Proper COL / Seating Depth for Berrys HBFN

[Mike / Tx]

Just a couple of things here,

First and foremost, being an engineer one would expect you to follow some sort of guideline in development for your ammo. What I read is you simply picked the top charge weight and figure that it will be fine. Also you yourself pointed out all of the associated red tape that companies have to go through because of the misunderstanding of loading ammunition, yet you disregard the number one rule, WORK UP SLOW and just straight to a top end load.

Now for the other point, as mentioned, the hollow base bullets are longer for a reason. They are for accuracy and in most cases the load data is sometimes different than for the flat base counterpart. Longer bullets can and will spike pressure to some degree no matter the weight simply do to them hitting the lands quicker than the shorter flat base version. They will through the simple act of having more bearing surface also induce more pressure, even if it is minute. However add a fast powder, to a slam stop or instant pressure due to more bullet engraving and you can see a resulting over pressure situation. As mentioned it might not happen with the first 25, 75, or even 100, but throw in some fouling whether powder or copper, or combination of both and maybe just a little lead just for kicks and you can easily see the compounding effects.

Since Oct of year before last I have loaded and shot in excess of around 4K of Berry's in both the HBRN the FBRN and their HP. I did however work up the loads from low to high and as such have found that with some powders things get squirrely real fast. I also seat to fit the magazine or the chamber in my pistols which ever is the functioning best of the two. However loads starting low and being worked up, I haven't had much if any issues other than knowing by my chrono when things spike. If I find a powder that spikes before I get to a top listed load I would rather not use it. I use a LOT of Bullseye, and Accurate powders in my 9mm loads and other than some of the loads being a bit sooty with the BE, I have had no issues.

My best suggestion would be to start your loads, as recommended, at the bottom of the load data, then work up with your pistol and make sure things are all well before jumping to the top end stuff. It might be fine in my gun or 50 other peoples, but may take yours apart in your hand.

[TheGuyOfSouthamerica]

Dufus,

Thanks for sending me your load data per email.

I wonder if VV N340 is that much slower that VV N330 so that 4.5 grain N340 equals to 3.9 grain of N330.

[Ben_Snow]

Mike / Tx wrote

First and foremost, being an engineer one would expect you to follow some sort of guideline in development for your ammo. What I read is you simply picked the top charge weight and figure that it will be fine. Also you yourself pointed out all of the associated red tape that companies have to go through because of the misunderstanding of loading ammunition, yet you disregard the number one rule, WORK UP SLOW and just straight to a top end load.

I normally don't respond to snarky posts, but I'll make an exception.

1. No one "picked" the top charge and expected it to be "fine". I had conflicting load data derived from multiple sources listing an average range of 3.6gr - 4.6gr, one source even had my high load as the starting point. Complicating matters was the lack of data for a plated bullet that matched the HBRN, that's not excuse-just an explanation of how I steered wrong.

2. I am meticulous about safety, the fact we are having this discussion is the result of my own due diligence; I recognized a possible conflict between the published COL, load data, and the powder burn rate; I acted on that conflict and sought guidance (this thread). After gathering more data I validated that my initial load was truly at the top threshold, and also that my COL needed to be adjusted for a wider safety margin; I am currently in the process of correcting my error. Again, due diligence taken BEFORE firing, not after.

3. Because I am new to the practice I handle every loading task manually. Every case is inspected multiple times, EACH powder drop is manually measured and digitally weighed (often verified again with a beam scale), the COL (and other measurements) of EVERY cartridge is checked with a caliper prior to going in the box. I removed the worm gear of my Turret Press forcing me to focus on each step. It probably takes me 4X longer to handload than most beginners, but this 'engineer' is proud to say he does strictly follow and even exceed development guidelines. Doesn't stop there, post-firing I gather my brass and meticulously look for any signs of over-pressure; I'm still a rookie at that task, but dozens of youtube videos have brought me up to speed.

3. There is a lot more conversation occurring behind the scenes than what appears in this thread, don't assume I just slapped something together and was heading to the range. There are several members that I converse with a great deal using the forums PM feature; they are both mentoring and monitoring my progress, and I submit every final recipe so they can validate for safety prior to any actual firing. Those member's can chime in if they wish, they can attest that I inundate their inbox with questions on an almost daily basis.

Yes, still a beginner that will make mistakes, but a safe beginner that catches his own mistakes. I guess I'm still adapting to this tiny ammo, my previous job involved something a bit larger: FMJ with a solid fuel load of Thiokol M-55e and a COL of 59' 9.5".

PS - Thanks for the 2nd and 3rd paragraph, some very good info and advice given--much appreciated

[Mike / Tx]

Ben,

Wasn't really trying to be snarky as you put it. Having read from the beginning of the post however and based upon how it is worded I am not the only one who gathered that the load was a top end load from the get go.

I am far from being an expert but I do have many years and countless rounds assembled. Have I ever had an issue absolutely. Luckily nothing more than a blow primer or two, but plenty enough to wake you up to reality.

Most folks do not really grasp the concept of 25-65K PSI erupting in your hand or face. If they did there would be a whole lot less that shoot much less handload. To most its just a little boom or a big boom.

I fully and completely wish you all the best and that you have a long and fruitful hand loading experience. Just that the initial lift off should always Starr slow and build rather than skipping over a load or even range simply because your estimated start range is in the middle of an average. You mentioned starting out, don't rush through things you might be surprised at how very well the low end load really do shoot. The flip side of that is how surprised you might be if that extropulated load happens to be that one particular combo that just goes squirrely.

[Ben_Snow]

Thanks Mike...

I truly thought I was starting on the low/mid end of the scale and had a few published sources that agreed with that. Yes, that load was a mistake, and yes it would have been better to catch it BEFORE producing any ammo. But it was caught though my own quality control checks and balances, so my system works. The problem is now fixed, the COL reduced along with the load.

As a disabled veteran I am very aware of things that go boom, and how fragile the human body is when faced with the physics of dangerous materials and objects. It shouldn't make us afraid to do things such as reloading, but we should maintain a healthy respect and not become complacent when working with explosives and toxic materials. I performed a risk management study on workplace injuries back in the 90's, almost 80% of injuries occur to those with the most task experience. Experienced workers become complacent with safety practices, and start to cut corners to save time. Even on this forum it exists, I often hear "well I've loaded 1000's of rounds and never had a problem" to justify a less than safe practice just because the odds have been in their favor. How many wear eye protection while decapping/capping primers? How many ensure proper ventilation when smelting lead? I remember riding around in the back of my Dad's pickup when I was a kid, can you imagine allowing that today with your own children/grandchildren, or would you say "well nothing happened to me when I was a kid, so its safe"?


So thank you for being concerned about my safety, perhaps it could have been done a bit more tactfully, but your heart was in the right place.

[kmw1954]

In the endeavor to learn more on the use of plated bullets I will gladly chat with and listen to anyone that has real time experience with them. Especially the Berry's as they seem to be the only one producing Hollow Base Plated bullets.

I find it everywhere that some say plated bullets should be loaded at cast lead levels and others such as the manufacturer which states they can be loaded to Jacketed levels. While others such as Western/Accurate and Hodgdon actually have published data for certain Berry's plated bullets.

Berry's stated that their Hollow Base Thick Plated bullets can be loaded to 1500fps., yet I have yet to find any powder manufacturer that lists any data for a cast lead 9mm bullet to 1500fps.

So I'll ask again, Which is correct? Cast Lead data of Jacketed data?

I find that because of all the misleading or uninformed information found on all the forums regarding plated bullets and the Hollow Base Berry's in particular I find I'll follow and trust the data published by powder manufacturers such as Western or Hodgdon.

Next issue is COAL.

Berry's web site lists a starting length of 1.160 for their 124gr RN bullets yet again when one goes to Hodgdon's website to get data you will find they base their load data on a OAL of 1.150... That in itself is a discrepancy of .010" and depending on the powder being used can be a huge difference.

I personally can relate to have something explode in your face. What was involved was a 10 ton hydraulic press and a piece of steel. My face lost and I spent 6 hrs. in the ER getting x-rays and trying to stop the bleeding from both sides of my nose and having my shoulder immobilized. Just a fraction on an inch in any direction and it could have killed me or taken an eye.

[Mike / Tx]

The thing with the manufacturer saying that these type bullets can withstand 1500FPS is that they can be loaded to say 1150'ish in a standard length 9mm pistol. Take the same loaded round and shoot it through one of the little carbines and you now have 6" more barrel length which going with a WAG, is 75FPS more per inch or another 450'ish FPS for a total of right around 1500fps.

Just as an example using factory type loads here is a good cross reference of velocity verses barrel length for the 9mm(<---click)

I as mentioned have shot a LOT of the Berry bullets over the past two years. The loads I have used the most with them are basically starting loads using Bullseye. Not because of the construction or type of bullets, but I find they are family friendly in our guns. In other words my wife can shoot them good as well as my 8yr old grandson with no difficulties. Don't even show up with the 226 and only a hundred with my 15yr old grandson, he will knock those out in about 15 minutes.

As for rolling them up the scale of power, yes I have those as well, but I use powders which give more of a push than a pop like AA-5, & 7. Those are two really sweet powders to work with and give amazingly accurate loads.

As far as data used, well I use data for the weight of the bullet I am shooting. I start with the bottom load, usually suggested by the powder manufacturer. I load mainly for accuracy and not velocity so if I am working up towards the upper end loads and am drilling them through a ragged hole at only .2 above the start load well thats good enough for me.

If I am loading for some serious social occasion that might arise, then I usually consider something mid way through the data but still I would rather have everything drilling a ragged hole to begin with and if I can get both well all the better. I will say that I have shot quite a few of the Berry Hybrid Hollow Points. While I DO find them very accurate, I have not really seen that much in the way of expansion that makes me feel warm and fuzzy. I cast my own 125'ish grain HP and it has shown a much more reliable expansion in the media
I use than the Berry HHP. I'm not suggesting that they aren't a good bullet just that I personally would use either my own cast or possibly an XTP or Gold Dot.

[kmw1954]

Mike, very clear thoughts there and well stated. Believe we think very much alike.

I believe as plated bullets become more prevalent because of restrictions on the use of bare lead more and more published data will become more available. We can already see this with Western/Accurate which I for one appreciate and because of their efforts I will be buying some of their powder.

When I first started with plated bullets just as Ben did I found data all over the spectrum from low to high. Even when comparing data for particular powders using both lead or jacketed. Then to bring up the subject on the forums it all got even more convoluted with suggestions and recommendations.

So taking all the data I could find and starting a noted list of all the starting points for the powder I was using I made an educated guess as to a safe starting point. Which was Hodgdon HP-38 at 3.9gr which they listed as the starting load for the 124gr Hollow Base. They did not have a listing for the Solid Base Round Nose 124gr bullet.

I loaded 10 rounds at that level at a OAL of 1.155 which also split the discrepancy between Berry's listing and Hodgdon's. Then I also loaded 10 at 4.0gr and 10 at 4.1gr., all at the 1.155 length.

The 3.9gr load proved to be a bit weak for my PT92 as they would fire and cycle fine accept the last round would not lock the slide back on the PT92 but worked fine in the XD Mod2. Moving up just .1gr proved to be enough to correct the slide lock on the PT92. Not sure if moving the seating depth to 1.150 as Hodgdon listed would have had the same effect.

I am now loading these 124gr Solid base Berry's to between 4.0/4.1 and 4.1/4.2gr of HP-38 and they perform very well in both guns. I see no need to go to max load of 4.4gr. They are accurate and very pleasant to shoot.

Which brings me back to the data on Western/Accurate which shows the difference with either #5 or #7 as being almost a full grain heavier for the Solid Base compared to the Hollow Base of the same weight Berry's bullet.

Now I hope this discussion helps Ben or any others thinking of using Berry's Hollow Base bullets to gain some insight.

I have also had many long conversations with some folks that do a lot of competitive shooting that are using the X-Treme plated bullets and they to seldom load much above starting loads with those bullet in their pistols.

[Ben_Snow]

KMW Wrote:

Now I hope this discussion helps Ben or any others thinking of using Berry's Hollow Base bullets to gain some insight.

KMW, the contributions of Nick, Mike, Yourself, and several others has turned this thread into a gold mine of practical and reliable plated bullet information. A big thanks to all that contributed.

It seems that plated bullets are expotentially growing in popularity; indoor range requirements, cost, and health concerns seem to be the major push. As I posted in another thread, during a recent trip to Cabela's I found that 85% of the available bullet shelf space has been allocated to Plated Bullet sales.

When I started reloading with plated bullets I was suprised at the lack of data, bad info, or downright conflicting advice from the major reloading books/websites. My only hope is that the reloading book publishers jump on the bandwagon in the future, include more recipes for popular plated bullet combinations, and perhaps devote a chapter to the particular requirements and techniques required for handloading with plated bullets. In the meantime all of us should be thankfull to our fellow forum members that are busy backfilling the knowledge gaps.

[kmw1954]

I as an amateur reloader rely on the information I can find in the load data manuals and the manufacturers websites and with that statement I find Alliant very lacking in this regards. Which is a shame as I use to use their powder because it was widely and readily available and at a good price point.

Long ago I took a technical class and the one text book we had was titled "The Art and Science of _ _ _" . That title stuck with me. Loading bullets is much the same, there is an art and a science to it. The Art is that what works and is pleasant to me may not work for you or be very pleasurable. The Science on the other hand cannot be ignored.

Cast bullets used to be a cheap way to hand load for pistols. Today the cost of plated pistol bullets can be found for the same cost or at sales many times for less than the cost of store bought cast lead.

[charlesasmith]

Just begining to load 9mm for the 1st time. I am concerned about a safe load and am aware of the issue of case mouth vs ogive chamber contact. Checking online for COL info I found a discrepancy in factory recommended COL for the Berry HBRN bullet. Called Berry's and was told that the recommended COL is for the MAXIMUM (longest) seating depth. I will be starting at that point to see if it will allow loading into my magazines. Once clearance is determined, I will look at the powder company's recommended loads.

OT - I will be testing with WSF and CFE Pistol as I find Bullseye to be very dirty in my 38 special loads, but accurate. Is there any significant difference in cleanliness and accuracy in loading VV N320 or N340 to warrant the extra cost

Chuck

[Dufus]

I can recommend VV N340 for the 9mm. I have been using it exclusively for 4 years in 4 different pistols.

It is the cleanest powder I have used in the 9. I use it with cast and jacketed bullets of 115, 124, 147, and 135 gr (the cast bullet).

It is totally muzzle flash free, as we have observed at night.

A bonus is that it fills the case which eliminates the chance of a double charge.

[ThatsNice]

Originally Posted by Mike / Tx

Just a couple of things here,

First and foremost, being an engineer one would expect you to follow some sort of guideline in development for your ammo. What I read is you simply picked the top charge weight and figure that it will be fine. Also you yourself pointed out all of the associated red tape that companies have to go through because of the misunderstanding of loading ammunition, yet you disregard the number one rule, WORK UP SLOW and just straight to a top end load.

Now for the other point, as mentioned, the hollow base bullets are longer for a reason. They are for accuracy and in most cases the load data is sometimes different than for the flat base counterpart. Longer bullets can and will spike pressure to some degree no matter the weight simply do to them hitting the lands quicker than the shorter flat base version. They will through the simple act of having more bearing surface also induce more pressure, even if it is minute. However add a fast powder, to a slam stop or instant pressure due to more bullet engraving and you can see a resulting over pressure situation. As mentioned it might not happen with the first 25, 75, or even 100, but throw in some fouling whether powder or copper, or combination of both and maybe just a little lead just for kicks and you can easily see the compounding effects.

Since Oct of year before last I have loaded and shot in excess of around 4K of Berry's in both the HBRN the FBRN and their HP. I did however work up the loads from low to high and as such have found that with some powders things get squirrely real fast. I also seat to fit the magazine or the chamber in my pistols which ever is the functioning best of the two. However loads starting low and being worked up, I haven't had much if any issues other than knowing by my chrono when things spike. If I find a powder that spikes before I get to a top listed load I would rather not use it. I use a LOT of Bullseye, and Accurate powders in my 9mm loads and other than some of the loads being a bit sooty with the BE, I have had no issues.

My best suggestion would be to start your loads, as recommended, at the bottom of the load data, then work up with your pistol and make sure things are all well before jumping to the top end stuff. It might be fine in my gun or 50 other peoples, but may take yours apart in your hand.

I know this is a reply to old post. Looking for guidance. I got into reloading last year. Ive had some good success reloading 124 gn HBFN, HBRN, and Xtreme plated HP, with N340 and putting rounds thru 3.1" P365. Which can accept +P. But I have a few questions. I compare velocity to 124 gn manufacture ammo on same day at range with chronometer. Im using short barrel 9mm and I have had to work my loads above recommended max gn of powder to achieve same velocity as man ammo. is it safe to say reloads with higher then typical gn powder but same velocity as manufacturer ammo should be at roughly same pressure? Recoil and performance is = between reload and man ammo. velocities for reload/man are around 1023-1050fps

[Unclenick]

Welcome to the forum. Please go here to introduce yourself.

The answer to your question is NO! There are many powder numbers available because the characteristics of each one is different from the characteristics of the others, and one of the things that difference means is they do not produce the same velocity from the same peak pressure. When velocity matches, it means the average pressure in the bore was a match, not the peak pressure. In general, slower powder produces the same average with a lower peak pressure value and a higher muzzle pressure value. Fast powder producing the same velocity will have a higher peak pressure and a lower muzzle pressure to get the same average pressure. However, excessive peak pressure is what can damage the gun, so loading for velocity with a powder that has a faster relative burn rate in your chambering and with your bullet choice than the powder the commercial manufacturer used will raise the peak pressure above what his load got.

A fast powder is used instead of a slow powder when a lower velocity load, like a target shooting load, is desired. It is used instead of slow powder because the slow powder loaded to lower velocity and pressure doesn't burn very well, which means it wastes powder and produces a lot of fouling to clean up. Slow powders don't like reduced pressures.

Look for powders with published load data that produce the velocity you want, and obtain one of those powders.

[Marco Califo]

No, do not increase beyond published loads to get to a published velocity. That is flawed, and potentially unsafe, thinking. A shorter barrel will generally achieve lower velocity. There is no such guarantee that you can reach a published velocity out of a shorter barrel.
I suggest that you selected your load for the highest theoretical velocity, considering the barrel length. What you get from that load is what you will get from your pistol.

[ThatsNice]

Originally Posted by Unclenick

Welcome to the forum. Please go here to introduce yourself.

The answer to your question is NO! There are many powder numbers available because the characteristics of each one is different from the characteristics of the others, and one of the things that difference means is they do not produce the same velocity from the same peak pressure. When velocity matches, it means the average pressure in the bore was a match, not the peak pressure. In general, slower powder produces the same average with a lower peak pressure value and a higher muzzle pressure value. Fast powder producing the same velocity will have a higher peak pressure and a lower muzzle pressure to get the same average pressure. However, excessive peak pressure is what can damage the gun, so loading for velocity with a powder that has a faster relative burn rate in your chambering and with your bullet choice than the powder the commercial manufacturer used will raise the peak pressure above what his load got.

A fast powder is used instead of a slow powder when a lower velocity load, like a target shooting load, is desired. It is used instead of slow powder because the slow powder loaded to lower velocity and pressure doesn't burn very well, which means it wastes powder and produces a lot of fouling to clean up. Slow powders don't like reduced pressures.

Look for powders with published load data that produce the velocity you want, and obtain one of those powders.

THANK YOU!

[ThatsNice]

Thank you!

[ThatsNice]

Originally Posted by Marco Califo

No, do not increase beyond published loads to get to a published velocity. That is flawed, and potentially unsafe, thinking. A shorter barrel will generally achieve lower velocity. There is no such guarantee that you can reach a published velocity out of a shorter barrel.
I suggest that you selected your load for the highest theoretical velocity, considering the barrel length. What you get from that load is what you will get from your pistol.

Thank you as well!

[44 AMP]

I skimmed this thread, and one of the things I noticed that didn't get touched on back when the main discussion was going on was "how much of the bullet is in the case"??

Lots of discussion about COAL, what's too long, too short, how different COALs change pressure, etc. None of it looked at the seating depth of the bullet base. And that is what controls available powder space and thereby affects the pressure.

A longer pointed bullet and a short stubby one can have identical seating depth in the case, but very different overall loaded lengths.

The way I see it, for something like a 9mm Luger round overall length matters to keep the bullet off the rifling and let it fit and feed from the magazine. Any length that does that, and keeps the proper amount of bullet inside the case, keeping the powder space correct for the powder charge works just fine. But if meeting an arbitrary over all loaded length changes the powder space volume, you can have issues....

Welcome to TFL and listen to Uncle Nick, his advice is sound and valid.

[jetinteriorguy]

I use this method for determining seating depth in semi auto pistols. Start with making a dummy round seating the bullet as long as your mag can handle reliably. Then pull the barrel and start plunking it. Keep seating deeper until it plunks, then seat it .010 deeper to allow for bullet variances. Then make four more and hand cycle them through to make sure they work in your gun. Then work a load up starting from the bottom being careful not to get a compressed load before hitting the maximum recommended load. Then test for accuracy, and after finding the load you like load twenty more and test again. If all this works out then load away. One other step for me is to do this with whichever of my pistols is the most finicky, such as a short throat or any feeding issues particular to that gun.

[44 AMP]

Then pull the barrel and start plunking it.

I don't disagree with your methods, only wish to point out that "pulling the barrel" isn't possible with every single semi auto out there.

[Unclenick]

But also note that while the plunk test works well with jacketed bullets unless the case becomes too short (firing shortens 45 Auto cases rather than stretching them like rifle cases), with softer bullets like cast or plated, you usually get the best accuracy by jamming the throat with them if the magazine can still accommodate them that long and they still feed at that length. For guns that the barrel comes out of easily for use as a gauge, getting the head flush with the back end will usually feed. This uses the bullet for headspacing rather than the case mouth. I've had this practice cut group size by as much as 40% as compared to plunking soft bullets.