Can I get a short run down on reloading science? Bullet weight, powder charge, case volume, burn rate, seating depth, and how they correlate

[Obvious]

Weird title I'm sure, but I have a background in engineering and love to understand how things work fundamentally to make better predictions/judgements. I reload .40S&W and want to try a 220 grain bullet in it. I'm currently loading out to 1.210" but can go further. With this caliber and bullet, there isn't any real load data I can find that's well documented. So, should I start with 230 gr 45 ACP data? 45 has a larger case volume, which i'm assuming means you can use more of a slower burning powder to not cause dramatic pressure spikes. Theres some 200 gr .40 data out there, however I only need this to be going 750 fps to make major. I currently have 2 lbs of titegroup, 1 lb of accurate no 2, 1lb of HP-38, and 1lb of e3 for shotgun. Essentially, what data would you start with to try to keep things safe? I currently have a batch of 50 of these loaded to 1.210" with 4.4 gr of accurate no 2, however I'm a bit hesitant to shoot them because I've been warned no 2 is a very fast burning powder. Is tite group a better idea for this load? 

[Old3GNR]

I haven't shot much .40 S & W for many years but I was a high "B" USPSA shooter and also the .40 was my 3-Gun pistol.  No way would I use a 220 gr bullet and definitely not use .45 data for a .40 reload.  

[Obvious]

1 minute ago, Old3GNR said:

I haven't shot much .40 S & W for many years but I was a high "B" USPSA shooter and also the .40 was my 3-Gun pistol.  No way would I use a 220 gr bullet and definitely not use .45 data for a .40 reload.  

Could you elaborate on your reasoning why? I understand 220 gr is meant for the 10mm that has more case volume, and more oomph behind it, but if I don't need it going at those speeds would it be as dangerous? 

[dannyd]

Never loaded for a 40 cal but used a lot of #2.  Looked up the data didn't find any jacketed bullet heavier than a 135 using it.   Number 2 is a very fast and very unforgiving powder keep that in mind. I would definitely rethink the load.

[Obvious]

16 minutes ago, dannyd said:

Never loaded for a 40 cal but used a lot of #2.  Looked up the data didn't find any jacketed bullet heavier than a 135 using it.   Number 2 is a very fast and very unforgiving powder keep that in mind. I would definitely rethink the load.

I have no problem rethinking the load! I'm just not exactly certain on how to go about gathering data for what I need. Take the 200 gr .40 data and scale it back a few tenths? Check against 230 gr 45? Still not certain which of my powders would be best suited for this, or if I should use a drastically slower powder like something meant for rifle? 

[ranger]

I shot USPSA Limited a long time. There was a short lived trend to use 200 or 220 grain projectiles in 40 S&W for making major in Limited. I think I still have some of the 200s and 220s under the bench. Do a search and bet you find the threads and loads. 

[CHA-LEE]

You don't see much 220gr in 40 S&W because its not an optimal weight vs velocity vs case volume setup. 220gr bullets are usually used in 10mm loads because there is enough case volume to safely push the bullet fast enough to generate reliable accuracy.

 

A common mistake I have seen people make when using super heavy bullets in 40 S&W is that they do shoot "softer" at major power factors. But that "Softer" felt recoil usually also comes with significant accuracy issues. This is simply because the bullets are not being pushed fast enough to stabilize in flight. This is especially true when the rifling twist rate in most barrels chambered in 40 S&W are optimized for 180gr bullets going SAAMI spec velocities (950fps - 1050fps).

 

Usually heavier bullet loads tend to perform better with faster burning powders, so looking at #2 and E3 is probably a good idea. But fast burning powders are also very prone to pressure spikes. The SAAMI spec maximum pressure for 40 S&W is 35,000 PSI. Its very easy to exceed that pressure using super fast powders behind heavy bullets.

 

In the end, you need to ask yourself this. Why go down the 220gr bullet rabbit hole in the first place? You really think that it hasn't been tried, failed and abandoned 798934982374237 times before you? There are several reasons why the vast majority of 40 S&W reloaders settle on the 180gr bullet weight. One major reason is that its much harder to have a KABOOOOM!!! event using 180's.

[GrumpyOne]

3 minutes ago, CHA-LEE said:

You don't see much 220gr in 40 S&W because its not an optimal weight vs velocity vs case volume setup. 220gr bullets are usually used in 10mm loads because there is enough case volume to safely push the bullet fast enough to generate reliable accuracy.

 

A common mistake I have seen people make when using super heavy bullets in 40 S&W is that they do shoot "softer" at major power factors. But that "Softer" felt recoil usually also comes with significant accuracy issues. This is simply because the bullets are not being pushed fast enough to stabilize in flight. This is especially true when the rifling twist rate in most barrels chambered in 40 S&W are optimized for 180gr bullets going SAAMI spec velocities (950fps - 1050fps).

 

Usually heavier bullet loads tend to perform better with faster burning powders, so looking at #2 and E3 is probably a good idea. But fast burning powders are also very prone to pressure spikes. The SAAMI spec maximum pressure for 40 S&W is 35,000 PSI. Its very easy to exceed that pressure using super fast powders behind heavy bullets.

 

In the end, you need to ask yourself this. Why go down the 220gr bullet rabbit hole in the first place? You really think that it hasn't been tried, failed and abandoned 798934982374237 times before you? There are several reasons why the vast majority of 40 S&W reloaders settle on the 180gr bullet weight. One major reason is that its much harder to have a KABOOOOM!!! event using 180's.

And, 180 bullets are cheaper to buy.

[Obvious]

1 minute ago, CHA-LEE said:

You don't see much 220gr in 40 S&W because its not an optimal weight vs velocity vs case volume setup. 220gr bullets are usually used in 10mm loads because there is enough case volume to safely push the bullet fast enough to generate reliable accuracy.

 

A common mistake I have seen people make when using super heavy bullets in 40 S&W is that they do shoot "softer" at major power factors. But that "Softer" felt recoil usually also comes with significant accuracy issues. This is simply because the bullets are not being pushed fast enough to stabilize in flight. This is especially true when the rifling twist rate in most barrels chambered in 40 S&W are optimized for 180gr bullets going SAAMI spec velocities (950fps - 1050fps).

 

Usually heavier bullet loads tend to perform better with faster burning powders, so looking at #2 and E3 is probably a good idea. But fast burning powders are also very prone to pressure spikes. The SAAMI spec maximum pressure for 40 S&W is 35,000 PSI. Its very easy to exceed that pressure using super fast powders behind heavy bullets.

 

In the end, you need to ask yourself this. Why go down the 220gr bullet rabbit hole in the first place? You really think that it hasn't been tried, failed and abandoned 798934982374237 times before you? There are several reasons why the vast majority of 40 S&W reloaders settle on the 180gr bullet weight. One major reason is that its much harder to have a KABOOOOM!!! event using 180's.

I appreciate your insight, the real truth is that when I was shooting factory ammo, 165's felt super snappy at first and when i tried 180's it felt much more tame. I've also experienced something similar in 9mm when going from 115 to 147 gr ammo. Following that thought process, I figured 220s would feel like nothing while shooting, but failed to do any serious research before hitting the buy button on a box of 500. If these need to be loaded super soft to be safe I'm fine with that and will use a different bullet to make major, but I'm still a relatively new reloader and am currently in my "curious" phase, excited to try combos that aren't offered commercially 

[Obvious]

Just now, GrumpyOne said:

And, 180 bullets are cheaper to buy.

My first batch of 180s was from berrys and was around $55 for 250 at BPS. My 220s were $67 shipped for 500, although the coated lead 180s might be much cheaper.

[GrumpyOne]

5 minutes ago, Obvious said:

My first batch of 180s was from berrys and was around $55 for 250 at BPS. My 220s were $67 shipped for 500, although the coated lead 180s might be much cheaper.

You are doing it wrong. Nothing wrong with those bullets, but there are much cheaper alternatives out there that are just as good.

 

I have shot many thousands of these and had absolutley ZERO issues with them.

 

https://missouribullet.com/details.php?prodId=390&category=5&secondary=11&keywords=

[Obvious]

Just now, GrumpyOne said:

You are doing it wrong. Nothing wrong with those bullets, but there are much cheaper alternatives out there that are just as good.

I bet! it was just what I could find locally at the time. I've heard wonderful thing about blue bullets and bayou, but haven't priced them out yet because I haven't ran out. 

[GrumpyOne]

2 minutes ago, Obvious said:

I bet! it was just what I could find locally at the time. I've heard wonderful thing about blue bullets and bayou, but haven't priced them out yet because I haven't ran out. 

I edited my post above to provide a link. 

[Obvious]

2 minutes ago, GrumpyOne said:

I edited my post above to provide a link. 

Thank you! I'm still experimenting with what I may/may not like so I'll probably give those bullets a try