Any rule of thumb

ShootingNut · October 17, 2008, 02:37 PM

My regular 9mm 125 gr lead bullet load of Titegroup is 3.6 gr powder, going up to a 147 gr lead bullet. Any "rule of thumb" as to how much to cut back on this powder load. Titegroup doesn't list any powder charge for a 147 gr lead bullet in 9mm.
Use Accurate #5 also for .40 and .45 loads, would like to not go with a third powder unless need to.
Any thoughts appreciated! Anyone loading the 147 lead that has a favorite powder load?
Regards,
SN

Michaelm45 · October 17, 2008, 02:47 PM

The Lyman Pistol & Revolver Handbook lists,
147 Lead
Titegroup - 2.5grs - MAX- 2.8grs

I load Clays in my 9mm with 147gr and am very happy with this combo.

Michaelm45 · October 17, 2008, 02:49 PM

Looked at your 125gr load and the Lyman book lists,
3.3 grs of Titegroup as MAX.

I'm not sure of a "rule of thumb" but going up to a heavier bullet you usually use less powder.

ShootingNut · October 18, 2008, 05:39 AM

Agree with heavier bullet get's less powder load.
The Hodgdon loading data website, shows for the 125 gr LCN a start load
of 3.6 and a max load of 4.0 using their Titegroup powder.
So, why Lyman shows a max of 3.3 Titegroup for the 125 gr lead is either misguided or misprint?
I have always loaded my 125's between 3.6 and 3.8 with very good results.
That now presents another question, why should loading data differ so much, when dealing with a serious subject as this?
Seems like I once read, take the load for a jacketed bullet (same grain), and cut back 10 per cent of the starting load if using all lead. Does my memory serve me correct, or is my percentage off?
Thanks for your posts.
Best regards,
SN

Al Norris · October 18, 2008, 08:18 AM

ShootingNut, there are many variables when looking at load data. Bullet hardness, shape, and bearing surface are all variables to be taken into consideration. Hence the discrepancy in published data.

Sport45 · October 18, 2008, 08:35 AM

With lead bullets the limit is sometimes velocity rather than pressure which accounts for some of the difference as well. This goes along with Antipitas statement that hardness is an issue. Did they test with 22 bhnor17 bhn bullets, or maybe even softer swaged bullets.

ShootingNut · October 18, 2008, 08:51 AM

My lead is from Mike at Mastercast, with a 20 BHN hardness.
I thought for sure that I had read someplace, if no lead bullet is listed to deduct x percent from the jacketed identical grain load for a starter.
I would hope one doesn't have to get overly scientific, just going from a 125 grain lead to a 147 grain lead 9mm. I expect to lessen my powder charge from
the 3.6 start load on the 125 to whatever (maybe 3.25 gr) for a 147 gr bullet.
Always loaded and shot the 125, just thought I'd see what the 147's are like.
Regards,
SN

Sevens · October 18, 2008, 09:47 AM

I'm not saying the Lyman data is a misprint or is wrong, but I'm sharing my own results -- I load 9mm with a 125 grain LRN and Titegroup using a charge of 4.1 grains and it works well.

I tried the same bullet with a 3.6 grain charge of Titegroup and it was too light.

Sorry, I haven't tried 147 grain bullets at the bench. Yet.

Other loads that worked for me with 125 grain LRN bullets:
4.6 grains of Bullseye
5.1 grains of Power Pistol
7.4 grains of Blue Dot

I would like to hear other folks' loads in 9mm, especially using cast lead bullets.

zippy13 · October 18, 2008, 06:38 PM

Am I correct, you're asking if there's a rule-of-thumb for powder reduction when going from one bullet weight to a heaver bullet weight with the same powder in the same caliber? If that's the question, then the answer, to the best of my knowledge, is no. You may be thinking of rules-of-thumb that apply when developing a new load based upon data provided for a maximum load.

Little data have been developed for the 147 gr cast bullets in 9x19mm. As has been previously mentioned, there are several factors that determine a maximum load for cast bullets. You may have to navigate some uncharted waters to find exactly what you want.

What are you trying to achieve with your 147 gr cast loads, do you want full cases and leaded barrels, moderate plinkers, or what? That may be your guide where to start. For me, it's economy... if I'm going to hand load to save money, then I'm going to cast and save even more money. I load home-cast mid-range rounds that are accurate, cheaper than the average .22LR, and leading is not a problem. I've found that the standard, old school, bullseye recipes work best for me. It's interesting that they are all below what the manuals recommend as the starting load.

ShootingNut · October 19, 2008, 05:42 AM

No, I was only talking about the powder weight data variation, using the exact same grain bullet, only diff being one is a jacketed and the other lead with no metal jacketing. And as mentioned, I believe that I have read that a lead bullet is given a lower powder charge, as the same grain bullet with a jacket.
SN

WESHOOT2 · October 19, 2008, 10:56 AM

I would think very hard about why data is at best 'sparse' for 147g / Titegroup.

And then I would run out and buy Power Pistol..... (but Accurate data is very good; test first using AA5).

I use Winchester WAP (yes, I still have a 'bit') and Alliant Power Pistol when loading any 147g .355"-bore bullets.

My current "9x19 what I actually use" powder list:
3N37
N350
Power Pistol
WAP (man I gotta lotta WAP)

I mostly use WAP.

zippy13 · October 19, 2008, 12:11 PM

SN
Thanks for the clarification and, yes, your observations are correct.
Sorry, thus far, it seems no one has a favorite 147 gr cast load. Michaelm45's referenced Lyman data is probably as good a starting point as any. Unfortunately, Titegroup's a newer powder, and there isn't voluminous data tucked away in old publications as there is with powders like Bullseye.
Good luck, and please keep up posted on your progress.

ShootingNut · October 19, 2008, 06:16 PM

Thanks guys, ya I know that I should have just stuck with my 125 grain leads,
as they have always worked very well for me. And you are right, not much for loading data with my current powders. Oh well, didn't order a truck load of 147's, so I'll keep it low and load them up and we shall see.
Not one to take chances, value my guns and my hand very much!
Appreciate your posts.
Regards,
SN

WESHOOT2 · October 20, 2008, 01:13 PM

-147g LFP
-4.6g Power Pistol (although, theoretically, I've used 4.9g WAP, too)
-sorted sized case
-CCI500 (can substitute WSP)
-OAL 1.135--1.140"

NOT "theory":

4.9g WAP
Speer / WIN used cases
The LFP I use mikes at .3565". It weighs about 146g, maybe a wee bit more.
By the hundreds.......

Just pretendin'......

Powder discussion: In my testing I've found best accuracy from the weights I use --115g up to 151g-- with powders more in the 'medium' burn-rate range.
I note many Bullseye-discipline 9x19 users are using Power Pistol and a 121g Hornady.

October 17, 2008, 02:37 PM	#1
ShootingNut Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2006 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 1,475	Any rule of thumb My regular 9mm 125 gr lead bullet load of Titegroup is 3.6 gr powder, going up to a 147 gr lead bullet. Any "rule of thumb" as to how much to cut back on this powder load. Titegroup doesn't list any powder charge for a 147 gr lead bullet in 9mm. Use Accurate #5 also for .40 and .45 loads, would like to not go with a third powder unless need to. Any thoughts appreciated! Anyone loading the 147 lead that has a favorite powder load? Regards, SN

October 18, 2008, 05:39 AM	#4
ShootingNut Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2006 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 1,475	Michael Agree with heavier bullet get's less powder load. The Hodgdon loading data website, shows for the 125 gr LCN a start load of 3.6 and a max load of 4.0 using their Titegroup powder. So, why Lyman shows a max of 3.3 Titegroup for the 125 gr lead is either misguided or misprint? I have always loaded my 125's between 3.6 and 3.8 with very good results. That now presents another question, why should loading data differ so much, when dealing with a serious subject as this? Seems like I once read, take the load for a jacketed bullet (same grain), and cut back 10 per cent of the starting load if using all lead. Does my memory serve me correct, or is my percentage off? Thanks for your posts. Best regards, SN

October 18, 2008, 08:35 AM	#6
Sport45 Senior Member Join Date: May 25, 1999 Location: Too close to Houston Posts: 4,196	With lead bullets the limit is sometimes velocity rather than pressure which accounts for some of the difference as well. This goes along with Antipitas statement that hardness is an issue. Did they test with 22 bhnor17 bhn bullets, or maybe even softer swaged bullets. __________________ Proud member of the NRA and Texas State Rifle Association. Registered and active voter.

October 18, 2008, 08:51 AM	#7
ShootingNut Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2006 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 1,475	Sport My lead is from Mike at Mastercast, with a 20 BHN hardness. I thought for sure that I had read someplace, if no lead bullet is listed to deduct x percent from the jacketed identical grain load for a starter. I would hope one doesn't have to get overly scientific, just going from a 125 grain lead to a 147 grain lead 9mm. I expect to lessen my powder charge from the 3.6 start load on the 125 to whatever (maybe 3.25 gr) for a 147 gr bullet. Always loaded and shot the 125, just thought I'd see what the 147's are like. Regards, SN

October 18, 2008, 09:47 AM	#8
Sevens Senior Member Join Date: July 28, 2007 Location: Ohio Posts: 11,756	I'm not saying the Lyman data is a misprint or is wrong, but I'm sharing my own results -- I load 9mm with a 125 grain LRN and Titegroup using a charge of 4.1 grains and it works well. I tried the same bullet with a 3.6 grain charge of Titegroup and it was too light. Sorry, I haven't tried 147 grain bullets at the bench. Yet. Other loads that worked for me with 125 grain LRN bullets: 4.6 grains of Bullseye 5.1 grains of Power Pistol 7.4 grains of Blue Dot I would like to hear other folks' loads in 9mm, especially using cast lead bullets. __________________ *Attention Brass rats and other reloaders:* I really need .327 Federal Magnum brass, no lot size too small. Tell me what caliber you need and I'll see what I have to swap. PM me and we'll discuss.

October 17, 2008, 02:47 PM	#2
Michaelm45 Senior Member Join Date: October 28, 2004 Location: NV Posts: 215	The Lyman Pistol & Revolver Handbook lists, 147 Lead Titegroup - 2.5grs - MAX- 2.8grs I load Clays in my 9mm with 147gr and am very happy with this combo.

October 17, 2008, 02:49 PM	#3
Michaelm45 Senior Member Join Date: October 28, 2004 Location: NV Posts: 215	Looked at your 125gr load and the Lyman book lists, 3.3 grs of Titegroup as MAX. I'm not sure of a "rule of thumb" but going up to a heavier bullet you usually use less powder.

October 18, 2008, 08:18 AM	#5
Al Norris Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 29, 2000 Location: Rupert, Idaho Posts: 9,660	ShootingNut, there are many variables when looking at load data. Bullet hardness, shape, and bearing surface are all variables to be taken into consideration. Hence the discrepancy in published data.

October 18, 2008, 06:38 PM	#9
zippy13 Senior Member Join Date: August 23, 2008 Location: SoCal Posts: 6,442	Am I correct, you're asking if there's a rule-of-thumb for powder reduction when going from one bullet weight to a heaver bullet weight with the same powder in the same caliber? If that's the question, then the answer, to the best of my knowledge, is no. You may be thinking of rules-of-thumb that apply when developing a new load based upon data provided for a maximum load. Little data have been developed for the 147 gr cast bullets in 9x19mm. As has been previously mentioned, there are several factors that determine a maximum load for cast bullets. You may have to navigate some uncharted waters to find exactly what you want. What are you trying to achieve with your 147 gr cast loads, do you want full cases and leaded barrels, moderate plinkers, or what? That may be your guide where to start. For me, it's economy... if I'm going to hand load to save money, then I'm going to cast and save even more money. I load home-cast mid-range rounds that are accurate, cheaper than the average .22LR, and leading is not a problem. I've found that the standard, old school, bullseye recipes work best for me. It's interesting that they are all below what the manuals recommend as the starting load.

October 19, 2008, 05:42 AM	#10
ShootingNut Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2006 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 1,475	zippy No, I was only talking about the powder weight data variation, using the exact same grain bullet, only diff being one is a jacketed and the other lead with no metal jacketing. And as mentioned, I believe that I have read that a lead bullet is given a lower powder charge, as the same grain bullet with a jacket. SN

October 19, 2008, 10:56 AM	#11
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	choice I would think very hard about why data is at best 'sparse' for 147g / Titegroup. And then I would run out and buy Power Pistol..... (but Accurate data is very good; test first using AA5). I use Winchester WAP (yes, I still have a 'bit') and Alliant Power Pistol when loading any 147g .355"-bore bullets. My current "9x19 what I actually use" powder list: 3N37 N350 Power Pistol WAP (man I gotta lotta WAP) I mostly use WAP. __________________ . "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"

October 19, 2008, 12:11 PM	#12
zippy13 Senior Member Join Date: August 23, 2008 Location: SoCal Posts: 6,442	SN Thanks for the clarification and, yes, your observations are correct. Sorry, thus far, it seems no one has a favorite 147 gr cast load. Michaelm45's referenced Lyman data is probably as good a starting point as any. Unfortunately, Titegroup's a newer powder, and there isn't voluminous data tucked away in old publications as there is with powders like Bullseye. Good luck, and please keep up posted on your progress.

October 19, 2008, 06:16 PM	#13
ShootingNut Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2006 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 1,475	Wes and Zip Thanks guys, ya I know that I should have just stuck with my 125 grain leads, as they have always worked very well for me. And you are right, not much for loading data with my current powders. Oh well, didn't order a truck load of 147's, so I'll keep it low and load them up and we shall see. Not one to take chances, value my guns and my hand very much! Appreciate your posts. Regards, SN

October 20, 2008, 01:13 PM	#14
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	let's pretend -147g LFP -4.6g Power Pistol (although, theoretically, I've used 4.9g WAP, too) -sorted sized case -CCI500 (can substitute WSP) -OAL 1.135--1.140" NOT "theory": 4.9g WAP Speer / WIN used cases The LFP I use mikes at .3565". It weighs about 146g, maybe a wee bit more. By the hundreds....... Just pretendin'...... Powder discussion: In my testing I've found best accuracy from the weights I use --115g up to 151g-- with powders more in the 'medium' burn-rate range. I note many Bullseye-discipline 9x19 users are using Power Pistol and a 121g Hornady. __________________ . "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"