The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 20, 2013, 01:21 PM   #1
Gunnels
Member
 
Join Date: March 23, 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 76
Smaller bullets, more powder. Why is that?

I have been reloading 9mm mostly in 147gn and 124gn. Recently I was experimenting with reloading smaller bullets in 9mm. I was reloading 100gn bullets. I noticed that, based upon the load data I have from several sources, the minimum and maximum recommended powder weight was more for smaller bullets. Sometimes much more. Just as an example, Lyman recommends a maximum load for a 95gn jacketed bullet in Bullseye to be 5.2gn. For a 147gn jacketed bullet they recommend 3.9gn.

I was expecting just the opposite to be true.
Gunnels is offline  
Old December 20, 2013, 01:41 PM   #2
PawPaw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 24, 2010
Location: Central Louisiana
Posts: 3,137
Pressure. It takes more powder to get to a certain pressure level with a lighter bullet. The effect is even more pronounced in rifle cartridges.
__________________
Dennis Dezendorf

http://pawpawshouse.blogspot.com
PawPaw is offline  
Old December 20, 2013, 01:41 PM   #3
SL1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 8, 2007
Posts: 2,001
What you are looking at is the maximum load and a start load which is usually just 90% of whatever the maximum loads is. A true minimum load is not provided by most manuals, although the Hornady manual often showes minimums.

So, what you are seeing is the maximum amount of powder that can be loaded under each bullet without the peak pressure exceeding the same number (SAAMI peak pressure limit for that cartridge). When a lighter bullet is loaded in a case to the same overall cartridge length as a heavy bullet, it takes-up less room inside the case, thus leaving more space for the powder. That lowers the peak pressure if the same charge is used as for the heavier bullet. In addition, the lighter bullet accelerates faster than the heavier bullet, so by the time the peak pressure is reached, the lighter bullet has also provided more additional room for the powder gases, which also lowers the peak pressure if the same charge is used. So, it is possible to put a lot more powder under a lighter bullet and stay within the peak pressure limit.

Now, because a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, I should warn you that there are other important factors at play. One is that the rate at which smokeless powders burn depends strongly on the pressure at each instant that the powder is burning, plus a lot of things like grain shape and coatings on the powder's surface. So, you can't just use the Perfect Gas Law to figure out how to adjust a powder charge for a different bullet weight.

What really happens when a cartridge is fired is a race between (1) the powder trying to burn faster because it is raising pressure in a confined space as it releases more gas, and (2) the bullet's motion trying to make the powder burn slower by givng those gases more room and thus lowering the pressure. Basically the powder wins up to a point, which is when the peak pressure occurs, and then the bullet wins and the pressure starts going down.

SL1
SL1 is offline  
Old December 20, 2013, 01:57 PM   #4
Nick_C_S
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 21, 2013
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,523
SL1 kinda nailed it.

Perhaps an oversimplification, but one way to look at it is that lighter bullets give the effect of having a slower powder (conversely, heavier bullets give the effect of having a faster powder). For the reasons explained by SL1.

If you look at load data for a given bullet, you'll see that your slower powders usually call for higher powder charges. Well it's the same with lighter bullets - they usually call for higher powder charges too.

(Somehow, that makes sense in my head )
__________________
Gun control laws benefit only criminals and politicians - but then, I repeat myself.
Life Member, National Rifle Association
Nick_C_S is offline  
Old December 20, 2013, 02:03 PM   #5
BigD_in_FL
Junior member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: The "Gunshine State"
Posts: 1,981
It also holds true even when loading shotgun shells; lighter payloads need more powder to get pressures up for effective powder burn and performance.
BigD_in_FL is offline  
Old December 20, 2013, 02:07 PM   #6
steve4102
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,955
It's all about Newton's Second Law.
steve4102 is offline  
Old December 20, 2013, 02:16 PM   #7
Gunnels
Member
 
Join Date: March 23, 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 76
Thanks all for the detailed explanation. I was getting nervous with how much powder I was putting in the shell and still staying within the recommended limits.

Btw, is there some place is can check to determine the total volume in cc for the various caliber shells?
Gunnels is offline  
Old December 20, 2013, 02:17 PM   #8
Wreck-n-Crew
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 8, 2013
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,820
Is this the way you thought it was ?:

A pick up needs more power to haul heavier loads. Picture the cartridge as the truck, the charge as the engine and the load as the bullet weight. The problem with this analogy is the "engine" part of this equation and Pressure is your engine and not powder charge.

The pressure drives the bullet and pressure needs resistance. Resistance is higher in heavier bullets and less powder is needed to build up pressure in heavier bullets and more I lighter bullets where resistance is much lighter.
__________________
If you ever have to use a firearm, you don't get to pick the scenario!
Wreck-n-Crew is offline  
Old December 20, 2013, 02:19 PM   #9
Wreck-n-Crew
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 8, 2013
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,820
Three responses before I typed out a few lines!....see how fast these guys are willing to help?
__________________
If you ever have to use a firearm, you don't get to pick the scenario!
Wreck-n-Crew is offline  
Old December 20, 2013, 04:58 PM   #10
xcracer160
Member
 
Join Date: December 19, 2013
Posts: 32
i learned something new already

Last edited by xcracer160; December 20, 2013 at 05:04 PM.
xcracer160 is offline  
Old December 20, 2013, 05:18 PM   #11
57K
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2013
Location: Heart of Texas
Posts: 788
There's a little recoil geometry involved as well. To make the slide function properly, a lighter bullet must have higher velocity to generate a similar slide velocity. You can easily determine that with a calculation of Power Factor that is simply Bullet Weight X Velocity / 1000. Say you're shooting IDPA and want a Minor power factor load with just enough extra power for a safety cushion at say 130 PF. In 9mm with a 147 gr. bullet, velocity will need to be 884 FPS. With a 124, 1048 FPS. With a 115, 1130 FPS and with a 95 gr. bullet you'll need 1368 FPS.

The comments on pressure and physics are good and each bullet weight will have it's own pressure peak for that weight and the powder used. While all of the above mentioned 130 PF loads can probably be achieved with Bullseye, there are better powders that are more pressure stable toward the medium burn rate area, or closer to it, anyway. Unique isn't a bad choice if it's available. I like spherical powders at a similar burn rate or slightly slower like WSF and particularly True Blue and Silhouette, but there a number of good choices and with light bullets like 95 grs., some typically used 9mm powders can be a bit too slow in burn rate like say AA#7.
57K is offline  
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.06930 seconds with 8 queries