2aHawaii
Tools and Uses => Reloading => Topic started by: oldfart on April 02, 2013, 11:52:00 AM
-
The 9mm XTP Project
Part 1- Defining the Goal
A friend requested that I reload some 9mm ammo for him.
It was supposed to SIMULATE his choice of home defense ammo. The logic being that one should practice defensive shooting skills with equipment equal to, or very similar to what is actually used. Ideally the ammo would have the same shape, size, recoil, and point of impact as the original factory ammo.
In this case it is the Hornady 124 grain XTP Hollow Point. (A truncated cone-shape.)
The factory spec for that ammo is 1110 fps from a 4" test barrel.
My sample measurements taken from supplied ammo was as follows:
LOA=1.060” with a standard deviation of 0.006”
Case mouth diameter= 0.374”
Bullet wt= 123.8 gr. not sealed with asphalt
Powder= 5.5 gr. of unknown flake-style propellant. (very uniform flakes)
Chronograph test from my SW compact 9mm-3.5 in stock bbl.
1065, 1046, 1046, 1037, 1032 fps
Av= 1045
Sd=12
It was expected that my local test speeds would be lower than factory spec because my gun has a shorter bbl and is a stock item. The longer 4” test bbl will shoot faster and since it is probably cut to tighter tolerance, it will shoot even faster than a typical 4’ gun bbl.
EG. A 5’ colt 45 acp bbl will shoot slower than a 5” match grade colt 45 acp bbl.
So now that I have defined the goal, let’s see if we can come up with something that approximates the original factory load. (124 gr JHP-TC at 1045fps from my pistol)
To be continued....
-
I chrono'd some 9mm xtp using hp38/231 Can't remember if it was 115 or 124?
-
So when we gonna shoot em
-
So when we gonna shoot em
========================
Kinda busy this week. How about Sunday before I go work? Maybe around noon?
-
The 9mm XTP Project- Part 2
The Bullet Heads
A few months ago I was fortunate to have been able to order 1000 Hornady XTP bullets.
Unfortunately that means I could not burn those up for testing since my friend wanted 1000 loaded rounds. So I had to find something similar for testing.
Montana Gold- nose too short ..Similar to the AF design TC bullet. (none available anyway)
Speer Gold Dot- wrong shape-more like a truncated RN (not available)
Winchester and Rem.—wrong shape and not available
Hornady HAP (action pistol) –bingo! Found 1500 of these at a reasonable price. They are virtually identical to the XTP heads except they do not have serrations at the tip.
Precision Delta- Virtually identical to the XTP head except the serrations are not as deep. I have used them before with fair results.
Sadly, as of today, 4/2/13, I could not find any heads like these anywhere. I’m sure things will improve in a few months.
So for testing purposes, I settled on the precision delta heads and the HAP heads since they look similar to the XTP heads at much lower cost.
To be continued…
-
I asked a question to Oldfart regarding reloading 9mm via PM. I should have posted this publicly and thanks to Oldfart for pointing that out :D
So here is the question and great answer from Oldfart....Thanks Dave!!!!
Hey Oldfart,
I seen your post with the 9mm XTP and had a question on reloading 9mm. I ran cases down a Lee 9mm Luger carbide die to FL size them. The case came out fine with no visible bulges. I then seated some 124gr JHP bullets into them. They seated fine but notice that it slightly bulges with the contour of the bullet. Is this normal? It seems that the bullet is bigger than the neck of the case. I measured the bullets and they are all roughly .355. This happen to you before?
The bulge is nothing to worry about. It just means that the sizer is squeezing the case down a little "aggressively".
The bulging effect means you don't have to worry much about bullet setback.
That is when the bullet hits the feed ramp and gets pushed further into the case than it ought too.
You should still taper crimp the ammo. Typical would be 0.374 at the mouth. Some people use the LEE factory crimp die, but I have never used one and don't know anything about it. My Dillon press came with a sizer that did the same thing. The ammo had that "hourglass" effect. The ammo works great but I did not care for the appearance. So I switched to an old RCBS sizer die
-
Rbadua, mahalo for posting this msg. I was wondering the same thing after loading a few rounds today. I had the same hour glass shape that oldfart had referred to. Aloha
-
The 9mm XTP Project
Part 3- Propellant (powder)
So I got some bullet heads in search of somewhere to go now.
I looked up load data in my books and online and also dug through my past chronograph test results. The only powder I saw that came close to 5.5 grains for a 124 gr. bullet was Ramshot True Blue. Unfortunately, I do not have that powder. So I decided to use what I had available.
Looking at all the stuff I had sitting on my shelf and comparing all the data I had, I decided to try 4 different powders. AA7, Unique, Bullseye and HP38 (ww231).
In a nutshell, here are the results:
AA7- I have used this with good results, but I was running low so I decided not to pursue it.
Unique- Interesting stuff. Works great for +P loads but I could not get the speed down low enough.
Bullseye- I actually found a load using BE that felt good and got really close to the desired speed.
HP38- This is the same powder as Winchester 231 marketed by Hogdon. I did get a load that came very close to the right speed.
Attached is a chart showing some past and current test results. Charge weights are redacted for liability reasons.
I would be glad to PM the charge weight if you ask for it.
J=standard dev
K=case
L=primer
M=power factor
-
The 9mm XTP Project
Part 4- Bringing it Together
Refering to the chart in Part-3, I found 2 loads that seem to fit the purpose.
One with BE powder and the other with HP38 powder.
The desired velocity was 1045 FPS.
BE load gave me 1055 fps (1% faster)
HP38 load gave me 1065 fps (2% faster)
In actual practice you will never notice a 1% or 2% difference so I was happy.
So now the question became, “Which one shoots more accurately?”
Attached are 2 photos of targets. Each target has 10 shots but fired in 2 5-shot strings.
It would have been nice if I could shoot groups without reloading, but you all know the rules at KHSC. Which one looks better to you?
-
Nice load test I have had good luck with w231 also. Just got me some hornady 230gr XTP in 45 acp got it loaded with w231 trying to get around 950fps which is what hornadys load data is for their +p loads. Hopefully I'll have some time this weekend to chrono it..
-
Nice load test I have had good luck with w231 also. Just got me some hornady 230gr XTP in 45 acp got it loaded with w231 trying to get around 950fps which is what hornadys load data is for their +p loads. Hopefully I'll have some time this weekend to chrono it..
=========================
About 20 years ago I tested 230 JHP/JFP/FMJ loads trying different powders including 231.
There is no way to get an honest 950 fps from a standard 5" 1911 barrel. The powder is too fast.
A near-max charge of 5.9 gr 231 through a 5.5" Bar-sto match bbl, could only muster about 840.
You might have a chance with a looonngg glock poly bbl but I doubt it.
You can safely achieve 950fps with a slower burning powder like Unique. I actually exceeded 950.
But be wary. The heavy recoil can cause malfunctions.
-
Which one looks better to you?
They are very similar, but the HP38 group looks better to me.
-
=========================
About 20 years ago I tested 230 JHP/JFP/FMJ loads trying different powders including 231.
There is no way to get an honest 950 fps from a standard 5" 1911 barrel. The powder is too fast.
A near-max charge of 5.9 gr 231 through a 5.5" Bar-sto match bbl, could only muster about 840.
You might have a chance with a looonngg glock poly bbl but I doubt it.
You can safely achieve 950fps with a slower burning powder like Unique. I actually exceeded 950.
But be wary. The heavy recoil can cause malfunctions.
Yah I know I would rather have used wsf but ran out and I can't find any and I got w231 I'm probably only gonna get around 830-850 which is around ball spec. Right now I loaded up to 5.5gr gonna see what the Vel. Is and if there are any pressure signs first before I push it any hotter
-
Yah I know I would rather have used wsf but ran out and I can't find any and I got w231 I'm probably only gonna get around 830-850 which is around ball spec. Right now I loaded up to 5.5gr gonna see what the Vel. Is and if there are any pressure signs first before I push it any hotter
========================
I clocked 782fps with 230 gr.FMJ 5.5gr-231
That was from a 5" 1911.
To get to mil ball speeds you would need to go up to about 5.8-5.9 of 231
-
They are very similar, but the HP38 group looks better to me.
===============
I reshot a test yesterday with the HP38 load. This time I just fired one 5-shot string.
I used 124 gr HAP heads instead of PD heads. Nice result attached
-
===============
I reshot a test yesterday with the HP38 load. This time I just fired one 5-shot string.
I used 124 gr HAP heads instead of PD heads. Nice result attached
Very nice group!
Looks like the HAP bullets are more consistent than the PD bullets.
Thanks for the posts. :shaka:
-
Very nice group!
Looks like the HAP bullets are more consistent than the PD bullets.
Thanks for the posts. :shaka:
--------------------------
No doubt that the HAP is a much more refined bullet. You can tell just by the appearance.
On the other hand the PD bullets cost way less. Too bad everything is back ordered by months right now. :(
-
========================
I clocked 782fps with 230 gr.FMJ 5.5gr-231
That was from a 5" 1911.
To get to mil ball speeds you would need to go up to about 5.8-5.9 of 231
Yup your pretty on spot with the 5.5. I loaded up to 5.7 before I went to the range today and got an average of 833fps with that load.
-
oldfart - are you using a vice or sled to shoot?
-
oldfart - are you using a vice or sled to shoot?
=================
No. Sitting and resting my hands on the rolled up carpet things at kokohead.
why?
-
=================
No. Sitting and resting my hands on the rolled up carpet things at kokohead.
why?
It will take more variability out of the grouping. Even braced like that I assume there is more human error in there than you want.
-
It will take more variability out of the grouping. Even braced like that I assume there is more human error in there than you want.
================
True dat.
On the other hand, Accuracy was not my primary goal. The primary goal was to make ammo that looks and feels like the factory XTP ammo.
Good accuracy is only a pleasant perk to have. Besides, It's already a PITA to haul around and set up the chrono in addition to all the normal stuff.
Having said that, there is one other anomaly that I noticed last week. I'll tell you about it if I can duplicate the anomaly.
Going back to the 2.5 inch group I shot. I thought that was pretty good for 3.5 inch compact 9mm "carry gun"
-
A surprising anomaly....
Last week, when I was testing for the best accuracy with the "simulated XTP" load. I noticed that the same load specs stuffed into different shell casings had a drastic difference in point of impact. In this situation, the bullet was the 9mm 124 HAP with 4.x HP38 with a Fed GM100 primer. Test gun was a stock 3913 at 25 yds off the carpet roll at KHSC.
So I went and re-tested yesterday to confirm that it was not a fluke. ...I got the same result.
When I used Federal (FC) shell casings, the poi (point of impact) was at 8 o'clock about 2.5" from center.
When I used Winchester (WIN) shell casings the poi was 3 o'clock about 1.25' from center
See the attachment...
I am at a loss to explain why there would be such a drastic change in poi just by changing shell casings.
Velocity test showed a 1.4% difference in speed (WIN was about 16fps faster) I do not think 1.4% makes that kind of difference.
Anyone care to form a theory?
Consider the implications. If you are reloading for casual target shooting and get your shell cases all mixed up, then some shots go low-left and some shots go high-right and you get a big spread of shots all over the place automatically. And that is before you factor in human error. YIKES! :'(
-
Hmm interesting I wouldn't think 16fps would do to much also. Unless you trimmed the brass to the same length could it be that the different cases have a different oal causing the crimp to be different resulting in poi difference? I'm not a pro loader but just a thought..
-
Hmm interesting I wouldn't think 16fps would do to much also. Unless you trimmed the brass to the same length could it be that the different cases have a different oal causing the crimp to be different resulting in poi difference? I'm not a pro loader but just a thought..
Considering the 9mm round head spaces on the case neck having the bullet embedded into the case and crimped at different places along the bullet's length I think you may be on to something here.
-
Could be the amount of crimp on too. So much different areas for variances. Unless OP is using new brass, then it takes some of the variances out of the equation.
-
Hmm interesting I wouldn't think 16fps would do to much also. Unless you trimmed the brass to the same length could it be that the different cases have a different oal causing the crimp to be different resulting in poi difference? I'm not a pro loader but just a thought..
====================
I do not trim 9mm brass. These were once fired shells. Absolutely no changes made to the dillon between the loads. Only the shells changed.
It's a mystery.
Personally, I shot almost 100% 45 auto in combat matches so supreme accuracy was never a consideration.
I was more concerned with making power factor and reliable function.
The 45 auto shoots straight with almost anything. To prove that point, I once dug 45 FMJ ball heads out of the backstop, washed them, ran them through a sizer to make sure they are sort of round, and loaded them up again. I got 25yd groups about 4". Crazy but true. :crazy:
I suppose that is why I tried to avoid 9mm all these years. It is a bit more twitchy than the old 45.
-
====================
I do not trim 9mm brass. These were once fired shells. Absolutely no changes made to the dillon between the loads. Only the shells changed.
It's a mystery.
Personally, I shot almost 100% 45 auto in combat matches so supreme accuracy was never a consideration.
I was more concerned with making power factor and reliable function.
The 45 auto shoots straight with almost anything. To prove that point, I once dug 45 FMJ ball heads out of the backstop, washed them, ran them through a sizer to make sure they are sort of round, and loaded them up again. I got 25yd groups about 4". Crazy but true. :crazy:
I suppose that is why I tried to avoid 9mm all these years. It is a bit more twitchy than the old 45.
I have been reloading 9mm for almost 30 years and I have never seen this. Only time I have seen a different POI is with different weight/type bullets. Even charge differences don't move the POI enough to mention. At least this is what I have seen.
-
Did you measure the over all case lengths between the different cases? I've noticed that different brands have had different length and being that you set up your Dillion for case "A" and didn't make any changes to it when loading case "B" if it is longer there will probably be more crimp applied or vise versa not enough crimp and like what the inspector said about the different places along the bullet's length
-
Did you measure the over all case lengths between the different cases? I've noticed that different brands have had different length and being that you set up your Dillion for case "A" and didn't make any changes to it when loading case "B" if it is longer there will probably be more crimp applied or vise versa not enough crimp and like what the inspector said about the different places along the bullet's length
================================
I just took a quick survey of the fc and win cases. This is what I see.
Generally, the thickness of the brass at the mouth is the same.
Generally the win cases are about .004" longer. I think this could be the key, but not because of the crimp.
Here is my theory:
Because the taper crimp is so gentle, .004 in. case length difference does not make the crimp change much, if at all.
However, I think .004 in. is enough to make a tighter chamber fit This might make the bullet more concentric with the bore and thus launching the bullet into the lands a bit truer. That might also be why the poi of the win cases are really close to the correct place.
Tighter chamber fit would also account for the increase in velocity, guaranteed.
How does that theory sound??
Seasoned rifle shooters know all about this, don't ya?
-
Yup that's a good theory. After fire forming brass to the headspace of the chamber and seating the bullet ~ .020-.030 off the lands depending on the rifle, by getting the case body and bullet to line up with the center of the bore will help with concentricity and lead to better accuracy. I noticed it helped with my .308. But if any one of these are off along with case neck tension it can throw off accuracy that's why I thought maybe your crimp could of been causing the problem. But with only .004 difference I doubt the crimp is the problem either.
-
This is about the end of the project. After testing loads for about a month, I got a decent powder charge.
My buddy tried a sample and it was ok with him, so I started busting into those precious boxes of XTP heads.
pic 1 is after cleaning the lube off the ammo.
pic 2 is checking for high primers and the max cartridge gauge for checking for proper chambering
-
Bonus Rounds:
Just for fun, I loaded some XTP heads at what might be considered "+P" levels.
I achieved velocities approx. 15% to 20% higher than the factory XTP load.
When using lightweight 9mm heads and medium/slow Aliant flake powder, Sometimes the powder charge is compressed by the head when seating.
Sometimes the powder overflows and you have to tap the shell to get it in, then smash the head on top.
In this case it was not so bad. The powder charge was the max listed for UNIQUE. The powder is only slightly compressed.
see pic
I hope all you newbie 9mm reloaders found this thread to be informative. Happy loading. :shaka:
-
thanks for all the info!!! It seems like a trial and error to find the right combination...
-
A surprising anomaly....
Last week, when I was testing for the best accuracy with the "simulated XTP" load. I noticed that the same load specs stuffed into different shell casings had a drastic difference in point of impact. In this situation, the bullet was the 9mm 124 HAP with 4.x HP38 with a Fed GM100 primer. Test gun was a stock 3913 at 25 yds off the carpet roll at KHSC.
So I went and re-tested yesterday to confirm that it was not a fluke. ...I got the same result.
When I used Federal (FC) shell casings, the poi (point of impact) was at 8 o'clock about 2.5" from center.
When I used Winchester (WIN) shell casings the poi was 3 o'clock about 1.25' from center
See the attachment...
I am at a loss to explain why there would be such a drastic change in poi just by changing shell casings.
Velocity test showed a 1.4% difference in speed (WIN was about 16fps faster) I do not think 1.4% makes that kind of difference.
Anyone care to form a theory?
Consider the implications. If you are reloading for casual target shooting and get your shell cases all mixed up, then some shots go low-left and some shots go high-right and you get a big spread of shots all over the place automatically. And that is before you factor in human error. YIKES! :'(
Thank you for all the great info!
My theory would be that the different brass might be of a significant different volume. In rifle reloading this is a know factor. In a tiny case like 9mm, a slight difference in case volume could mean a great difference in pressures, causing such POI and accuracy shifts.
In a voluminous case, such as .45acp, this would not matter as much. However, in 9mm the higher pressures and smaller volume could be why it is so "finicky". My $.02... :)
Also to add, if you play with seating depth, just a little, you can move those groups around as well.
-
Thank you for all the great info!
My theory would be that the different brass might be of a significant different volume. In rifle reloading this is a know factor. In a tiny case like 9mm, a slight difference in case volume could mean a great difference in pressures, causing such POI and accuracy shifts.
In a voluminous case, such as .45acp, this would not matter as much. However, in 9mm the higher pressures and smaller volume could be why it is so "finicky". My $.02... :)
thanks heavies
your theory makes sense
-
Thank you for all the great info!
My theory would be that the different brass might be of a significant different volume. In rifle reloading this is a know factor. In a tiny case like 9mm, a slight difference in case volume could mean a great difference in pressures, causing such POI and accuracy shifts.
In a voluminous case, such as .45acp, this would not matter as much. However, in 9mm the higher pressures and smaller volume could be why it is so "finicky". My $.02... :)
Also to add, if you play with seating depth, just a little, you can move those groups around as well.
..
I just noticed this reply years after posting.
Yes it does make sense.
-
In theory, it makes sense. For rifle, I've seen where it makes little difference, at least for 223.
-
..
I just noticed this reply years after posting.
Yes it does make sense.
I agree with Heavies.
Try weighing the cases.
Heavier case thicker wall ?
Thicker wall, less space inside.
-
I agree with Heavies.
Try weighing the cases.
Heavier case thicker wall ?
Thicker wall, less space inside.
...
Ya know this was 4 years ago.
I'll try weighing somè shells anyway .
-
Looking at my current brass...
10 fc cases weighed 583 gr.
10 win cases weighed 595 gr.
Looks like there is 1 extra grain of brass in each case.