Load data for plated bullets ( still confused )

[Metal god]

I'm here at the range now and just finished that load development. I was getting erratic velocities that I can't explain. They would be consistent then one would be 100 or even 200fps faster . At first i thought it was the chrono but ran some other loads through both 9mm and 45 . Both were very consistent so I'm not sure what was going on with these loads .

I used check weights and weighed every charge so I don't think that was the issue . The velocities were above 1100fps and would jump up from there

[Unclenick]

That's going to be irregular ignition. I note the Ranier data linked to was 6.8 grains of HS-6 for a 115 grain round nose seated to 1.169" COL. If you are using the HP's and seating deeper you are making a shorter powder space that will raise pressure when the bullet holds its position long enough. However, a lot of times in short pistol powder spaces the primer will push the bullet forward before a slow powder really gets going, and that will drop pressure. So you might be seeing a mix of these two events.

The only way I know to resolve that is to seat the bullets out so you headspace on the the bullet making contact with the throats and run the workup over again.

Another factor may be that the HS-6, being a pretty old St. Marks spherical formulation (Western Cannon 540) that can be difficult to ignite consistently and can require a magnum primer to do so. Of course, when you switch to a magnum primer, you need to start low again.

[Nick_C_S]

Another factor may be that the HS-6, being a pretty old St. Marks spherical formulation (Western Cannon 540) that can be difficult to ignite consistently.

It is a difficult to ignite propellant. And this characteristic is somewhat mitigated with the use of heavy bullets. Which is why when I use HS-6, it's almost always with heavy bullets (147's, 9mm; 158's, 357Mag; 230's, 45 ACP; 180's, 10mm).

So,

Try a magnum primer. Or . . .
Try a heavier bullet. Or . . .
Try an easier to ignite propellant.

Any of the three will take you "back to the drawing board" with your work up (it'll be a new work up, essentially).

Load safe.

[RaySendero]

MetalGod,

My experience reloading Rainier Leadsafe Restrike 0.357" bullets.

Box says they are total copper jacketed and double swaged.
I ran ladders and picked the load that gave me the same POI as my PD factory load.

They chrono between 1,250 and 1,300 fps from my 6" 357 Reolver. Only use them for practice and paper targets so never found one or tried to recover a bullet. I've since shot over 500 of them. Never found any leading or copper flakes cleaning the revolver. I loaded them with a light taper crimp.

[Unclenick]

Agree with Nick on bullet weight. The heavier it is the more inertial resistance it has for the powder to build pressure against. A heavier bullet may be thought of as greater confinement.

I've only ever used HS-6 with 230 grain bullets in .45 Auto. The first HS-6 I ever bought was based on velocities for heavy cast bullet loads in Lyman's handbook. At the time it was a top velocity getter. Since then, other powders have come along and it's no longer King of the hill. The sectional density of the 230's in .45 would match a 142.5 grain bullet in 9mm, so a 147 is the closest common equivalent burden on the powder.

[Metal god]

Now that I've been home and have had time to think about the testing and your responses . I can update what's going on with more specificity .

Originally Posted by Me

The velocities were above 1100fps and would jump up from there

First let me add this . I first shot rifle at the 300yd range and ran a TMK ladder test using the chrono and it worked very well . When I went to the pistol range the chrono was only getting error readings so I started the load development with out it . About half way through I tried taking off the baffle things and that worked and I was able to use the chrono for the rest of the test . This is why I said the velocities were 1100 and above , I never tested the lower charges . I very well could have been getting those erratic velocities through out the load spectrum .

Second and "maybe" not as important is that I used mixed brass and I could clearly tell some case walls were thicker then others while crimping resulting in a heavier crimp with some cases . I would say most had a light crimp and some ( Random 10% ) had a light medium to medium crimp . I say "MAY" not have contributed because the 9mm load I ran over the chrono to test it's consistency used mixed brass as well and it was consistent with a very low ES/SD .

Seating depth

Yes I seated these bullets pretty deep . My COAL was 1.090 . Gold dot suggest 1.125 for there 115gr HP so I was .035-ish shorter . My reasoning for seating as deep as I did was that when comparing the 115gr bullets to the 147gr bullet . The 115gr bullet had much less barring surface . I concluded the bullet needed as much of that area seated in the case to insure bullet hold .

Here are a few numbers

Barring surfaces ----- 147gr .335 / 115gr .235 these are approximate

If I were to seat the bullet to just touch the lands in my XD-9 the COAL would be 1.155 leaving .170 of bullet hold in the case , is that enough ??

FWIW with my S&W shield the bullet does not even hit the lands at a COAL of 1.170

All that said I do have CFE pistol I can try . Maybe it will ignite better then HS-6 and if I use a COAL of 1.125-ish I may get a more consistent powder burn ????

I really don't want to put to much effort into this 115gr bullet if it results in a firearm specific load . Meaning it's very unlikely I try running the bullet real long to touch and or head space off the lands of any one pistol . If I can't get a safe consistent 1150 to 1200 fps load with it I'll just use a different powder and make a plinking load .

Side note , I'm training to be RSO and once I am I can go to the range after hours and shoot alone . When this option is available to me . I'll do some ballistics test and see at what velocities these bullets really expand .

[Nick_C_S]

Okay. Lot's to digest.

Yes I seated these bullets pretty deep . My COAL was 1.090. Gold dot suggest 1.125 so I was .035-ish shorter . My reasoning for seating as deep as I did was that when comparing the 115gr bullets to the 147gr bullet. The 115gr bullet had much less bearing surface . I concluded the bullet needed as much of that area seated in the case to insure bullet hold.

You should determine your seating depth by plunk test and magazine clearance, etc. Not bearing surface to the case. BUT . . . from what you mentioned here:

If I were to seat the bullet to just touch the lands in my XD-9 the COAL would be 1.155 leaving .170 of bullet hold in the case , is that enough ?? FWIW with my S&W shield the bullet does not even hit the lands at a COAL of 1.170

A shorter OAL might be a good idea. I'd like to get Unclenick's take on this. Hopefully, he's still lurking.

I used mixed brass and I could tell while crimping

I try not to get too wrapped up and OCD about the whole mixed brass/like brass thing. But in this case (no pun intended), where you're trying to collect accurate usable data, coupled with the small 9mm case, like brass would be a good idea.

If I use a COAL of 1.125-ish I may get a more consistent powder burn?

Or you may not. Generally, with less internal volume (from a shorter OAL) the more consistent the burn. Longer OAL's generally deliver a less consistent burn. Variables abound, of course. And usually, it would make little difference. The general rule is mostly theoretical in nature.

There's a few different ways to go from here. I'm going to refrain. I wanna see what you're thinking.

[Metal god]

You should determine your seating depth by plunk test and magazine clearance, etc

I do but only in so much as to make sure they pass . Unlike rifle where I find my "max" COAL first before anything else and either start my load development there or start it .020 off ( depending on the bullet and ogive profile ) . I've not been finding my hand gun "max" COAL first then adjust from there . As stated earlier . I observed what looked like a bullet that would have less bullet seated below the mouth then I was comfortable with . I use that term loosely because my experience in hand gun COAL , bullet hold and seating depth is limited and is why I bring it up here .

Or you may not. Generally, with less internal volume (from a shorter OAL) the more consistent the burn. Longer OAL's generally deliver a less consistent burn. Variables abound, of course. And usually, it would make little difference. The general rule is mostly theoretical in nature

Agreed , and I to hope UN will be back . My thinking is getting the bullet .035 closer to the lands "may" help those start pressures while still giving me antiquate bullet hold . Rather then the 1.155 COAL that puts the bullet right at the lands . This is getting into that area where internal case volume variances and the bullet sitting on or close to the lands start to off set each other . In riffle , going closer to the lands peaks pressure faster then seating deeper . I'm not sure where the two relationships in small cases off set each other if at all . I'm not even sure "offset" is the right term .

A shorter OAL might be a good idea. I'd like to get Unclenick's take on this. Hopefully, he's still lurking.

I was thinking the same thing and is why I'm thinking 1.125 or .035 longer then I used before . I then would also like to try a different powder as well . The thing is I don't know that much about CFE-pistol as it compares to HS-6 and how easily it ignites .

I brought up the mixed brass in relation to the crimp and if those with heavier or lighter crimps could cause the erratic velocities . I don't think there internal volumes would have caused those large inconsistencies but I'll defer to others on that .

I'll leave it there and await more feed back from others .

[Nick_C_S]

I get what you're saying - and doing - with OAL. It makes sense. But I still wanna see what Unclenick has to say too .

I don't want to tell you how to load. You're doing your thing and it should be a fun learning experience (even the setbacks are fun, in their own way) that pays dividends in the long run (both personal satisfaction, and cost savings).

I don't load a lot of 9mm. For me, 9mm is purely a utilitarian round. I have no "target" or "competition" 9mm firearms. I only own two: A Kahr CW9 for carry; and a Beretta 92fs safe queen. I don't go to the range to shoot 9mm - other than carry practice a few times a year - which is maybe 500 rounds a year. Between that, and the fact that I have a couple thousand factory rounds, I haven't loaded a 9mm round in almost three years. So loading 9mm is not my strong suit - full disclosure.

That said, if it were me, I'd load my 115's with a faster propellant. My "set" 115gn (plated) is 4.6gn of W231 and goes downrange at 1068 f/s through the Kahr (3.7"), and 1124 f/s through the Beretta (5"). Cycles great, shoots straight, and has a nice, "positive" crispy recoil. A fantastic range shooter that is not exactly whimpy.

My loading with HS-6 goes about 100 f/s faster, but I find it superfluous. If I want more juice from my 9mm, I'll first move to a heavier bullet (124) and then move to an intermediate burn rate propellant (such as HS-6).

But that's just my load style. And we all need to find our own way with this craft - that's part of its charm.

[SHR970]

Some notes dealing with 9mm and plated bullets:

Mixed brass: Not a good idea due to two things. One is there is a lot of variation on internal capacity which creates more ES, the other is some brass has thicker walls than others which leads to inconsistent crimps. In the past I have run into Remington brass that was so thin I couldn't get a good hold on the bullets.

Running deep: Not a good idea and not a bad idea. .170 case to bullet depth is no problem if you have good brass and a good crimp. I've used a lot of plated 115's...if they won't hold you probably have thin brass. However, if you develop your load at the deeper depth and don't get setback you are also fine as long as you can get the powder to light off correctly.

Powder: HS-6 likes the heavier bullets. There are a lot of powders better suited for that weight. If you are going to use it you need to run it hard for it to work properly. I've used quite a bit of AA#7 and it too likes to be run hard at 115 gr. weight but is a bit more forgiving than HS-6.

[Dufus]

I once bought 1500 once fired 9mm brass.

When I got them I dumped all of them in the tumbler and cleaned them good.

When I got around to prepping them (resize, deprime, etc) I noticed that some had less resistance when running thru the expander die.

I started sorting...easy ones in one pile, harder ones in another. When I finished, my brass was sorted with Federal in the easy pile and all the others (WW, Rem, PPU, etc) in another pile.

Come to find out, the Federal brass was thinner at the mouth.

Since I shoot a lot of oversized cast bullets, I delegated the Federal brass to those, and the others are reserved for jacketed bullets.

I shot a lot of HS-6 in the 9s but they were not light loads. Burns clean with 124 gr and up. I later found that VV N340 is even better.

[Metal god]

Yep found the same thing out when I started loading 45 ( hand gun as a whole ). Many people said mixed brass is no big deal because of the lower pressures the 45 works at . There were times I could tell what case I was sizing just by how easy or hard it sized . Then when it came to crimping , it was quite clear there were differences in case wall thickness .

It really bothered me . I was just coming from loading precision rifle loads where I sized cases to with in .001 of each other as well as having exact neck tension/bullet hold . I anneal , use bushing dies and micrometer seating dies while measuring everything .

All of a sudden I can feel all these things in the press handle that had me knowing I was not loading very consistent cartridges . It really messed with my head for a little while . So I was separating my brass by head stamp in large lots and if I did not have enough of any one type . They would go into two different mixed lots . Thin walled and thick walled cases . I still do that to this day .

Nick .C.S knows this but I'll share it here . I was debating before I started these loads if I was going to even use mixed brass or stick to one head stamp . I was anticipating having problems with this load from the get go and did not want to waist my good or well cared for brass on it . It's the reason I ultimately went with mixed brass . I knew right away I was having the same issues I did with mixed 45 cases . The only difference was my factory crimp die in 45 swages every round a little and the thicker brass more . Where as my 9mm factory crimp die does not . Although I believe it has the carbide ring , it just does not contact the cases like my 45 crimp die does .

[kmw1954]

Very interesting discussion folks. I may have to read this again to absorb it all.

For anyone interested in plated bullets a friend just informed me that X-Treme is running a sale right now. 10% off with free shipping.

Missed the last couple days of this had to make a short stop to the hospital for a couple days.

[TailGator]

Hope you are doing better. X-Treme runs lots of sales. It is worth being on their email list.

[kmw1954]

Thanks TailGator, Doing much better now.

In response to Nick from earlier and along the line of plated bullets. I've been seeing many more topics on using them and how to load for them and find this discussion very interesting. As time goes on I believe more and more people will be using them, for one because they are becoming more widely available and for 2 many ranges such as indoor ones are starting to restrict lead for environmental reasons.

With this I also believe we will start to see more published data on plated loads.

When I was into reloading long ago all I used were Speer cast lead bullets for my revolvers. Now that I'm loading 9mm I just find it easier and cheaper to load plated target loads for them over lead. Though I've yet to try any of the coated lead bullets, which I will at some point.

[SHR970]

I think it is high time we create a sticky with all of the facts known about plated bullets and direct links to manufacturers loading recommendations. This subject comes up far too often and there are definitely some things that are known quantities.