Can I improve my handgun groups with heavier loads?

[JJE]

I handload for .380 ACP, 9mm and .38 special. I load mostly Berry's or Rainier plated bullets, and most of my shooting is 2-handed and unsupported at an indoor range at 20 to 35 feet. I take my shooting seriously and want to improve my groups, but don't plan to shoot competitively. I use only W231 for all 3 calibers since it is a good compromise and I like to keep things simple.

When I developed loads for each caliber, I started low and worked up until I had a load that seemed just fast enough to stabilize the bullet (clean holes in the target), but no higher to minimize flash and recoil. For semi-autos, the load also has to be heavy enough to cycle the action. Anyway, I have wimpy loads in each caliber that I'm happy with.

My question is: Under the conditions that I shoot (unsupported, less than 35 feet, non-competition) is there any reason to think that a heavier charge will provide significantly better accuracy? The obvious answer is: "try it and find out!" I have done some experimenting, using varied charges and a crappy improvised rest and the results were absolutely inconclusive - I couldn't tell if the variation among loads was because of my shooting or because of the difference in charge.

I don't want to buy a machine rest, and I don't want to spend a lot of time on this if there's no payoff. Should I just stick to the light loads I have and concentrate on my shooting fundamentals, or is there a potential payoff in more load development?

[NuJudge]

Why I don't know. I have 5 .357 magnums, and .38 Wadcutters don't shoot worth a hoot for me in any of them. Full charge .38 Specials shoot fine.

I do not find this true with 9mm loads.

CDD

[Tex S]

Under the conditions that I shoot (unsupported, less than 35 feet, non-competition) is there any reason to think that a heavier charge will provide significantly better accuracy?

You will never know till you try, but.........

it sounds like you need a better setup for accuracy testing...

It wont take too much time to find out the most accurate load for a given powder/bullet selection, but you need to have a good rest. I spent a whopping $0 when I made my rest. I've got a 1x4 about 12'' long with supporting feet screwed into each end. I cut a v-notch into the middle of it, then got a sandbag. I sit the barrel in the v-notch and the bottom of the grip on the sandbag. It is surprisingly sturdy, allows you to steady on a target, and will definately help you find those tight groups. I need to upgrade to a 1x6 though... the 1x4 can be a little short.

I have had good luck accuracy testing many different pistols this way.

[oneounceload]

IME, heavier, faster loads usually do NOT give better accuracy - usually the opposite - I have found this to be true, IME, with shotshells, pistols and rifles...YMMV...

You might want to try a different powder - maybe Unique, Universal Clays, Bullseye or similar might be one that lets you keep it simple while giving acceptable groups. For MY guns, Universal for my 38's and various 9mm's has done well...( I also use it to load 20 and 28 gauge).

Good luck

[aaalaska]

What Tex S said .the only way to know how your gun really shoots is test the accuracy off a rest. Alex

[SL1]

I'll disagree with Oneounceload.

In my experience, loads that are as light as possible (barely stabilize the bullet or barely function the slide) are NOT the most accurate.

With a very rudimentary rest, I can see groups at 50' tighten-up as I increase the charge weight.

True, max loads are usually not the most accurate, either. Especially with plated bullets. But, there is usually an obvious minimum group size somewhere in the mid-range of charge wieghts.

Of course, only you can decide whether minimum group size or minimum recoil is most important for the type of shooting that you do.

SL1

[WESHOOT2]

If you're happy with the accuracy you're currently seeing, keep doing that (until you become a better shot; go visit a USPSA club www.uspsa.org).

No actual harm giving your loads a small charge 'bump', though, and investigating THAT accuracy.


(Find a better shot to test your gun/ammo for you? I've certainly done so, and often still have other shooters of demonstrated prowess test my 'stuff'.)

[JJE]

OK - thanks for the suggestions. Since I enjoy shooting a lot more than load development, I think that I am going to spend a few months shooting my light loads to see what kind of groups I can put together. Then, once I've shot these loads enough that I've got a good idea about how tight a group I can get, I'll play around with the loads a bit to see if there re tighter groups to be had. In the meantime I'll keep my eye open for a budget pistol rest or maybe nail something together.

[WESHOOT2]

I use a Millett Pistol something-or-other (Perch?); cost about $25 (or it did when I bought mine).

[Slamfire]

I really enjoy shooting my handguns, and I do it all unsupported. Since my eyes have focus problems, I am now shooting bullseye style, to get that post sight out far enough to see it.

Shooting unsupported is a true measure of your sight alignment, trigger pull and follow through. Watch your sights carefully, make sure the front is centered in the notch. Then you have to train your brain to pull the trigger when the post touches what you want to hit.

This is all very concentration heavy. No joke. Things like flinching, jerking, changing grip tension, location of the gun in the hand, those will all change point of impact. In various and strange ways. You have to concentrate hard, not to flinch, not anticipate the recoil, and to pull the trigger the same way.

You are firing relatively light recoiling calibers. This is good. The more recoil, the quicker comes the involuntary flinch. Also, muzzle blast causes flinching.

You will find that the lightest recoiling, least noisy cartridge you can find will be the easiest to shoot accurately.

Incidentally, the bullet weight, charge, is not as critical to accuracy as the human factor. Human errors are orders of magnitude greater than ammunition errors. Just develop a good load and shoot it. Shooting is a skill. Practice makes you better. Ammunition is stuff you shoot in practice.

I shoot 125 gr lead in my 9mm's, and 158 L in my 38 Special. Because the fixed sight guns shoot to point of aim with these bullets. As long as the bullet is accurate in your gun, just go out and shoot the thing.

[JJE]

Thanks Slamfire - I'm rapidly learning that a slight lack of concentration means I'm just wasting ammo.

[amamnn]

These guys make a REAL pistol rest that won't break the bank. I've used the light ones and they make better ashtrays than gun rests.

http://www.wichitaarms.com/

The only way to really know what the gun is doing is with a good rest. Caldwell was making a cheaper version of the Ransom rest, and I kick myself for not getting one before they discontinued it.

What you're doing that affects the groups is another matter. Personally, I do better with a heavier load in all calibers. I like HS-6 for the calibers you mention. It's a bit slower powder and fills the case better. Tests done by the Army and also Ken Oehler, among several others have pretty well proven that cases that are so filled with powder as to eliminate or at least minimize empty space in the case more efficiently burn the powder, resulting in increased velocity and power. To do that you would undoubtedly have to change from W231 and/or powders in that burning rate range and go to a slower powder like HS-6. Filling the case more fully also helps to reduce the chances of accidental double charges.

Probably a slower powder would make the guns themselves shoot a TINY bit better. At the ranges you mention it might not be noticeable. Also bear in mind that slower powders will increase perceived recoil, so if you are especially recoil sensitive, any slower powders than the burning rate range of powders like HS-6 might not be worth exploring, especially in the revolvers.
It might take a bit of practicing to get used to a slower power than 231, if you've been using that for a long time. You'l have to make the call yourself.