bullet choice for IDPA

Farrier · August 27, 2010, 12:06 PM

I just started shooting some IDPA and IDPA type shooting with my Glock 23. I know that it isn't the best gun or even the best Glock out there, but it is what I have for now. What bullet do you recommend? I am working on a box of Reinier 165 gr. Flat points. They seem to shoot well, but if I shoot a lighter bullet will I notice a difference in recoil? I see Reinier makes a 135 gr. They are a little cheaper to

Thanks
Cody

Jim Watson · August 27, 2010, 01:19 PM

For IDPA, your ammunition must:
1. Function the gun and
2. Make the 125,000 power floor for SSP.

MOST people find that a heavy bullet at low velocity has less FELT recoil than a light fast bullet in an uncompensated gun.

But I load a 135 gr 9mm for my Plastic M&P and find it comfortable to shoot, so if you want to save money with lighter bullets, you will probably be ok.

RickB · August 27, 2010, 01:48 PM

Yes, the subjective description of heavy-bullet recoil is "soft", but it's also slow. I've known guys to experiment with bullets heavier than normal to try for that "soft" recoil effect (250+ grains in .45), but I was reading in Front Sight (USPSA publication) that back-to-back testing of heavy- and light-bullet loads resulted in better scores being shot with lighter bullets. I started shooting USPSA and IDPA with 230gr bullets in .45, but have shot nothing but 200s for the last ten years. I've been loading 130s in 9mm and .38 Super, though some guys claim that 147gr 9mm at minor power factor is like shooting a .22. I've also heard these same guys say they like to load to 135-145 power factor, as the gun seems sluggish when loaded lower, but I wonder if they'd do better driving lighter bullets a bit faster? If I were shooting a .40, I'd certainly experiment with different weights.

Jim Watson · August 27, 2010, 02:35 PM

Well, John M. Browning and Colt's Pt. F.A. Mfg. Co., Inc. introduced the .45 automatic with 200 grain bullets in 1905. Perhaps the Army messed that up by insisting on getting as close as possible to the various .45 revolver loads they were accustomed to.

I believe the 9mm P was introduced with a 124 gr bullet and the .38 Auto/Super certainly with a 130.
I have shot everything from 115 to 160 and am now using 135 gr bullets. Don't know but what I might settle on 124s which are more readily available. I want to stay subsonic even if only by a little. The 115's supersonic or at least transsonic shockwave adds to the perception of recoil. For me, at least.

The .40 was introduced with a 180 gr bullet to approximate the 185 gr .45 ACP JHP, but the trend was downward from an early date. For target shooting a medium-light .40 will approximate a heavy 9mm.

Farrier · August 27, 2010, 02:38 PM

So let me see if I understand the power floor. If I load a 135 gr bullet, it needs to be atleast 926fps, and if I load a 165 gr bullet, it needs to be 758 fps. I don't think that the .40 with 165 gr.@ 1050(approx, I think) is uncomfortable to shoot, just wondering if I can get on target faster with something else.

Wow, looking at it like this, I'm WAY above the floor. I am looking at Hodgdon's load data, and I don't see much that is even close to the floor. Clays is the slowest showen, and it is still about 100 fps faster then the floor on either the 135 or 165. I guess that's cause I'm shooting a .40 not a 9mm. Is there a safe load that is close to the floor? Will it function in the gun? Tell me (my wife more importantly) I need another gun, maybe a G34!!

Jim Watson · August 27, 2010, 03:07 PM

In the first place, you don't want to get too close to the floor. A change in components or ambient conditions or chronograph calibration could turn your barely acceptable f 127,000 load into a disqualifying f 124,900. I had it happen, I took my P226 to a match with ammo loaded for my Colt but not retested. It would not deliver as much velocity as my Colt. Fortunately the chronoman at the match had a Colt 9mm as a reference gun and my ammo passed in it, so I could continue.

In the second place, handbook velocity, shot in minimum dimension, smooth surfaced test barrels, is usually pretty optimistic. A starting load with the 135 would probably be fine.

Caveat: I do not own a .40, my experience is limited to 9mm, .38, and .45.

Farrier · August 27, 2010, 08:47 PM

Thanks Jim, I think that I'll try a box of 135 grainers.

Bones · August 28, 2010, 01:33 PM

Farrier,

I guess that's cause I'm shooting a .40 not a 9mm. Is there a safe load that is close to the floor? Will it function in the gun? Tell me (my wife more importantly) I need another gun, maybe a G34!!

Nice try, I want to wish you "GOOD LUCK" with that!!!

LOL, Tell your wife you need a new gun...Thats a good one....

g.willikers · August 28, 2010, 03:02 PM

Don't forget about those big, steel popper targets, if they are used at the matches you will be attending.
Too mild a load might not knock them down well, or at all.

WESHOOT2 · August 30, 2010, 06:05 AM

I have and use the Rainier 135g; I use it over WAP (modern equivalent= Ramshot Silhouette).
Recommend.

jmorris · August 30, 2010, 09:21 AM

Quote:

I took my P226 to a match with ammo loaded for my Colt but not retested. It would not deliver as much velocity as my Colt. Fortunately the chronoman at the match had a Colt 9mm as a reference gun and my ammo passed in it, so I could continue.

Good point, I have a few pistols and revolvers that always go with me to matches as they are the “fastest” shooting guns I have in their caliber. The rule book allows your ammunition to be chronographed in any legal (for the division) firearm. I have never had to use them but a fellow shooter did come to find his load out of my 38 spl went 75 fps faster than it did out of his .357 so he didn’t DQ. I go for just over 170 and 130 just so I don’t have to worry about making 165 or 125, there are plenty of other things to be thinking about.

Quote:

Don't forget about those big, steel popper targets, if they are used at the matches you will be attending.
Too mild a load might not knock them down well, or at all.

All steel must be calibrated to fall with ammunition that makes PF. However, this is another reason why I prefer, heavy for caliber, bullets (9/147, 40/180,45/230) as they seem to do a better job to me knocking down steel.

ice9_us · September 1, 2010, 09:22 PM

Farrier needs a new gun...

Farrier · September 5, 2010, 03:29 PM

Thanks ice9_us

Farrier · September 5, 2010, 03:35 PM

I just bought some 135 berry's. I haven't loaded any yet, but I'll have to post my findings. I do know what you guys are talking about with the steel. It seems to take a good hit with a 9mm to tip them, but even with the 135 I'm 9-15 grains heavier, I guess it's all up to the speed after that.

Farrier · September 8, 2010, 12:08 PM

So I tried out some of the 135 grain Berry's on top of 5.5 gr. of Bullseye. Nosler has 5.4 as their start load. I only shot about a dozen so far, but there was no problems and the recoil was definately less then my 165 gr. I guess I'll have to wait to see how they handle steel poppers and if I have any FTF.

P.S. Still thinking about a new gun (duh), but probably not this year.

CatsEye · September 8, 2010, 07:21 PM

If your serious about loading I strongly suggest you get a chronograph. Knowing exactly what your loads are doing is invaluable.

Your 135gr loads will do fine for steel, not a worry.

If you are wanting to load to a PF then heavier bullets will nearly always feel like they have less recoil. Couple heavier bullets and faster powders and you get even less perceived recoil.

August 27, 2010, 12:06 PM	#1
Farrier Junior Member Join Date: July 10, 2010 Location: Northern Minnesota Posts: 14	bullet choice for IDPA I just started shooting some IDPA and IDPA type shooting with my Glock 23. I know that it isn't the best gun or even the best Glock out there, but it is what I have for now. What bullet do you recommend? I am working on a box of Reinier 165 gr. Flat points. They seem to shoot well, but if I shoot a lighter bullet will I notice a difference in recoil? I see Reinier makes a 135 gr. They are a little cheaper to Thanks Cody __________________ The hurriered I become, the behinder I get.

August 27, 2010, 02:38 PM	#5
Farrier Junior Member Join Date: July 10, 2010 Location: Northern Minnesota Posts: 14	So let me see if I understand the power floor. If I load a 135 gr bullet, it needs to be atleast 926fps, and if I load a 165 gr bullet, it needs to be 758 fps. I don't think that the .40 with 165 gr.@ 1050(approx, I think) is uncomfortable to shoot, just wondering if I can get on target faster with something else. Wow, looking at it like this, I'm WAY above the floor. I am looking at Hodgdon's load data, and I don't see much that is even close to the floor. Clays is the slowest showen, and it is still about 100 fps faster then the floor on either the 135 or 165. I guess that's cause I'm shooting a .40 not a 9mm. Is there a safe load that is close to the floor? Will it function in the gun? Tell me (my wife more importantly) I need another gun, maybe a G34!! __________________ The hurriered I become, the behinder I get.

August 27, 2010, 08:47 PM	#7
Farrier Junior Member Join Date: July 10, 2010 Location: Northern Minnesota Posts: 14	Thanks Jim, I think that I'll try a box of 135 grainers. __________________ The hurriered I become, the behinder I get.

August 28, 2010, 01:33 PM	#8
Bones Senior Member Join Date: February 16, 2010 Posts: 122	Farrier, I guess that's cause I'm shooting a .40 not a 9mm. Is there a safe load that is close to the floor? Will it function in the gun? Tell me (my wife more importantly) I need another gun, maybe a G34!! Nice try, I want to wish you "GOOD LUCK" with that!!! LOL, Tell your wife you need a new gun...Thats a good one.... __________________ READY on the "LEFT!"....READY on the "RIGHT!"...PULL!

August 30, 2010, 06:05 AM	#10
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	Odd: 130 in 9, 135 in 40 I have and use the Rainier 135g; I use it over WAP (modern equivalent= Ramshot Silhouette). Recommend. __________________ . "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"

August 27, 2010, 01:19 PM	#2
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,534	For IDPA, your ammunition must: 1. Function the gun and 2. Make the 125,000 power floor for SSP. MOST people find that a heavy bullet at low velocity has less FELT recoil than a light fast bullet in an uncompensated gun. But I load a 135 gr 9mm for my Plastic M&P and find it comfortable to shoot, so if you want to save money with lighter bullets, you will probably be ok.

August 27, 2010, 01:48 PM	#3
RickB Senior Member Join Date: March 1, 2000 Location: Boise, ID Posts: 8,518	Yes, the subjective description of heavy-bullet recoil is "soft", but it's also slow. I've known guys to experiment with bullets heavier than normal to try for that "soft" recoil effect (250+ grains in .45), but I was reading in Front Sight (USPSA publication) that back-to-back testing of heavy- and light-bullet loads resulted in better scores being shot with lighter bullets. I started shooting USPSA and IDPA with 230gr bullets in .45, but have shot nothing but 200s for the last ten years. I've been loading 130s in 9mm and .38 Super, though some guys claim that 147gr 9mm at minor power factor is like shooting a .22. I've also heard these same guys say they like to load to 135-145 power factor, as the gun seems sluggish when loaded lower, but I wonder if they'd do better driving lighter bullets a bit faster? If I were shooting a .40, I'd certainly experiment with different weights.

August 27, 2010, 02:35 PM	#4
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,534	Well, John M. Browning and Colt's Pt. F.A. Mfg. Co., Inc. introduced the .45 automatic with 200 grain bullets in 1905. Perhaps the Army messed that up by insisting on getting as close as possible to the various .45 revolver loads they were accustomed to. I believe the 9mm P was introduced with a 124 gr bullet and the .38 Auto/Super certainly with a 130. I have shot everything from 115 to 160 and am now using 135 gr bullets. Don't know but what I might settle on 124s which are more readily available. I want to stay subsonic even if only by a little. The 115's supersonic or at least transsonic shockwave adds to the perception of recoil. For me, at least. The .40 was introduced with a 180 gr bullet to approximate the 185 gr .45 ACP JHP, but the trend was downward from an early date. For target shooting a medium-light .40 will approximate a heavy 9mm.

August 27, 2010, 03:07 PM	#6
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,534	In the first place, you don't want to get too close to the floor. A change in components or ambient conditions or chronograph calibration could turn your barely acceptable f 127,000 load into a disqualifying f 124,900. I had it happen, I took my P226 to a match with ammo loaded for my Colt but not retested. It would not deliver as much velocity as my Colt. Fortunately the chronoman at the match had a Colt 9mm as a reference gun and my ammo passed in it, so I could continue. In the second place, handbook velocity, shot in minimum dimension, smooth surfaced test barrels, is usually pretty optimistic. A starting load with the 135 would probably be fine. Caveat: I do not own a .40, my experience is limited to 9mm, .38, and .45.

August 28, 2010, 03:02 PM	#9
g.willikers Senior Member Join Date: September 28, 2008 Posts: 10,442	Don't forget about those big, steel popper targets, if they are used at the matches you will be attending. Too mild a load might not knock them down well, or at all.

September 1, 2010, 09:22 PM	#12
ice9_us Senior Member Join Date: October 14, 2008 Posts: 101	Dear Farrier's wife Farrier needs a new gun...

September 5, 2010, 03:29 PM	#13
Farrier Junior Member Join Date: July 10, 2010 Location: Northern Minnesota Posts: 14	Thanks ice9_us __________________ The hurriered I become, the behinder I get.

September 5, 2010, 03:35 PM	#14
Farrier Junior Member Join Date: July 10, 2010 Location: Northern Minnesota Posts: 14	I just bought some 135 berry's. I haven't loaded any yet, but I'll have to post my findings. I do know what you guys are talking about with the steel. It seems to take a good hit with a 9mm to tip them, but even with the 135 I'm 9-15 grains heavier, I guess it's all up to the speed after that. __________________ The hurriered I become, the behinder I get.

September 8, 2010, 12:08 PM	#15
Farrier Junior Member Join Date: July 10, 2010 Location: Northern Minnesota Posts: 14	So I tried out some of the 135 grain Berry's on top of 5.5 gr. of Bullseye. Nosler has 5.4 as their start load. I only shot about a dozen so far, but there was no problems and the recoil was definately less then my 165 gr. I guess I'll have to wait to see how they handle steel poppers and if I have any FTF. P.S. Still thinking about a new gun (duh), but probably not this year. __________________ The hurriered I become, the behinder I get.

September 8, 2010, 07:21 PM	#16
CatsEye Member Join Date: July 15, 2010 Location: Clarksville, TN Posts: 35	If your serious about loading I strongly suggest you get a chronograph. Knowing exactly what your loads are doing is invaluable. Your 135gr loads will do fine for steel, not a worry. If you are wanting to load to a PF then heavier bullets will nearly always feel like they have less recoil. Couple heavier bullets and faster powders and you get even less perceived recoil.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search