Who shoots the lightest 9mm load possible

[bufit323]

When I first got serious about shooting production, I tried a bunch of different loads in my gun. I found that the lightest load that I could achieve that made power and was still very accurate was a Lasercast 147 grain bullet over N320 (N310 was lighter but not as consistent or accurate).

Lasercast lead was nearly as expensive as jacketed, so I decided to try some other cast bullets to save on money. As a rule none of them were hard enough to handle this fast burning powder (bad tumbling).

I stuck with the lasercast for a while but quickly got tired of cleaning the lead out of my gun; while lasercast was hard enough to handle the hot powder, it still leaded to heck.

Since there was no cost exchange at the time, I went to Precision Delta 147 gr Jacketed. I had to add a few tenths more powder resulting in a slightly increased felt recoil response. I have now shot that load for about 10,000 rounds with no complaints.

I am getting ready to purchase more supplies and have begun to ask myself if the lightest load is necessarily the best. I have often heard some say that they preffereed a snappier gun. I have decided to do some tests for two reasons. First, I am not sure that softer is better, second, I am noticing that I can save $10 per thousand if I go to 124 grain bullets. While I hate to base too many decisions on dollars, I can save at least $100 on my next order of 10,000 rounds.

I have ordered a couple hundred 124s from hornady (some JH some FMJ) and will run some tests. Mostly these will be with N320 since I still have about 4 lbs left.

If you don't mind, shower down with some opinions.

[scooterj]

Jim, if you come to the classifier match in Garyville in two weeks, I'll give you some of the 115gr Ranier jhp loads to try. They are loaded with IMR 7625. I've got a few thousand bullets I can let you have for a steal. Don't think I'll be shooting Production for a while and got about 5,000 loaded if do decide to bring the old Glock out again.

[Chris Keen]

Jim,

Everything you said in your post, is exactly what I've been pondering in my head lately. I shot 147 grain bullets & N-320 powder in Production for almost all of 2006, and even though I am not shooting Prod. right now, I will be later this year at Nationals. And I have been thinking along the same lines as you.

In fact I am shooting Open right now, and I have been wondering if I can get similar cycle rates in Production by going to lighter bullets. Maybe 124's with the same powder.

Let us know how your tests turn out, and I will check back often.

[revchuck]

See if Gary Thibodaux can size you a box of his 147s or 150s to .357". Yours is a relatively low pressure load, and hard cast bullets lead badly with low pressure unless they're slightly oversize. My .357 Mag hard cast loads (158s at ~1100 fps from a 4" barrel) don't lead, but I have to use .358s in my .38 Specials (or swaged .357" diameter bullets) or I get to scrub my barrel.

Trying a slower powder (I use 3.7 grains of Unique in 9x19 with 147s) might help, too.

[bufit323]

Scott,

Sorry to hear that the Glock is getting put away for a while, its always nice to have a bunch of prodution shooters to compete with. I will see you at Nicks in two weeks and I will certainly take you up on a few of those reloads; if they work out, I will even take some of your bullets!!

Chris,

it is nice to know that others are going through the same thought process. I will keep you posted on any conclusions that I am able to reach (subjective or otherwise).

Chuck,

i am not sure that this load is all that low pressure, my estimation puts it pretty high (because of the high burn rate). A greater diameter bullet may help (if my problems were caused by "blow-by"). I certainly agree that a slower burning powder would work with lead bullets, but at the time, that was defeating the purpose of reducing the recoil. I experimented using some local lead bullets (much softer than Lasercast) with HS-6 and wound up with a very accurate round that was fairly cheap to produce. It still leaded my gun and recoiled a good bit more than I wanted (at the time) though. For now, I am still thinking jacketed, just less hassle. I will chat with Gary about this next time I see him though.

More thoughts are welcomed . . . please keep it coming!!

[bufit323]

Bumped up for some post vacation weekend comment

[Loves2Shoot]

Why would you want the lightest possible load? 147 Zero's and VV N320 is pretty soft and accurate.

In Production I would rather have something that takes down the steel than something that is ubber soft. Besides, if they are too soft, there isn't enough seperation between shots and they just blend together.

[bufit323]

Why would you want the lightest possible load? 147 Zero's and VV N320 is pretty soft and accurate.

I think you missed my intent. That is the load that I shoot now and I am thinking of changing to something snappier, not something lighter; I am wondering how many people have decided that the lightest load is not the best for them. The initial post was a bit long, but I think it's clear.

[Loves2Shoot]

I was trying to say that 147's and N320 is about as soft as is gets, but I prefer the Zero 124's and N320 loaded to 135 PF.

[Dick Ozinga]

Why would you want the lightest possible load? 147 Zero's and VV N320 is pretty soft and accurate.

I think you missed my intent. That is the load that I shoot now and I am thinking of changing to something snappier, not something lighter; I am wondering how many people have decided that the lightest load is not the best for them. The initial post was a bit long, but I think it's clear.

My personal favorite at the moment is a Hornady 125 grs FP ENC with N340 (5,4 grs) it gives approx 325m/s (1060 fps) from my P7 with 4" barrel, which is about 150 fps fastar and snappier than the magtech 124 grs factory ammo that I used for a comparison. Burns cleanly and cases are ejected in a nice uniform pattern.

Dick

Edited May 29, 2007 by Dick Ozinga

[Vlad]

At some point last year I went away from 147's myself. They where soft but the slide seemed slow. Its not that I could outrun it but I felt like I was waiting for the sights to settle. I think 124's are a better choice.

[bufit323]

At some point last year I went away from 147's myself. They where soft but the slide seemed slow. Its not that I could outrun it but I felt like I was waiting for the sights to settle. I think 124's are a better choice.

That is exactly what I feel is happening. I am not faster than the gun, but I do get the feeling that it is moving slowly.

[Mick]

That is allot like the .40/180 game we played at the old power factor. We went from 155s to 220s . The heavys were soft but sluggish. The lightweights were real snappy. I always came back to the 180s and I think most others did as well.

I had some 130 and 135 9s I like for that reason, being the middle of the road, they seemed the best.

If not I like the 124/125 9s or Supers.

[kamann]

My vote goes for snappy with the 124's. I tried some 147 reloads with Titegroup this past winter and did not like the way they felt through my G34 at all. I am however willing to try some more just to make sure, buts its not a priority.

[Steve Anderson]

I used to be the king of the mousefart load...ask Flex.

With a beretta's slide, you can load s-o-f-t.

When i switched to the XD, I noticed fairly quickly that it like a snappier load for reliablity and speed of the gun.

Now I like 320 with a 125 38 super bullet. 1 bullet for open and prod and a faster, more accurate gun.

Also bear in mind, the consequenses for failing to make minor are severe at the chrono in production...

I would also recommend that you use the timer to judge a load, not how it feels.

SA

[Flexmoney]

Read Steve's post again. It's a lot nicer than i would put it.

How soft does a f*#king minor load need to be? Learn to shoot your gun and it matters not. Hell, on the clock, a bit more zip likely helps anyway.

[bufit323]

I would also recommend that you use the timer to judge a load, not how it feels.

That is my intent. When I get time (before I purchase a bunch of new bullets) I am going to run some bill drills with loads of the same PF (aroun 128-132) using N320 in both (147 gr and 124 gr). If the timer tells me that I am the same or faster with the lighter bullet, I am switching on over.

Being an OCD technical dude, I am sure that I will need to run some statistical analysis on my splits from one load to another (probably only counting clean runs (or close to clean). Of course I will have to swap up my mags so that I will not be aware of which load is in each mag before I fire the first shot.

Please keep the info coming. I am a your basic B-class shooter who went with soft is good (at the time it probably was the best for me). Now I am trying to grow into a better shooter and do not want to limit myself by the feel of a sluggish gun.

[Keninaz]

I was thinking of switching from 147's to 124's myself. Let us know of your progress.

Ken

[Steve Anderson]

Just do it.

I forgot to add that you intend to shoot limited or another major pf division, you don't want to be all wussed out used to the minor mousefart stuff.

[Micah]

I've got 15,000 rounds loaded up with the 147/VV320 cocktail, but once those are gone, I'm going to switch over to 124's. Cheaper is better.

What else is better is shooting a load that's right around a 135pf. I NEVER sweat the chrono, nor worry about cleaning out a Texas Star. Losing time on poor steel shots is something only suckers should endure

[Joe D]

I use a 125 gr lead bullet with 3.5 gr of Titegroup. It goes a little over 1050 fps. Certainly not as soft as a 147, but not too bad.

[Derwoodski]

At some point last year I went away from 147's myself. They where soft but the slide seemed slow. Its not that I could outrun it but I felt like I was waiting for the sights to settle. I think 124's are a better choice.

That is exactly what I feel is happening. I am not faster than the gun, but I do get the feeling that it is moving slowly.

I use 4.8 gr of WSF under a zero FMJ and it has good snap, but not the flip of wwb 115. The gun seems to return much better. YMMV

[HoMiE]

I use 4.7 gr. of WSF under a 124 MG JHP. Gives me ~1075 fps out of a G34 for a 133PF. I used to run 4.5 gr. of WSF for ~1040 fps, 128PF. I have only had 1 popper not fall and when I asked for calibration, the popper didn't go down with WWB, I got the reshoot.

[Cherryriver]

It's not a Glock load and I have no idea how my wife's abandoned G17 would do with it, but for the lightest-recoiling 9mm load for our Combat Commander, I put a 147gr Berry's in front of 3.5gr WSF. It chronos about 840fps or so. With the recoil spring lightened a couple of pounds, it runs 97% for me and about 85% for my wife.

Like WST, WSF sure seems quiet. This one just puffs a bit. The empties just sort of drool down the outside of my right hand and land next to my right foot.

It's so much fun to shoot I have to limit how much of it I bring to the range so as not to go through too many hundreds.

It does knock down the plate rack for Ms. Plate Lover, too, but big poppers take a while to actually fall.

Meanwhile, I go up to 4.0gr of WSF for 920fps in that gun for perfect function in all of our nines.

It's also so pleasant to shoot that my acccuracy improves significantly.

The 3.5gr load never fails to create giggles from first-time users. Then they empty the magazine.

Bill

[Carlos]

I was thinking of switching from 147's to 124's myself. Let us know of your progress.

Ken

I also switched to 124s. Cost drove me to it. Once the N320 is used up, there's a bunch of Solo 1000 that needs burnin'.