The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 4, 2010, 01:14 PM   #26
Clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 1999
Location: WA, the ever blue state
Posts: 4,678
Quote:
scottperk
Member

Join Date: February 1, 2010
Posts: 51

About that Case Bulge photo. I have another photo and the bulge
is much closer to the head of the case that came from a Glock.
Could it be possible that that case was fired out of battery ?

I cant imagine that the ramp would extend that far into the chamber.

Can we get some more details please ?
The gunzone web site is quoting me as .306".
http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/kb-notes.html
I thought it was .250".
I need to pull that barrel and measure it again.

What a hassle, I had to get a needle from the wife.
The .025" dia straight needle does not reach in as well as a .025" diameter hooked dental probe.

It looks like .275" ~ .280" now from the breech face to the end of the feed ramp. The case was really tight in the chamber. The case was .840" long.
The feed ramp angle is so gentle, it is hard to get in there and measure.

Clark is offline  
Old May 4, 2010, 01:49 PM   #27
scottperk
Member
 
Join Date: February 1, 2010
Posts: 75
peetzakilla
I say again....
The "data" in the OP can not be lumped into some sort of "10mm +p" category.

In fact, much of it can not be classified at all, since particular bullet and COL numbers are missing. As such, some of those loads would produce pressure that are FAR beyond anything that could called "+p" or even "+p+" or pressure that are only 80-90% of SAAMI standards, depending entirely on COL and the exact bullet.
=======================

Ok some of you guys Like Peetzakiller and "Troll hunter" and "Stupid" are getting little out of control and beginning to imagine or fabricate things. Let me be specific. ALL of the data in my original post was data out of FACTORY LOAD MANUALS. I hope that clears things up a bit. So far I have not
recommended anything at all. I'm just sharing data as a foundation
for discussion. I posted the information as a reliable reference check for any other ideas that might pop up in the absence of me having any pressure
testing equipment. Also by taking the top performers from several powder
manufacturers, I believe I have highlighted the powders that show the
most promise or at least have proven to be the most efficient.

Like it or not there is a long history of guys duplicating the original factory 10mm loads that were hotter than than any specified by todays loads.
I simply thought it was a better idea to go back to the drawing board
and start from scratch rather than copy their loads. Besides I think there
there are at least two new powders that were not available to the old guys
that appear to me to show promise.

Now if that all sounds suicidal or stupid to some of you not much
I can do about it. I rather hope this thread can result in a logical
and technically constructive progress instead of a bunch of
the-sky-is-falling alarmists comments.
scottperk is offline  
Old May 4, 2010, 02:05 PM   #28
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottperk
Ok some of you guys Like Peetzakiller and "Troll hunter" and "Stupid" are getting little out of control and beginning to imagine or fabricate things. Let me be specific. ALL of the data in my original post was data out of FACTORY LOAD MANUALS. I hope that clears things up a bit. So far I have not
recommended anything at all.

I'm not out of control and didn't call you a troll or stupid.

But here's a fact. The "data" that you posted is incomplete. It does not contain CRITICAL information such as cartridge overall length or specific bullet data. "180gr JHP" is NOT sufficient. Changing from one bullet to another of the same weight and making no other changes can effect pressure in the 10mm by many THOUSANDS of psi.

Your "data" might be "out of factory manuals" but it is INCOMPLETE data from those manuals.

Particularly when posting maximum load data it is imperative that ALL information is presented.

I could say "I use 8.0gr 800x in my 10mm." and not really say anything else because that load is well within SAAMI limits with any normal bullet of COL.

I should not post "I use 8.0gr Power Pistol in my 10mm." because that load could be anywhere from mild to catastrophic.


Quote:
I rather hope this thread can result in a logical
and technically constructive progress instead of a bunch of
the-sky-is-falling alarmists comments.
As do I, hence my suggestion that the loads are potentially dangerous if the pertinent technical information is not included.
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives...
...they just don't plan not to.
-Andy Stanley

Last edited by Brian Pfleuger; May 4, 2010 at 02:37 PM.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old May 4, 2010, 02:13 PM   #29
darkgael
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2006
Location: Homes in Brooklyn, NY and in Pennsylvania.
Posts: 5,061
trolling?

Scott: This is the fourth forum that I have been to in the last half hour that had this thread. You are also Preventec47??

http://www.reloadbench.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/001952.html
http://shootersforum.com/showthread.htm?t=65491
http://forums.handloads.com/forum_po...TID=26236&PN=1

Maybe there are others?
That comment
Quote:
It is mans nature ( the younger ones anyway... without experience)
to push the limit, envelope or edge what ever you want to call it.
( experience comes from bad decisions )
We know that the powder companies have to be conservative
for liability. We know that they load to 34 and 35K psi when
the SAAMI limit is 37.5K. So those interested in taking it
to the limit and maybe a little more if we know we have
stout platforms to play with are welcome to positively
tag along and participate. Have all the naysayers never
driven faster than the speed limit ?
is as bald an attempt to rationalize suspect behavior as I have seen in a long time. Have I ever exceeded the speed limit? Yep. I've also swung out on a rock face for a handhold that I was "pretty sure" that I could get too...and neither of those has anything to do with trying to be an "amateur ballistician" (without any instrumentation).
Pete
__________________
“Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports ... all others are games.” Ernest Hemingway ...
NRA Life Member

Last edited by darkgael; May 4, 2010 at 02:26 PM.
darkgael is offline  
Old May 4, 2010, 02:17 PM   #30
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,416
Those of you who like Blue Dot, have you tried AA#7? I switched from BD to #7 in .357 Magnum and get the same performance with less leading (I don't understand that) and the #7 measures better.
__________________
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun"
zxcvbob is offline  
Old May 4, 2010, 03:58 PM   #31
scottperk
Member
 
Join Date: February 1, 2010
Posts: 75
All of my background in reloading is in rifles and by some peoples
definition there is a lot of "suspect behavior" going on
in the process of working up loads steadily and inspecting
components and plotting velocities etc. If it is suspect
behavior in the eyes of some so be it.

I have said this is part of some research with the objective
to start from scratch and work up rather than copy peoples loads
from the past to match older original performance of the cartridge.
Yes I posted on some other forums and I'll take good info and share
wherever I can find it.

Regarding the load data I published in the opening post, well of
course I was not going to retype whole manuals and for the purpose
of acting as a check reference I feel sufficient data was provided.
On the other hand, for many of the loads mentioned, in fact
there WAS NO OTHER INFO included so the interested party
would best take it up with the powder or bullet supplier that provided
the load data if htey feel that strongly about it.

Let me say I think my responses may appear to be somewhat
hostile or combative in nature but I am merely providing the courtesy
of a response to those that have expended the energy to post
their thoughts which I thank them for.

I perhaps have not succinctly described the overall objective
but much as the situation with many other calibers and cartridges,
todays load data from the manufacturers does not match real world
performance of the same cartridges many years ago and the history
shows that those older higher performing cartridges did no harm.
The simple goal is to recreate the performance for which the
10mm was known for when it was first developed.

If someone has some other constructive suggestions as to
how to go about it I am all ears.
scottperk is offline  
Old May 4, 2010, 04:02 PM   #32
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,429
Quote:
I perhaps have not succinctly described the overall objective
but much as the situation with many other calibers and cartridges,
todays load data from the manufacturers does not match real world
performance of the same cartridges many years ago and the history
shows that those older higher performing cartridges did no harm.
The simple goal is to recreate the performance for which the
10mm was known for when it was first developed.

If someone has some other constructive suggestions as to
how to go about it I am all ears.
The easiest, and I think safest, way to do that is to use a program like Quickload, start at a known safe charge, tweak the software until it matches the real world as closely as possible and then continue to work up the load in a safe fashion until the indicated max is reached.

You are certainly correct, particularly in the case of the 10mm, that the original loads were MUCH more powerful that current "max" data, and the SAAMI limit remains unchanged.
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives...
...they just don't plan not to.
-Andy Stanley
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old May 4, 2010, 04:11 PM   #33
scottperk
Member
 
Join Date: February 1, 2010
Posts: 75
I forgot to thank and acknowledge Freakshows very useful
suggestions. I need just a bit of clarification however. The Longshot
and #9 suggestions are consistent with the factory load manual
data for the heavier bullets but they would seem to be less
efficient for the 150 to 165gr bullet weight ranges.

He mentions WSF for lighter loads but I dont think he is meaning
lighter bullet weights... I get the impression he is saying lower
power range and target use loads.

Elsewhere he has mentioned he is not a fan of AutoComp and as
Hodgdon shows that is the most efficient in the mid weight bullet
range I am a bit perplexed. It could be that their claimed
performance is exaggerated and I am seeking clarification on that.
scottperk is offline  
Old May 4, 2010, 04:15 PM   #34
scottperk
Member
 
Join Date: February 1, 2010
Posts: 75
To Clark-
If you ever see this, you never did give us the loads that
produced that bulge in the case and that you warned us
not to pay any attention to ? ? ?
scottperk is offline  
Old May 4, 2010, 09:45 PM   #35
uncyboo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 7, 2008
Location: Shelby, MT
Posts: 1,013
scott, I used Blue Dot and 180 HP's years ago in a 5" Delta Elite for 1225 fps. Very accurate load in that gun. Was near max. Don't have the numbers in front of me, but find a 15 year old max load with Blue Dot and 180's and you'll be close. As usual, start low and work up.
uncyboo is offline  
Old May 5, 2010, 12:13 AM   #36
Clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 1999
Location: WA, the ever blue state
Posts: 4,678
Quote:
scottperk
Member

Join Date: February 1, 2010
Posts: 56

To Clark-
If you ever see this, you never did give us the loads that
produced that bulge in the case and that you warned us
not to pay any attention to ? ? ?

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.


The stock Glock 20 10mm barrel would case bulge at 3% ~ 30% more powder than the max published loads.

The Bar Sto barrel with better case support will shoot 82% extra over the max published 800X with 200 gr

The Glock 22 40sw with welded up feed ramp will shoot even more, as when the case is supported the case wall is no longer the weakest link, and the primer pocket becomes the weakest link. The 40sw has a small primer pocket and is stronger than the 10mm case.

What does it all mean?
a) Most people follow handloading recipes and have faith in the pressure measurement of authoritative organizations.
b) A minority work up their own loads, and have the where with all to know which guns are stronger than the brass, and thereby find the practical limit at the threshold of short brass life.
c) The conflict between these two points of view could keep 100 reloading forums busy for eternity.
Clark is offline  
Old May 5, 2010, 04:12 AM   #37
darkgael
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2006
Location: Homes in Brooklyn, NY and in Pennsylvania.
Posts: 5,061
of interest

Related to these ideas: this thread from the Handloads forum about a fellow getting 1780fps from his Glock 20.
http://forums.handloads.com/forum_po...TID=16968&PN=1

Thought that it might be of interest if any one was not already familiar with it.
Pete
__________________
“Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports ... all others are games.” Ernest Hemingway ...
NRA Life Member
darkgael is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.06686 seconds with 9 queries