ran 145s\147's for a number of years but switched to 115s last year. Im really liking them now 

[Darrell]

5 hours ago, rowdyb said:

At a certain level nothing we tell you matters and it is entirely your components, your press, your barrel and your chronograph.

 

If starting from scratch with previously unused components and gun I

• set overall length off of what the barrel tells me, aka plunk and spin. this way my seating die is set.
• set crimp off bullet diameter and case wall thickness. this way my crimp die is set.
• going in 0.1 grain increments I make 20 rounds at my length and crimp from the previous sets. usually over a total of 4 to 5 steps, like 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and so on.
• I shoot these over the chrono and check all of that data and pick one charge weight.
• with all of that data I make 100 rounds of this ammo and shoot it for function and accuracy from 3 yards to 30 yards.
• if that all works out I write it all down in my load book, make notes of the settings on my press and go into production. if it doesn't work then  I start adjusting from step one and go forward.

I do almost the same. I have an OAL tester  I made with Hornady OAL tool, I back off .015 and start from there. I look at max charge and subtract 10% and start there in .2 gr. My crimp is set at .378-.379. Once I chrono and accuracy test with my ransom rest, I take the most accurate one and start decreasing my OAL by .010, load 10 each at that powder charge and see if standard deviation and accuracy improves. ( i.e. Precision Delta loads their 124 JHP at 1.100, I found that that bullet is more accurate at 1.085 and that's what I use. Go look at my spreadsheet, I have OAL for different bullets in my guns and loads for the Shadow, Accu-shadow, and TS Orange.

[HOGRIDER]

30 minutes ago, Darrell said:

I do almost the same. I have an OAL tester  I made with Hornady OAL tool, I back off .015 and start from there. I look at max charge and subtract 10% and start there in .2 gr. My crimp is set at .378-.379. Once I chrono and accuracy test with my ransom rest, I take the most accurate one and start decreasing my OAL by .010, load 10 each at that powder charge and see if standard deviation and accuracy improves. ( i.e. Precision Delta loads their 124 JHP at 1.100, I found that that bullet is more accurate at 1.085 and that's what I use. Go look at my spreadsheet, I have OAL for different bullets in my guns and loads for the Shadow, Accu-shadow, and TS Orange.

Darrell:

 

I have scoured your loadsheets many times, and just not coming up with a comparable combo unless Sport Pistol meters similar to N320........

 

And it does appear, your heavier JHP/FMJ/CMJ bullets are working well with Sport Pistol.  Unfortunately all I have to work with is N320 and the Zero 147JHP combo.  Even though I'm retired, it's a major endeavor to test at length since the range for chrono work and my friends Ransom Rest are in two different, far between, locations.

 

I do appreciate your feedback!

 

[GringoBandito]

24 minutes ago, HOGRIDER said:

Darrell:

 

I have scoured your loadsheets many times, and just not coming up with a comparable combo unless Sport Pistol meters similar to N320........

 

And it does appear, your heavier JHP/FMJ/CMJ bullets are working well with Sport Pistol.  Unfortunately all I have to work with is N320 and the Zero 147JHP combo.  Even though I'm retired, it's a major endeavor to test at length since the range for chrono work and my friends Ransom Rest are in two different, far between, locations.

 

I do appreciate your feedback!

 

 

I have a fair amount of n320 and 147 zero load data that was used for an sp01. If you send me a PM with your email address, I can send it to you.

 

To net the results, 3.5GR of n320 made 130PF loaded at 1.125. ES of 21, AVG velocity 889. I have load data from 3.1-3.5

 

 

[HOGRIDER]

5 minutes ago, GringoBandito said:

 

I have a fair amount of n320 and 147 zero load data that was used for an sp01. If you send me a PM with your email address, I can send it to you.

 

To net the results, 3.5GR of n320 made 130PF loaded at 1.125. ES of 21, AVG velocity 889. I have load data from 3.1-3.5

 

 

Awesome!

 

PM coming and THANKS for sharing your data!

 

[cnote]

plunk test for max oal is crucial, otherwise every bullet produced above it,  is a waste.

[4n2t0]

You shouldn't need anything moerw

On 4/21/2021 at 11:09 PM, GringoBandito said:

3.5GR of n320 made 130PF

 

There's all the information you need OP. Remember, the OAL's listed in data/manuals (or provided by other members) is useless, always determine your own max OAL. Also, playing with OAL to achieve accuracy in pistol is a waste of time unless you're trying to shoot the wings off a fly.

 

P.S. I don't find 0.1gr increments very effective, use 0.2gr-0.3gr if you actually want to see a noticeable difference.

Edited April 23, 2021 by 4n2t0
Incorrect decimal place

[George16]

3 minutes ago, 4n2t0 said:

You shouldn't need anything moerw

 

There's all the information you need OP. Remember, the OAL's listed in data/manuals (or provided by other members) is useless, always determine your own max OAL. Also, playing with OAL to achieve accuracy in pistol is a waste of time unless you're trying to shoot the wings off a fly.

 

P.S. I don't find 0.1gr increments very effective, use .02gr-.03gr if you actually want to see a noticeable difference.

Do you mean to say, 0.2-0.3 Gr because .02-.03 Gr is way less than .1 or .2-.3 Gr increments.

[HOGRIDER]

17 minutes ago, cnote said:

plunk test for max oal is crucial, otherwise every bullet produced above it,  is a waste.

 

https://forums.brianenos.com/topic/293961-trying-a-new-platform-in-production/?do=findComment&comment=3258633

 

I understand!  And since wasting hard to come by components is not my desire, I'm trying to get solid info from others that have used my combination of bullets & powder.

 

Thanks!

[motosapiens]

10 hours ago, HOGRIDER said:

Even though I'm retired, it's a major endeavor to test at length since the range for chrono work and my friends Ransom Rest are in two different, far between, locations.

 

 

You may be overthinking this whole operation. I'm not sure I see the point of a Ransom Rest when developing uspsa loads. I have been totally unable to discover any bullet/oal/powder combination that wasn't at least as accurate as I am, with the exception of certain guns just hating certain bullets (keyholing, plating disintegration).  I had to work up loads with 4 different bullets (different profiles, different weights, different mfrs) a few months ago to get rid of various free samples and prize-table pickups from the last couple years. Each one took me one trip to the range to chrono 5-10 rounds. some needed a minor adjustment after that, but I didn't bother to re-chrono.

 

Once I figure out the oal my guns need for a particular bullet profile, i compare it to book loads or my own previous data and adjust the starting load to try to get 130 pf. if i shorten the oal by .05, i reduce the charge by .2 gr or so. if the only data I can find is for jacketed but I'm shooting coated, I reduce another .3-.4 gr.  That's always been able to get me in the 120-140 pf range on the first try, and from there it's just a minor tweak to get where I want.

 

all my load data for 147's is coated or plated, but based on those numbers, I would start with around 3.5 gr of n320 at 1.125 for zero jacketed bullets and go chrono it. Of course my manual doesn't even list n320 as an option for 147's, so you need to be comfortable going off the reservation and using your own brainpower. Fortunately, n320 and zero are both popular and consistent components. If you must use a ransom rest to make yourself feel better, I would probably advise to wait until you get the pf you desire, and then double check it. It won't do you any good if the most accurate load from your ransom rest only makes 122pf.

Edited April 22, 2021 by motosapiens

[twodownzero]

17 hours ago, motosapiens said:

1.125 is way too long for blue RN bullets in my shadow2. I prefer the 115gr RN for faster cycling and quicker return of the sights (and more bullets per $), and I load them to 1.08-ish.

I would not ever load 9mm Luger that short.  I know CZs have short chambers and I actually have one on order.  I will be sending the barrel to Memphis Mechanic to get him to ream it.  1.080 is almost a hundred thousandths shorter than SAAMI max and that is absolutely ridiculous.

[motosapiens]

31 minutes ago, twodownzero said:

I would not ever load 9mm Luger that short.  I know CZs have short chambers and I actually have one on order.  I will be sending the barrel to Memphis Mechanic to get him to ream it.  1.080 is almost a hundred thousandths shorter than SAAMI max and that is absolutely ridiculous.

meh. it works fine. I actually went to 1.055 for my old xdm. it worked fine. I've had a number of guns with the same issue,j and it's easier for me to just load shorter than to pay someone to fix every barrel.

 

if you choose a different bullet profile, it may not be an issue.

Edited April 22, 2021 by motosapiens

[HOGRIDER]

37 minutes ago, twodownzero said:

I would not ever load 9mm Luger that short.  I know CZs have short chambers and I actually have one on order.  I will be sending the barrel to Memphis Mechanic to get him to ream it.  1.080 is almost a hundred thousandths shorter than SAAMI max and that is absolutely ridiculous.

tdz:

I've got several boxes of various 9mm factory ammo that show OALs averaging from 1.064" to 1.110".  So, I don't think loads in the 1.080" range would be that unusual.

 

 

[HOGRIDER]

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

all my load data for 147's is coated or plated, but based on those numbers, I would start with around 3.5 gr of n320 at 1.125 for zero jacketed bullets and go chrono it. Of course my manual doesn't even list n320 as an option for 147's, so you need to be comfortable going off the reservation and using your own brainpower. Fortunately, n320 and zero are both popular and consistent components. If you must use a ransom rest to make yourself feel better, I would probably advise to wait until you get the pf you desire, and then double check it. It won't do you any good if the most accurate load from your ransom rest only makes 122pf.

moto:

I agree with your assessment as I'm trying to get information from other shooters that will get me "close" to my desired PF.  And with components as hard to come by as they are right now, I definitely don't want to waste a bunch of primers, powder, and bullets getting where I want to be.

 

Yes, I think I'll end up around 3.5g-3.7g of N320 based on feedback I've received so far. VihtaVuori has published data using the Hornady 147g XTP type bullets which IMO, the Zero 147g JHP resembles very well.  The do publish with an OAL of 1.142" and I have used this length in several other platforms; just not experienced with using shorter the lengths required of the CZ.

 

https://www.vihtavuori.com/reloading-data/handgun-reloading/?cartridge=89 

 

At my age, I always finalize my pet loads for accuracy using a Ransom Rest if it's available.  That way, if I miss in local competition, then it's MY FAULT and not the ammo!

 

THANKS for your feedback!

 

 

[motosapiens]

17 minutes ago, HOGRIDER said:

At my age, I always finalize my pet loads for accuracy using a Ransom Rest if it's available.  That way, if I miss in local competition, then it's MY FAULT and not the ammo!

 

 

 

there aren't really any shots in USPSA that require more accuracy than I actually have freehand (2" or so group at 15-20 yards). So it's pretty much always my fault if I miss.

[CocoBolo]

38 minutes ago, twodownzero said:

I would not ever load 9mm Luger that short.  I know CZs have short chambers and I actually have one on order.  I will be sending the barrel to Memphis Mechanic to get him to ream it.  1.080 is almost a hundred thousandths shorter than SAAMI max and that is absolutely ridiculous.

I don't know that 1.080 is dangerous, I've shot 9 major in open over a decade, I've put those rounds thru my Shadow and it survived.  It is a tank.  One of my good friends ran a 75B for years and that was his OAL 1.080, he was using TiteGroup with 147gr coated.   The recommendation is to make sure that it isn't short for no reason, and to start low and work up paying attention to the primers, if they flatten out back it off.  

[HesedTech]

2 hours ago, twodownzero said:

I would not ever load 9mm Luger that short. 

As you have found out, many people load that short with very successful results. It isn’t dangerous or even close to being dangerous.  
 

Remember it all depends on the profile of the bullet and how it hits the lands of the rifling. 
 

Search for how precision rifle competitors load and and you will find the OAL is a big subject and very chamber dependent. 
 

BTW, I believe CZ has hardened their barrels these days and makes reaming the throat a bit harder. 

[HOGRIDER]

40 minutes ago, HesedTech said:

BTW, I believe CZ has hardened their barrels these days and makes reaming the throat a bit harder. 

I have read that in several posts.

 

Thanks for your feedback!

 

[twodownzero]

2 hours ago, CocoBolo said:

I don't know that 1.080 is dangerous, I've shot 9 major in open over a decade, I've put those rounds thru my Shadow and it survived.  It is a tank.  One of my good friends ran a 75B for years and that was his OAL 1.080, he was using TiteGroup with 147gr coated.   The recommendation is to make sure that it isn't short for no reason, and to start low and work up paying attention to the primers, if they flatten out back it off.  

I never said it was dangerous, I'm not sure where you got that idea.

I shoot a lot of 9mm pistols and they all use the same minor ammunition, and I'd want to keep it that way.

 

That said, it doesn't seem sensible to me for the chambers to be cut that short, so I wouldn't leave it that way.

 

If it was my only 9mm, maybe I wouldn't care.

[twodownzero]

3 hours ago, HOGRIDER said:

tdz:

I've got several boxes of various 9mm factory ammo that show OALs averaging from 1.064" to 1.110".  So, I don't think loads in the 1.080" range would be that unusual.

 

 

 

That's very dependent on bullet profile.  I don't buy factory ammunition anymore, but for some bullet profiles, that might be normal.  For round nose/truncated cone heavies like we're likely to shoot in USPSA, 1.080 is quite a bit shorter than what I've been loading for my other 9mm pistols, so rather than develop a new load for them, I'd simply modify the gun.

 

There are a lot of different ways to skin a cat, so this is just the one I propose.

 

Also, just because there is factory ammunition that short, it does not follow that the chamber should be that short.  Someone made mention of precision rifle.  My .308 has a chamber that is 2.930" or more with certain bullets, even though every book puts .308 at 2.800".  I think that chamber is a bit long and if I had a custom barrel fitted, I would likely have the chamber a bit shorter than that, but any factory ammo shot in that rifle would necessarily have .130" to jump to get to the lands, assuming a similar bullet profile to that which I'm already using.  Obviously that's not ideal, but it's also clear that the chamber was cut to allow for normal variations in factory ammunition, in both bullet weight and profile.  Cutting a 9mm Luger chamber such that ammuition has to be significantly shorter than SAAMI max with a common bullet profile does not seem like a sound decision to me.  I prefer my guns to have a chamber that will run all common bullet profiles at SAAMI max for that cartridge.

 

My STI Eagle (40 S&W) will chamber ammunition at 1.3", ammunition that is so long that it can't eject that cartridge.  Maybe that's a bit much but I don't worry about the bullet hitting the rifling right out of the magazine, either.

 

You're free to have a different opinion, but this is mine.