D. Manley Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 I requested some updated information from Accurate on Solo-1000 in several calibers and got an email response today. The data provided for the other 3 calibers (.38 Special, .40 S&W and .45) were about as expected but I was a bit surprised at the 9MM recommendations, below: Caliber: 9mmx19P. Barrel length: 4” Powder: Accurate – Solo 1000 Bullet weight: 115grains Start load: 3.7 grains (975 – 1025 Fps) Maximum load: 4.2 grains (1050 -1125 Fps) Bullet weight: 124/125grains Start load: 3.1 grains (900 -950 Fps) Maximum load: 3.5 grains (975 -1025 Fps) Bullet weight: 135 grains Start load: 3.0 grains (825 -875 Fps) Maximum load: 3.3 grains (935 -990 Fps) Bullet weight: 147 grains Start load: 2.7 grains (775 - 850 Fps) Maximum load: 3.0 grains (825 -875 Fps) The 115 grain load is right where I expected it to be but I was a bit surprised at the sharp drop-off in charge weights with heavier bullets, especially 147 grainers. I've been shooting 3.4 grains under a 147 FMJ at 1.130 in my G-35 and thought them to be both very soft and very safe...no pressure signs that I can see. Now, I'm wondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 I requested some updated information from Accurate on Solo-1000 in several calibers and got an email response today. The data provided for the other 3 calibers (.38 Special, .40 S&W and .45) were about as expected but I was a bit surprised at the 9MM recommendations, below:Caliber: 9mmx19P. Barrel length: 4" Powder: Accurate – Solo 1000 Bullet weight: 115grains Start load: 3.7 grains (975 – 1025 Fps) Maximum load: 4.2 grains (1050 -1125 Fps) Bullet weight: 124/125grains Start load: 3.1 grains (900 -950 Fps) Maximum load: 3.5 grains (975 -1025 Fps) Bullet weight: 135 grains Start load: 3.0 grains (825 -875 Fps) Maximum load: 3.3 grains (935 -990 Fps) Bullet weight: 147 grains Start load: 2.7 grains (775 - 850 Fps) Maximum load: 3.0 grains (825 -875 Fps) The 115 grain load is right where I expected it to be but I was a bit surprised at the sharp drop-off in charge weights with heavier bullets, especially 147 grainers. I've been shooting 3.4 grains under a 147 FMJ at 1.130 in my G-35 and thought them to be both very soft and very safe...no pressure signs that I can see. Now, I'm wondering. Wow... I am well over max in my 147 loading......I am loading to about a 135-138 PF... How about posting the .40 data also...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rupie Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 ya i loaded a bunch of 3.5 grain 147's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasOPM Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 I don't think of it as loading "over" for 9mm, as much as loading 9mm+P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plinker625 Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Can you post the 38 & 45 Data? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Religious Shooter Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 I bought an 8 lb jug after reading all the posts about S1000. I've noticed too that all the loads on here are pretty much way higher than what Accurate is saying to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzShooter Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 The manual I have list for the .38 Special Start load Vel Max Load Vel 110 gr S JHP S1000 4.5 NG 5,0 1038 125gr H JFP 4.0 NG 4.4 965 140gr H JHP 3.6 NG 3.9 775 148 gr (L) WC Tft 2.4 NG 2.6 829 148gr (L) WC 2.9 NG 3.2 924 158 gr H JFP 3.3 NG 3,6 702 158 (L) SWC 3.3 NG 3.6 884 These velocities were tested by Scot Powder in a 4 inch Model 10. They come real close to my velocities but I do load a little hotter than the max charge listed. For ICORE I've tested 3.6 grains of S 1000 and a variety of 158 grain lead bullets. 3.6 will make minor in most of my guns but 3.8 definately works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe4d Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 The listed data makes no mention of OAL. Some published 9mm data I've seen loads em at 1.090. MAybe that acounts for some of the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougCarden Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Well.....I have seen load data books from 20 years ago that had much higher loads in them, and then see current data books and the loads were lower than they were 20years ago......... I have to think if you are watching what you are doing, the brass or gun doesnt show any signs of overpressure....it may be signs of being over cautious on the part of the "new" load data...... Some one posted old load data from Accurate for Solo 1000 on the reloading forum. I am wondering if that data jives with this "current data". I don't have any data to support this theory, but have to wonder about it..... DougC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. Manley Posted February 7, 2009 Author Share Posted February 7, 2009 (edited) Well.....I have seen load data books from 20 years ago that had much higher loads in them, and then see current data books and the loads were lower than they were 20years ago.........I have to think if you are watching what you are doing, the brass or gun doesnt show any signs of overpressure....it may be signs of being over cautious on the part of the "new" load data...... Some one posted old load data from Accurate for Solo 1000 on the reloading forum. I am wondering if that data jives with this "current data". I don't have any data to support this theory, but have to wonder about it..... DougC The Accurate data was provided by Johan Louber, Ballistician for Ramshot/Accurate powders. I think I'm gonna' follow up and see if he has the pressure data to accompany that provided. I'm certainly not smart enough to dispute this but frankly, I'm having a little trouble wrapping my brain around it. As for the other caliber data, below is that he provided for .40 S&W and the 2 attached .PDF files contain the .38 Special and .45 (unchanged from prior data): Caliber: .40 S&W. Barrel length: 4” Powder: Accurate – Solo 1000. Bullet weight: 135 grains. Start load: 4.8 grains (1100 – 1200 ft/p/sec) Maximum load: 5.3 grains (1175 – 1275 Ft/p/sec). Bullet weight: 155 grains. Start load: 4.3 grains (900 – 1000 ft/p/sec) Maximum load: 4.8 grains (1000 – 1100 Ft/p/sec). Bullet weight: 165-170 grains. Start load: 4.2 grains (850 – 925 ft/p/sec) Maximum load: 4.6 grains (950 – 1050 Ft/p/sec). Bullet weight: 180 grains. Start load: 4.0 grains (825 – 875 ft/p/sec) Maximum load: 4.5 grains (900 – 950 Ft/p/sec). Bullet weight: 200 grains. Start load: 3.7 grains (800 – 850 ft/p/sec) Maximum load: 4.1 grains (875 – 920 Ft/p/sec). FWIW, I have a copy of the old Scott Powder data and it actually had lower recommendations for 115 than the new but the 124 grain loads are significantly higher. The old data had no Solo-1000 listed for 147 grain bullets at all. 38_S_W_Special_pages_97_to_98.pdf 45_ACP_pages_137_to_139_revised.pdf Edited February 7, 2009 by D. Manley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M109R Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Here is loading data on Solo 1000 and I did email Accurate Arms and verified that it was still correct and the response was yes. scotpowders.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atbarr Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Here is loading data on Solo 1000 and I did email Accurate Arms and verified that it was still correct and the response was yes. All I have is Win small mag primers. The loading data above says "Warning do not use magnum primers". Will I be alright if I drop the charge some? Your thoughts, A.T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Here is loading data on Solo 1000 and I did email Accurate Arms and verified that it was still correct and the response was yes. No joy with the download in Firefox... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98sr20ve Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 (edited) I requested some updated information from Accurate on Solo-1000 in several calibers and got an email response today. The data provided for the other 3 calibers (.38 Special, .40 S&W and .45) were about as expected but I was a bit surprised at the 9MM recommendations, below:Caliber: 9mmx19P. Barrel length: 4" Powder: Accurate – Solo 1000 Bullet weight: 115grains Start load: 3.7 grains (975 – 1025 Fps) Maximum load: 4.2 grains (1050 -1125 Fps) Bullet weight: 124/125grains Start load: 3.1 grains (900 -950 Fps) Maximum load: 3.5 grains (975 -1025 Fps) Bullet weight: 135 grains Start load: 3.0 grains (825 -875 Fps) Maximum load: 3.3 grains (935 -990 Fps) Bullet weight: 147 grains Start load: 2.7 grains (775 - 850 Fps) Maximum load: 3.0 grains (825 -875 Fps) The 115 grain load is right where I expected it to be but I was a bit surprised at the sharp drop-off in charge weights with heavier bullets, especially 147 grainers. I've been shooting 3.4 grains under a 147 FMJ at 1.130 in my G-35 and thought them to be both very soft and very safe...no pressure signs that I can see. Now, I'm wondering. Old 115 gr had a 4.0 max That gave me 1000fps with my FMJ RN loading it fairly long Old 124gr had a 4.1 gr max I get 1032 fps with 4.2 grs Old 147 did not exist in my info. But 3.4 Grs gives me 897 fps. Seems I don't get the fps they say I should get. Not even close. Edited February 8, 2009 by 98sr20ve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SA Friday Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 One word explains it all, Lawyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98sr20ve Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Here is thought for you guys. They don't list any OAL data in the info I have. They do list "% of Volume used" It seems that every load is at 90%+ and many are a compressed load. If I take a 4.2 gr load and set a bullet on the top with a unsized case I get a 1.106 OAL with a FMJ RN Montana Gold. There old data list 4.1 gr as a 103% full loading. So they are loading short. Maybe they are afraid to publish data that requires them to load long because it's such a bulky powder (which I love). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Sadly, I have to agree with you (and I am a lawyer). Frankly, I think the company-supplied numbers are FAR too conservative. Moreover, I did not see OALs listed (nor pressures). I think that the weights we are using are perfectly safe with longer OALs such as 1.130" to 1.155" - and experiences here on be.com certainly backs that up. Remember, this is a single-base powder. One word explains it all, Lawyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al503 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Remember, this is a single-base powder. Not a chemistry major but whether it's a single based powder or not, could there have been a change in the raw materials that they're using? Considering the lot to lot variances seen with other powders.... Also, the new data shows some very short OAL's. I don't think I'll have any issues since I'm loading at 1.18+ for 124 grain bullets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Certainly could be some change in the composition over time; Solo began life as "Royal Scott 1000" then became an Accurate Arms product, and in 2004, Western Powder (Ramshot) acquired Accurate Arms (link: report from 2006 SHOT ). Agree that the longer AOLs we use make Solo 1000 a safe bet for minor 9mm with 124 through 147s and for Major .40 (and of course 45). I use it for all three. Remember, this is a single-base powder. Not a chemistry major but whether it's a single based powder or not, could there have been a change in the raw materials that they're using? Considering the lot to lot variances seen with other powders.... Also, the new data shows some very short OAL's. I don't think I'll have any issues since I'm loading at 1.18+ for 124 grain bullets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. Manley Posted February 9, 2009 Author Share Posted February 9, 2009 Got a reply from the ballistician this evening: Calibers such as 9mmP does not show pressure well sometimes. Did you perhaps measure the velocity? I estimate your pressure to be in the 34000-36500Psi range. All I can say is, if the numbers are right it sure fooled me (and a lot of other people). I would never have thought this was anywhere near that pressure. I'm going to dial it back a bit and re-shoot...if it works, good and if not, I'll move to something else under these bullets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben b. Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I don't get anywhere close to the velocities I received from Johann, in 9mm and .40, and my loads for these are both above listed maximum. 3.6 gr for the 147, and 4.5 gr for the 124 (loaded to 1.155"). the brass does not show unusual pressure signs. I admit that I am increasingly critical of using the brass as a pressure indicator, since it appears inherently unreliable. But...I get more velocity than they list in .45 (2 diff't pistols), and my major PF load of 4.8 gr is the start load they publish, and gives me ~172PF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. Manley Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 I don't get anywhere close to the velocities I received from Johann, in 9mm and .40, and my loads for these are both above listed maximum. 3.6 gr for the 147, and 4.5 gr for the 124 (loaded to 1.155"). the brass does not show unusual pressure signs. I admit that I am increasingly critical of using the brass as a pressure indicator, since it appears inherently unreliable.But...I get more velocity than they list in .45 (2 diff't pistols), and my major PF load of 4.8 gr is the start load they publish, and gives me ~172PF. I agree completely. Their .45 data has always seemed askew to me...starting data thumps pretty good where other caliber's starting loads will barely (and may not) cycle the gun. I just don't believe they've ever put any research into the Scot powders they "acquired" and since they provided only pressure estimates, it's a fair bet it's a software-based projection. I hope they will at some point develop some "real-world" data and roll it into their database...S-1000 is a sweet powder but you're sorta' on your on to a large extent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 One reason I promote Solo 1000 here is that I hope more people start using and the company keeps making it. I love the stuff, and I use it for everything. To me, Solo 1000 is THE replacement for Vihta Vouri N310 and N320 (which I used to get at cost, but now I don't). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atbarr Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 One reason I promote Solo 1000 here is that I hope more people start using and the company keeps making it. Well I did my part, I ordered 16 lbs. from Powder valley. It should ship next week. A.T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I think OAL is the more important thing here than charge weight. A low volume case like the 9 is a pipe bomb waiting to happen if you close the volume up too much and cram a lot of powder in. Most factory 115gr JHP is running 1.105 to 1.115. I ALWAYS load my neener stuff to at least 1.125 to 1.135. I even go out to 1.155ish for my +P+ major 9 loads. If folks running 3.5-4 grains of this powder are only getting 135-140PF then my guess is they are loading a lot longer than the factory data loads are being tested at. Bullet diameter vs barrel diameter will also have a lot to do with where your pressure point is. If you are pushing a .356 bullet down a .355 bore you will have a lot more pressure than a .355 bullet in a .355 bore. Very seldom do folks take all these small OAL and diameter differences into account. Trading load data without these facts is why trading load data is not as safe as it could be. Bullet and charge weight are only two of the four main factors controlling pressure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now