FMJ vs XTP Load Data?

[Arkmaker]

Hello,
I was reading in Handloader mag the other day about the 9mm reloading they did.

One thing they mentioned was that you could use the load data for the XTP bullet in place of the FMJ data.

Is this pretty much standard practice for all calibers as long as the weights are the same? I ask, because I find much more data for the XTP than I do for FMJ and this would sure make things easy if true.

Thanks for any remarks pro or con...

[zplinker]

You would be doing so at your own risk, and there could be plenty. One example that comes to mind, is 40 s&w loads: using 155 gr. Silvertips, 155 gr. Gold Dots, 155 gr. Starfire, and 155 gr. Hornady XTP's, shooting for a muzzle velocity of 1225 fps. There was a 10 per cent variation in powder charge to get the same result. Different bullets have different hardness, bearing surface, etc., and the pressure will be affected.

Comes back to the old adage: 'never assume anything', especially when dealing with explosives.

[SL1]

Substiting bullets of the same weight can be unsafe without knowing some things about their influence on PEAK pressure.

The 9mm Luger cartridge is very short, leaving little space inside the case for the powder, once the bullet is seated. So, if two bullets of the same weight, but different LENGTHS are seated to the same overall cartridge length, then the spaces left for the powder will be significantly different. Because the space is small to begin with, seemingly small changes are relatively large on a percentage basis. And, changing powder space changes pressure by a greater percentage. So, it is pretty easy to get to very high pressures by substituting bullets or even by seating the same bullet as used in the data to a deeper position in the case.

One way to deal with that is to use the same bullet weight and the same SEATING DEPTH. To do that, you need to know the length of the bullet used in the data as well as the overall cartridge length used in the data. Subtracting the overall cartridge length from the sum of the bullet length and case length will gie you the seating depth used in the data. Then, subtracting that seating depth from the sum of the case length and YOUR chosen bullet will give you the overall cartridge length for YOUR cartridge that should produce similar pressures to the data that you are using.

There are some caveats in this, particularly not changing the bullet constuction type from cup-and-core to solid copper, which will also affect the pressure.

When you do this seating depth math exercise, you will often find that there is little difference. But, especially in 9mm, where there are a lot of different bullet nose designs, bullets of the same weight CAN be different enough in length to change pressures by tens of thousands of psi, if one is not careful.

SL1

[buck460XVR]

Comes back to the old adage: 'never assume anything', especially when dealing with explosives.

First off......smokeless powders are not explosives. If you do not know this, you should not be giving advice on reloading.

Secondly, info given in Handloader magazine is not an assumption. It is written by handloaders for handloaders. It is not info given casually on the internet by the uninformed. To the OP....in most cases you can substitute bullets of similar weight, profile and bearing surface for others. Many small bullet manufacturers(MG, Berry's, etc) have no published load recipes for their bullets. So one uses known recipes for bullets of similar weight, profile and bearing surface. As long as you start at min and work your way up, you generally should not have a problem.

[Arkmaker]

I went back an re-read the article. Let me quote the paragraph. I may have read what I wanted to see rather than it's intent.

I asked here on this forum, because I am a relative newbie and have had some very good advise already given to me by members from questions I've asked or found though reading posts......so Thank you once again.

quoted from Handloader mag.

"The only FMJ roundnose bullet listed is the 125-grain Sierra. Both the Hornady 115-grain FMJ and Speer 124 TMJ roundnose were tried with excellent results, but due to space limitations and to avoid redundency, the data was not included. It is suggested to use the Hornady 115-grain XTP data and the Speer 124-grain GDHP data, respectively, and seat bullets as outlined. Velocities, for all practical purposes will be the same.""

So, what I want to read out of this is that I could use the data found for a 125-grain FMJ round nose Hornady XTP to load, lets say a 125 FMJ bullet made by Armscore (Everglades) in a .38 caliber, using the same powder (TiteGroup). That is what I want to read

[SL1]

Buck,

While I have a lot of respect for Handloader Magazine, the snippet of info the OP posted was that XTP data could be used for FMJ bullets in the 9mm cartridge. IF that is EXACTLY what was written in Handloader (my copy is elsewhere), then it was not a very good thing to write, because there are so many different FMJ bullet shapes in 9mm. And, if it was NOT EXACTLY what was written in Handloader, we still need to realize that it is what the OP has taken away from the article. So, we need to deal with THAT, rather than ASSUME that it is OK because the OP says he saw it in Handloader.

To illustrate the point more clearly, I will use some QuickLOAD calculations:

Starting with a charge of Power Pistol that gives 34,538 psi with the 115 grain Hornady XTP HP bullet (0.545" in length seated to 1.169" overall cartridge length) and then substituting the longest 115 grain 9mm FMJ bullet that I could find in the QuickLOAD bullet database ( a 0.626" PMP bullet) without changing any other parameters, the pressure goes to 54,740 psi.

But, maybe the OP would figure-out not to compress that load to 125% loading density under the longer bullet. So, let's use a charge of Bullseye that gives 34,613 psi under the Hornady XTP bullet, and then substitute the PMP bullet. That gives 49,912 psi with only about 10% compression. Or, we could use a charge of HP-38 powder and get 34,387 psi with the Hornady XTP and 50,209 psi with the PMP bullet and still have 4% empty space under the bullet.

The point is that all of the example cartridges with the substituted PMP bullet would give pressures higher than even the SAAMI "+P" peak pressure standard.

With shorter choices for the FMJ bullet, these pressure levels would be less. But, the Hornady XTP HP bullet nose design is also one of the longer hollow-point bullet designs, so trying to extend the concept of hollow-point data for FMJ designs could be even worse if one were to start with a shorter hollow-point design, such as the Speer Gold Dot design.

SL1

[Arkmaker]

Re-reading and re-reading again, Handloader is referring to 3 specific bullets and 3 specific bullets only.
That is now my take. I am not going to get out of building up my loads no matter how hard I want to look at things cross-eyed.

Thank you all for your input.

On a happy note, I have found a fantastic load using Accurate #2 for my 38 4" barrel revolver.

4.3 grains Accurate #2
125 Grain Armscore FMJ RN
Federal Sm Pistol Primers
Seated to 1.500" OAL with a heavy taper crimp.

Shoots like a dream with accuracy to match. Now onto the TiteGroup as the #2 is starting to run low,

[SL1]

Arkmaker,

What the Handloader quote is saying is that data for the Hornady 115 grain XTP data can be used for the HORNADY 115 grain FMJ, and the Speer GDHP bullet data can be used with the SPEER 115 grain TMJ bullet, RESPECTIVELY. That is two examples of bullets of the same weights but with different nose designs FROM THE SAME MANUFACTERER being able to use the same data. In fact, both the Hornady and the Speer loading manuals use the same data table for their respective pair of bullets. But, the max loads for some of the powders differ between the manufacturers.

The examples I provided in my post to Buck show that there are other FMJ designs from other manufacturers that CANNOT safely use the same data as the bullets in the Handloader article, and that article never intended to say that you can.

So, it is best to not over-generalize.

But, using the seating depth concept I provided in my first post, you can think properly about what is at least the most important factor when you substitute a bullet, and that goes a long way toward staying out of trouble when you need to do it. (We all know how hard it is to find all of the components needed to exactly duplicate the cartridges used in the load data, even when nobody is creatiing shortages with gun control proposals.)

SL1

Edit: You two are posting faster than I am, so my posts do not really reflect your posts directly above mine.

[iraiam]

I was reading in Handloader mag the other day about the 9mm reloading they did.

One thing they mentioned was that you could use the load data for the XTP bullet in place of the FMJ data.

Is this pretty much standard practice for all calibers as long as the weights are the same? I ask, because I find much more data for the XTP than I do for FMJ and this would sure make things easy if true.

I believe this comes from Hornaday books that list multipe bullets with the same recipe. I have interchanged Hornaday XTP and Hornady FMJ bullets in the sam recipe. *ONLY HORNADAY BULLETS* if you look at their manuals, the bullets have the same ballistic coefficient and sectional density between XTP and FMJ.

[Adamantium]

I'm surprised such a simple question can generate such poor replies. The simple answer is yes, you can substitute jacketed bullets of the same weight using the same load data. To understand why my (and Bucks) advice is good and zplinkers and SL1's advice is misguided you have to understand one thing. Every time you change something about your load (a bullet for example) you need to start back at a reduced charge (no more than 90% of max) and work back up while watching for signs of high pressure. Changing thing about a load will certainly effect pressure in some way. That doesn't mean a dangerous situation is being created or that you can't watch for it while working up your load.

For example...

To illustrate the point more clearly, I will use some QuickLOAD calculations:

Starting with a charge of Power Pistol that gives 34,538 psi with the 115 grain Hornady XTP HP bullet (0.545" in length seated to 1.169" overall cartridge length) and then substituting the longest 115 grain 9mm FMJ bullet that I could find in the QuickLOAD bullet database ( a 0.626" PMP bullet) without changing any other parameters, the pressure goes to 54,740 psi.

This is a perfect example of a careless reloader. Taking a load right at max pressure, changing something with it and not doing a proper load work up. Careless reloading...

Another faulty example,

One example that comes to mind, is 40 s&w loads: using 155 gr. Silvertips, 155 gr. Gold Dots, 155 gr. Starfire, and 155 gr. Hornady XTP's, shooting for a muzzle velocity of 1225 fps. There was a 10 per cent variation in powder charge to get the same result. Different bullets have different hardness, bearing surface, etc., and the pressure will be affected.

Comes back to the old adage: 'never assume anything', especially when dealing with explosives.

This tells you nothing about chamber pressure because it isn't being measured, only muzzle velocity. You can't measure chamber pressure using muzzle velocity or powder charge. Either you have pressure measuring equipment or you are watching for signs of over pressure like everyone else.

So to bring it home, working up from a reduced load and watching for pressure signs is the bread and butter of a smart reloader. That is why you can swap out bullets (or primers, brands of brass, different chambers/barrels, different lots of powder, etc) and not walk right into a dangerous situation.

[Arkmaker]

Thank you everyone. You have given me a lot to think about..."Think" being the word of my day.


All good feedback, but here is another question about load data that relates to this whole theory of inter-changability. Are all bullets created equal? What I mean is that given a 125-grain FMJ RN bullet made by Armscore (what I have on stock), would it be "equal in length" to a Speer FMJ RN or a Hornady FMJ RN?? Or any other brand FMJ RN for that matter??

Now I don't even know if Speer or Hornady make a FMJ RN, but my point or question really is are the bullet manufacturers all on the same page as to overall length for a given caliber? If not, then seating depth could increase pressures, yes? And that seems like it would also mess with load data even with starting loads.

[Runswiththunder]

Regarding your question for seating depth, the Hornady manual provides the same powder charge for either 115 gr fmj (#35557) or 115 gr XTP (#35540), but indicates a minimum OAL of 1.10 for the fmj and 1.075 for the XTP.

[SL1]

Arkmaker,

Be careful not to confuse overall cartridge length with bullet length.

Cartridge manufacturers are pretty much "on the same page" with respect to making the finished cartridges about the same length. But, they do that by seating bullets of very different lengths to different depths in the case.

Adamantium is only partially right about working-up a load. As he wrote, you need to start low and watch for any signs that things are not right. And, he is correct that you cannot tell much about the peak pressure of a load from the velocity that you measure if you have a chronograph, at least not without a lot of complicated mathematical computations using additional information.

Where he is wrong is in telling you that you can work-up a load for ANY batch of components by beginning with a safe starting charge weight and stopping when you see pressure signs. The problem is that the SAAMI pressure limit for the 9mm is only 35,000 psi (or 38,500 psi for the "+P" ammo). At those pressures, there are not any RELIABLE pressure signs. Most people look at the primers after the cartridges are fired, but that is not really very useful for avoiding over-pressure loads. In a semi-auto pistol, you can get some idea from how hard the spent cases are ejected, but that still won't tell you enough if you are using powder that is faster burning than usual for full-power loads.

So, it is not a good idea to tell a new reloader to just start low and work up with any components. It really pays to UNDERSTAND what effects to EXPECT when you are deviating from the components used in the pressure tested data. And, even then, you are still going to have different LOT NUMBERS for the primers and powder, which can vary the peak pressure of a load by a significant amount.

So, you should always start with the "start" load in a manual, even when you are not substituting components. But that procedure does not make it safe to BLINDLY substitute components. The more you learn, the better you will become at knowing what substitutions are relatively safe. But, just because a guy writes on the Internet that "I did that a thousand times and I'm still here" doesn't make it safe. After you read these reloading forums for a while, you will see that some people HAVE blown-up their guns and sometimes hurt themselves to some degree in the process. Those are the lessons you want to learn by READING about somebody else's mistake, rather than making all those mistakes yourself.

SL1

[zplinker]

Exposives? Not technically. Until you get careless.

[Adamantium]

You are one of many reloaders who creates rules about safety that don't actually exist. It is a miracle anyone survived the 90's when many loads read as follows...

9mm Luger, 125 FMJ, Rem 1 1/2, 1.15 OAL.

No load data for a JHP and no OAL listed for any JHP let alone specific ones. Pulled right out of Alliants 1996 manual. Some older manuals don't even specify what type of nose profile, only the weight and if it is jacketed or cast.

Everything I am talking about is safe and has been done for decades. Most of the stuff you are talking about you don't even have the ability to accurately measure. Putting a bunch of words in ALL CAPS doesn't sway me like it used to either.

[SL1]

Adamantium,

I really don't understand why you are insisting on telling a new reloader that it is OK to do things that most modern reloading manuals tell us not to do.

In this particular thread, a new handloader misunderstood something that he read in a magazine about the applicabilty of some load data to other bullets. And, with some discussion in the thread, he realized that he had over-generalized it in his mind.

In the process, I explained, with some examples, how bullet substitution can affect seating depth and how that can affect pressure. I also explained how he can compensate for that effect with some simple measurements and a calculation. None of that is wrong, and you have not argued with any of it.

What you have done is try to undermine that advice by attacking things that YOU said that I said, although I never did say them. And, you keep insisting that bullet substitution cannot be a problem, without any basis other than you have done it and did not have a problem. So, you are unwittingly proving my previous point to the OP that SOME people will write unsafe advice on the Internet, and that he needs to be careful about that.

So, my work is done here. I will not be responding to any more of your posts on this thread unless you specifically deal with the examples that I provided to support my statements. I am confident that what I have already provided will be more persuasive to objective readers than any unsupported opinions that you provide.

SL1

[buck460XVR]

Buck,

While I have a lot of respect for Handloader Magazine, the snippet of info the OP posted was that XTP data could be used for FMJ bullets in the 9mm cartridge. IF that is EXACTLY what was written in Handloader (my copy is elsewhere), then it was not a very good thing to write, because there are so many different FMJ bullet shapes in 9mm. And, if it was NOT EXACTLY what was written in Handloader, we still need to realize that it is what the OP has taken away from the article. So, we need to deal with THAT, rather than ASSUME that it is OK because the OP says he saw it in Handloader.

SL1......You, nor I, can control the ability of other folks on the internet to read and comprehend the written English language. One reason I never give load recipes on the internet. What I stated was, that if Handloader magazine gave out info, that it was correct. You have provided nuttin' to show anything to the contrary. If the OP cannot understand simple statements in Handloader magazine, you really think he can decipher all the confusing info he have given him? Besides, the OPs question is so generic, that even if he misunderstood the article, the answer to his question would be the same. The question by the OP is one that has been around for decades.....can one safely substitute a bullet of similar weight, profile, bearing surface and construction for another in a load recipe? For decades the answer has always been the same. Yes, as long as one backs down to minimum to start. Which is also a rule when one uses the exact components as used in a published recipe. Starting with a max load and compressing it to 125%(if that is even possible) was never mentioned until you brought it up.

This is from Berry's Bullets website when asked how to load their bullets...

When loading plated bullets we have found best results using low- to mid-range jacketed data in the load manual. You must use data for a bullet that has the same weight and profile as the one you are loading. Do not exceed mid-range loads.

.....wow, nuttin' about exact load recipes using specific components! How dare a major bullet manufacturer give out such dangerous and erroneous information to the general reloading public!

[SL1]

Buck,

You seem to be wanting to argue about something without actually listening to yourself. As YOU wrote in your last post, Berry's Bullets (which wants to sell bullets without going to the expense of pressure-testing loads with its bullets and publishing a manual) expressly said "Do not exceed mid-range loads" in data published for other bullets. That, and the velocity limits placed on their bullets tends to keep things on the safe side, especially when they are saying that you must use the same weight AND PROFILE bullet for selecting the load data.

But, the OP's question was not whether you can start low enough to make your starting loads safe when you substitute a bullet. The question was whether the DATA is applicable to other bullets. That includes MAX loads. The point of my advice TO A NEW RELOADER was that the XTP data is NOT applicable to ALL 115 grain FMJ bullets in the 9mm Luger cartridge. I think my examples prove that beyond any doubt.

What you and some others seem to want to tell people is that they can safely work-up a load with any selection of components by starting with low charges and "looking for pressure signs." That WAS advice often printed in early manuals, bugt it had proven to be overly optimistic and applied way to broadly. While pressure signs are abundant and reasonably reliable in high-pressure rifle cartridges in modern, high-strength guns, there are NONE available for old black-powder cartridges like the .45 Colt when chambered in weaker guns like the Colt Single Action Army.

In mid-pressure cartridges like the 9mm Luger, there are a few high pressure indications, but none of them are reliable enough to really know when you have crossed the SAAMI pressure limit. Recoil and case ejection are the best indicators, for an autoloader. But recoil is notoriously subjective, and case ejection can be the same for loads with greatly different PEAK pressures because it depends more on the integral of pressure over time as the bullet is being pushed down the barrel. That integral can be the same for a lot of different pressure curves with much different peak pressures.

So, let's all be more careful about how cavalier we are with our advice to new reloaders.

And, please recognize that I did not tell him to never substitute a bullet. I even told him HOW to do it with some degree of understanding about how to compensate for differences in the bullets.

So, this really seems to be an argument over whether it is worth making just a slight bit of effort to be safe when substituting bullets. Why are you and Adamantium trying to argue against that?

SL1

[Arkmaker]

OK fellas,

I did not mean to start a war here! Actually, feel bad that this thread started off with my own mis-understanding of a magazine article. I see both of your points, but I as a new reloader or in 10 years from now hope that I will always err on the side of caution in all things related to reloading.

All that said, my apologies. I do think I can understand the advise given on the forum as either being sound or unsound and as a new reloader, it was the question of doubt that generated the first question of the thread in the first place. So see.....me has half a brain. I ask before venturing into the abyss when holding a pistol that goes bang 12" in front of my face!

Now, as to the info given in the Lee Reloading handbook (as an example) on load data. There are no case or bullet manufacturers stated with the exception of the XTP, which I assume is the Hornady brand and very popular from my reading. With that said, I will be very careful to note bullet lengths as well as seating depths in my logbook from now on.

I have always started my loads at the low recommended data and will continue so.
Thanks again guys.

[SL1]

Arkmaker,

You really have nothing to apologize for.

You are actually demonstrating the kind of caution that good handloaders need to use. We all have misread things, maybe with a little wishful thinking thrown-in, because we all have the same problem of trying to figure out how to use the components we can get (or want to use) with the limited data we can get.

And, coming to this forum is another good idea. It is about the most helpful and well informed discussion of reloading issues that I have found on the 'Net. I have learned a lot here, and try to pay it forward when I see a post from somebody that could use some guidance that I have the ability to provide. Sometimes a few folks will start an argument here, but the moderators tend to keep an eye on things and shut-down threads that get into personal attacks.

This forum can be especially helpful to folks who need a little info to fill in a gap. For instance, I described a simple calculation in post #3 of this thread. To use it, you would need to know the length of the bullet used in the data that you have. But, you probably don't have that bullet to measure. A quick post to this forum will probably get somebody who actually has that bullet to measure it and post its length.

And, if you need a load from a manual that you don't have, somebody on this forum will probably have that manual and post the load for you.

Many of us also have a program called QuickLOAD, which does numerical simulations of powder burning and bullet travel down the barrel, with outputs of pressures, bullet velocities, barrel travel times, percentage of powder burned, and much more. For complex issues, we can tell you how to take the measurements we need to adjust the proram to your gun, and make some runs for you. I bought the program after folks on this forum demostrated how much more useful it is than any of the programs that I had bought (or built myself) previously.

So, welcome aboard, and don't be shy.

SL1

[SL1]

One more piece of information on switching HP and FMJ bullets with Speer and Hornady data:

Although the Speer and Hornady manuals both use only one table for their 115 grain FMJ and HP bullets in the 9mm cartridge, the headings on both of those tables specify DIFFERENT COLs for the two bullet types. I don't have the Handloader Magazine article handy to see if the author mentioned that matter when he said that the same data could be used for the different bullet types. So, I am mentioning that issue here.

The differences are not too significant for the 115 grain bullets, only about 0.010". QuickLOAD suggests that a max load for the Speer FMJ bullet at the HP length would be only about 2,000 psi higher than at the proper FMJ length. Maybe a bit more if I had chosen a faster powder for making the comparison.

But, that observation should NOT be generalized for all of their bullets, even in the 9mm. For example, in the 124 grain bullets, the COLs differ by as much as 0.100" between FMJ and FP data in the Hornady manual. QuickLOAD suggests a pressure increase on the order of 35,000 psi (70,000 psi total) if a fast-enough powder is used to avoid compression by the deeper seating. That would be a handgrenade. While use of other, slower powders would either diminish the effect or at least alert the handloader that something was not right due to excessive pressure needed to seat a bullet, many combinations could still be dangerous with this much difference in COL.

So, seating depth IS important, and that is why manuals have started listing it. The lack of that type of information in Lee's manual (which just copies load data from other sources without capturing all of the details) makes it difficult to use safely without tracking-down the original data source for a load that you want to use.

SL1

[Adamantium]

Online forums are good but you have to remember that you will get responses from people with a with a wide variety of experience. There is no filter here.

SL1, I will give you a perfect example of you pushing bogus safety precautions with Berrys bullets. "Do not exceed mid-range loads" has nothing to do with safety, it is about performance and I honestly thought everyone who shot plated bullets knew that. From Berrys website...

When loading plated bullets we have found best results using low- to mid-range jacketed data in the load manual. You must use data for a bullet that has the same weight and profile as the one you are loading. Do not exceed mid-range loads. Do not use magnum loads.

Velocities depend on the caliber, but as a rule of thumb, we recommend you don't shoot our plated bullets over 1250 feet-per-second. Our 44's actually shoot best around 1150 fps. 45's are generally good at 850-900 fps. Our bullets are not recommended for magnum velocities over 1250fps unless the bullet description denotes a thick plated bullet with a higher listed maximum for velocity.

Separation is very rare. Two things can cause a jacket to separate from the lead core: excessive speeds (magnum velocities) and a real tight roll crimp (cuts through the plating). If you'll keep these two items in check you shouldn't have a problem with bullet separation.

We recommend using hard cast load data or start with mid-range jacketed data. Make sure data is below 1250fps unless you are using a Thick-Plated bullet that we list a higher max velocity for like the 9mm 124gr HBRN-TP that can be shot to 1500fps in open class guns like a .38 Super. Keep in mind that since our plated bullet has the same pressure curve as a hard cast bullet, the published cast data will be very close to what you will get with our plated bullets. If you use Jacketed data with our plated bullets you can get from 5% - 8% increase in velocity using that data.

[SL1]

Adamantium,

You seem to be trying to continue to argue by avoiding the real issue.

I was not the one who brought-up Berry's Bullets. Buck did that in an effort to "prove" that data is transferrable between bullets of the same weight, regardless of whether they are FMJs or HPs. What I did say was that he missed some important info, including that Berry's said to use data for the SAME PROFILE. I also QUOTED HIS POST where he had copied part of Berry's literature that says "Do not exceed mid-range loads." All I added was that following THAT ADVICE would tend to keep people from using the MAX LOAD DATA FOR JACKETED BULLETS, which is where there tends to be trouble when switching bullets causes significant variations in seating depth.

So, clearly, your argument is with Buck, not me, on this particular issue.

What you are doing with each post is to put words into my mouth that I did not say so that you can argue with that, instead of what I actually said. You don't directly address my point. Enough is enough. You don't seem to have any substantial argument to refute my point, so your posts have become irrelevant.

To repeat, my point is that substituting bullets without regard to their effects on seating depth can lead to dangerous pressures in 9mm cartridges. So, to be sure you are safe, you need to do a little measuring and a little math to compensate for any changes in seating depth.

I am not the guy who originated that advice. Many manuals address that these days. So, if you want to convince me otherwise, I suggest that you get somebody from Speer or Hornady to contact me. Make sure (s)he is a ballistician.

SL1

[muggsjunior]

Hey Fellas... I'm just guessing here (my first issue of Handloader has yet to arrive) but as I understand the snippet, the author is saying that there was not enough room to post every recipe, and that the recipe is actually the same, in this instance only, as the one printed for the manufacturer's other bullet. I don't think he was even hinting at using recipes for XTPs and substituting the bullet with a FMJ. The author may be stating that the recipe he gave for the XTP is the same recipe he used with a Hornady FMJ, with the same being said for the GDHP and a Speer FMJ.


I'm just guessing that is his intended meaning. All of the normal rules still apply, and I don't think I would try the recipe since the author is ambiguous. The best solution is simply to refer to the Hornady and Speer manuals.

[Adamantium]

Seriously, the only issue is you don't like what I recommend and reloaders have been doing safely for decades. If you want to believe safety precautions pushed by the same people who are also saying "read them in this book I'm trying to sell you" go ahead.

Some of us experiment, some don't. This thread was started with the idea of experimenting, perhaps your overly cautious advice doesn't deserve 9 posts here...