10mm 200XTP 13.0 AA#9 CCI 350 COL 1.255" tested in the new Glock 20SF Stock barrel and RSA June 8 2013
Velocities 1179 fps / 1244 fps
Starline case 0.4330" / Winchester case 0.4340"
primers moderately flat, cases have smooth round expansion but "no smile lines"
I'll be sending two of them to Inercooler for testing also.
I have always noticed really flat primers with AA9, even at moderate loads.
I like this stuff, its accurate, clean, and low flash.
Id hate to call it idiot proof in 10mm because idiots are so damn resourceful,
but its pretty hard to blow yourself up with this powder (again, in 10mm)
Yeah...You can't really seat the bullet over much more than 13 grains of the stuff with a 200 grain pill.
Good powder. Wish I could get the performance for a little less price. Like finding 16 lbs of the old WC-820 that has an AA#9 burn rate.
To actually keep the powder form pushing the bullets back out you need to watch you expander plug diameter or not let it go very deep into the case mouth. This allows the bullet a tighter fit when seating and helps to maintain a firmer grip so it doesn't back out. I also seat without a crimp being applied then crimp in a separate step to finish. Yes it is that compressed.
This was a real problem with the Barnes 140 gr. TAC-XP, I could only get 12.6 grains of AA#9 inside with out movement.
I worked up a load using AA #9 over the weekend and at first with lower level loads my primers were being flattened and then as I increased powder charge they flattened less.
Interesting. I can think of a couple of reasons that may be, but couldn't begin to describe them in detail.
I was quite confused myself. I just figured the primers would keep flattening with increased loads as I expected when reading about AA#9 but to my surprise they did not only with 1050fps- 1100 fps loads or approx. 11 grains to just under 12 grains.
Quote from: The_Shadow on June 09 2013 01:13:06 PM MDTVelocities 1179 fps / 1244 fps
I'm mildly surprised there was a 65 FPS difference between the two, as I generally haven't seen more than about a 30 FPS spread in my own No.9 workups in charge weights ranging from 12.5-14.0 grains. But like I said;
Mildly Surprised.
Regarding No.9 load primer flattening; for me so far I haven't studied my own workups super-super close, and always felt my various No.9 loads all flattened fairly close to the same.
With No.7 I've had worse flattening than with No.9, but it could just as well be because I was at some higher pressure level than the No.9 loads anyway. Like I have a clue. ::)
What I would give for some pressure testing equipment. :P
Guess it doesn't matter much at the moment, as I can't find 180gr or 200gr XTP bullets to save my life. I'ld like some Gold Dots too, but I feel like that won't happen for like a millennium or so. :(
Quote from: sqlbullet on June 10 2013 10:38:57 AM MDTYeah...You can't really seat the bullet over much more than 13 grains of the stuff with a 200 grain pill.
At 14.0 grains of No.9 I can't get a 200 XTP load below about 1.263", and that's with the top of the bullet lightly leveled on top ~.003" from seating and crimping in the same operation (at least my Glock mags can still handle that). Like The_Shadow said; I also seat without a crimp being applied then crimp in a separate step to finish. I'm working toward that, have the proper dies, but no bullets, so I'm dead in the water for now anyway.
Quote from: REDLINE on June 10 2013 06:12:40 PM MDT
Quote from: The_Shadow on June 09 2013 01:13:06 PM MDTVelocities 1179 fps / 1244 fps
I'm mildly surprised there was a 65 FPS difference between the two, as I generally haven't seen more than about a 30 FPS spread in my own No.9 workups in charge weights ranging from 12.5-14.0 grains. But like I said; Mildly Surprised.
I don't have my notes with me I forgot them for the week. I started at 11.0 grains and was at 1050 fps and worked up from there to 13 which resulted in an average almost exactly at 1200 fps. My numbers could be off a little above I know for sure the starting and ending numbers are correct.
I just finished loading up some 200 gr XTPs over 13.0 gr AA#9 when I got online and saw this thread! I am going to chronograph them tomorrow or Thursday out of both the Stock G20 barrel & the 6" KKM. I will report back with the results.
Specs:
New Starline Cases
1.260" COAL
CCI-300 Primer
200 gr. XTP
13.0 gr AA#9
I seated these with my new flat seating plug (that my friend machined for me!) and there is no longer any deformation like I was experiencing with the rounded seating plug.
I'll be curious to see your results with the NON magnum primer, and the velocity difference between the 4.6" and 6" barrel lengths.
AA9 powder. It's so uneventful with the 10mm. I know a lot of folks use it, and think they get good results, and that's fine. Fact is, you just can't get enough of the stuff in the case to really perform. It's like trying to use H110/W296, it just ain't happening. The powder is too slow, and not dense enough to get the pressure up (unless you are trying the "lite" versions, which are misleading). It's a good powder, just not good for most 10mm. Get it compressed to 120% (not easy, at all), and you might have something.
Quote from: DM1906 on June 12 2013 12:51:06 AM MDT
AA9 powder. It's so uneventful with the 10mm. I know a lot of folks use it, and think they get good results, and that's fine. Fact is, you just can't get enough of the stuff in the case to really perform. It's like trying to use H110/W296, it just ain't happening. The powder is too slow, and not dense enough to get the pressure up (unless you are trying the "lite" versions, which are misleading). It's a good powder, just not good for most 10mm. Get it compressed to 120% (not easy, at all), and you might have something.
That's why it's good for someone like me... can't get enough in the case to blow myself up! ;D
I also loaded some 800x rounds ala Underwood... I have been working up to 10.2 gr under a 165 grain pill and 9.4 grains under a 180 gr HST. Will chrono them today if possible. No smilies or crazy pressure signs yet working up .1 gr at a time from 9.4 & 8.8 grains respectively but I would be lying if I didn't say that I remove the magazine and wear a glove for the first few rounds of each increased charge. :-\
Quote from: RMM on June 12 2013 09:27:27 AM MDT
Quote from: DM1906 on June 12 2013 12:51:06 AM MDT
AA9 powder. It's so uneventful with the 10mm. I know a lot of folks use it, and think they get good results, and that's fine. Fact is, you just can't get enough of the stuff in the case to really perform. It's like trying to use H110/W296, it just ain't happening. The powder is too slow, and not dense enough to get the pressure up (unless you are trying the "lite" versions, which are misleading). It's a good powder, just not good for most 10mm. Get it compressed to 120% (not easy, at all), and you might have something.
That's why it's good for someone like me... can't get enough in the case to blow myself up! ;D
I also loaded some 800x rounds ala Underwood... I have been working up to 10.2 gr under a 165 grain pill and 9.4 grains under a 180 gr HST. Will chrono them today if possible. No smilies or crazy pressure signs yet working up .1 gr at a time from 9.4 & 8.8 grains respectively but I would be lying if I didn't say that I remove the magazine and wear a glove for the first few rounds of each increased charge. :-\
No doubt! That's what I do. Revision goggles and Kevlar gloves (and a ballistic face shield if that isn't giving me the warm and fuzzy). Do whatever it takes to get the comfort level needed. I've gone so far with some wildcat load development to wear full welding leathers. It was never needed and hot as hell, but necessary at the time.
Quote from: DM1906 on June 12 2013 12:51:06 AM MDTAA9 powder. It's so uneventful with the 10mm. I know a lot of folks use it, and think they get good results, and that's fine. Fact is, you just can't get enough of the stuff in the case to really perform. It's like trying to use H110/W296, it just ain't happening. The powder is too slow, and not dense enough to get the pressure up (unless you are trying the "lite" versions, which are misleading). It's a good powder, just not good for most 10mm. Get it compressed to 120% (not easy, at all), and you might have something.
What would be cool for a new Accurate powder would be a No.8, where charge weights would be similar to No.7 but with the potency of No.9.
Something like that could hypothetically give Longshot and 800X a run for their money.
Quote from: REDLINE on June 12 2013 03:32:59 PM MDT
Quote from: DM1906 on June 12 2013 12:51:06 AM MDTAA9 powder. It's so uneventful with the 10mm. I know a lot of folks use it, and think they get good results, and that's fine. Fact is, you just can't get enough of the stuff in the case to really perform. It's like trying to use H110/W296, it just ain't happening. The powder is too slow, and not dense enough to get the pressure up (unless you are trying the "lite" versions, which are misleading). It's a good powder, just not good for most 10mm. Get it compressed to 120% (not easy, at all), and you might have something.
What would be cool for a new Accurate powder would be a No.8, where charge weights would be similar to No.7 but with the potency of No.9.
Something like that could hypothetically give Longshot and 800X a run for their money.
That's pretty good, but we already have that. For now, we'll just call it 410. Try it. You'll like it! (if you can find it, cuz I can't, and I'm out)
Quote from: DM1906 on June 12 2013 03:41:04 PM MDT
Quote from: REDLINE on June 12 2013 03:32:59 PM MDT
Quote from: DM1906 on June 12 2013 12:51:06 AM MDTAA9 powder. It's so uneventful with the 10mm. I know a lot of folks use it, and think they get good results, and that's fine. Fact is, you just can't get enough of the stuff in the case to really perform. It's like trying to use H110/W296, it just ain't happening. The powder is too slow, and not dense enough to get the pressure up (unless you are trying the "lite" versions, which are misleading). It's a good powder, just not good for most 10mm. Get it compressed to 120% (not easy, at all), and you might have something.
What would be cool for a new Accurate powder would be a No.8, where charge weights would be similar to No.7 but with the potency of No.9.
Something like that could hypothetically give Longshot and 800X a run for their money.
That's pretty good, but we already have that. For now, we'll just call it 410. Try it. You'll like it! (if you can find it, cuz I can't, and I'm out)
Accurate doesn't make 410. Alliant makes 410.
Regardless, what type of 10mm load are you saying 410 is so good for? Plinking?.....Nuclear?.....Light Bullets?.....Heavy Bullets?.....?
Quote from: REDLINE on June 12 2013 03:56:11 PM MDT
Quote from: DM1906 on June 12 2013 03:41:04 PM MDT
Quote from: REDLINE on June 12 2013 03:32:59 PM MDT
Quote from: DM1906 on June 12 2013 12:51:06 AM MDTAA9 powder. It's so uneventful with the 10mm. I know a lot of folks use it, and think they get good results, and that's fine. Fact is, you just can't get enough of the stuff in the case to really perform. It's like trying to use H110/W296, it just ain't happening. The powder is too slow, and not dense enough to get the pressure up (unless you are trying the "lite" versions, which are misleading). It's a good powder, just not good for most 10mm. Get it compressed to 120% (not easy, at all), and you might have something.
What would be cool for a new Accurate powder would be a No.8, where charge weights would be similar to No.7 but with the potency of No.9.
Something like that could hypothetically give Longshot and 800X a run for their money.
That's pretty good, but we already have that. For now, we'll just call it 410. Try it. You'll like it! (if you can find it, cuz I can't, and I'm out)
Accurate doesn't make 410. Alliant makes 410.
Regardless, what type of 10mm load are you saying 410 is so good for? Plinking?.....Nuclear?.....Light Bullets?.....Heavy Bullets?.....?
Yeah, it's Alliant. Doesn't matter what's on the label if it gets the job done. It's comparable to Blue Dot, but a little more lofty, shoots a little softer and less flashy. It meters easier, more like AA7/9.. I haven't tried jacketed or cast bullets smaller than 180, but it does well with those and 205 WFN. Originally, I wanted to work it up for 155 gr. Barnes, but it's too lofty for that long of a bullet. It sounded good at the time, but like AA9 and 2400, just can't get enough in the case. I used the pound I had on mostly 180 gr. XTP's. It turned out at similar performance to AA7 and BD, but about 15% less economical. Marginally greater performance was more charge weight, so economy went out the window for the gain. More costly per pound than BD, and greater charge weight than AA7. Cleaner burning than both, though. All full power load objective (1300/1200, respectively), and it just made it. I don't think it'll go nuke with heavier bullets. It may be better suited for lighter bullets, but I gave up before getting there. No pressure issues noticed, as I recall.
QuoteYeah, it's Alliant. Doesn't matter what's on the label if it gets the job done.
It kind of does when my whole premise was pushing for a Accurate Powders No.8 powder. QuoteIt's comparable to Blue Dot, but a little more lofty, shoots a little softer and less flashy. It meters easier, more like AA7/9.. I haven't tried jacketed or cast bullets smaller than 180, but it does well with those and 205 WFN. Originally, I wanted to work it up for 155 gr. Barnes, but it's too lofty for that long of a bullet. It sounded good at the time, but like AA9 and 2400, just can't get enough in the case. I used the pound I had on mostly 180 gr. XTP's. It turned out at similar performance to AA7 and BD, but about 15% less economical. Marginally greater performance was more charge weight, so economy went out the window for the gain. More costly per pound than BD, and greater charge weight than AA7. Cleaner burning than both, though. All full power load objective (1300/1200, respectively), and it just made it. I don't think it'll go nuke with heavier bullets. It may be better suited for lighter bullets, but I gave up before getting there. No pressure issues noticed, as I recall.
First you say; That's pretty good, but we already have that. For now, we'll just call it 410. Try it. You'll like it!
Then you say what's quoted above which was more negative than positive.
What was I going to like so much about Alliant 410, and how is Alliant 410 comparable to the hypothetical Accurate No.8 I made up for the reasons I brought it up? Alliant strictly says 410 is not to be used in any handgun load.
I feel like I'm missing something? :-\
I know what the label says, and I think they're wrong. The testing, and subsequent ~750 rounds I fired certainly suggested otherwise. You suggested a hypothetical powder, and I suggested a real powder that falls into the groove you suggested. Perhaps there isn't an 8 is because they found what I found: No real use for a powder, "right there", or perhaps maybe, but would it be worth the effort and expense. According to my extensive use of AA powders, the powder I suggested did exactly that, in 10mm. This is an enjoyable hobby. Picking nits makes it less enjoyable. Next time you post a hypothetical question, perhaps you should include your rules for reply.
Finally got out shooting yesterday night (around 8:45) but the sun was not cooperating with the chronograph. I shot one 13.0 AA#9 200 gr. XTP (no smiley), one 165 gr. BBI 10.2 gr. 800x (no smiley), and one 180 HST 9.4 gr. 800x (no smiley). All through the factory Glock barrel. I will chrono another day and report back here.
I did shoot about 65 165 gr. BBI through the factory barrel and the leading and deposits are gone now that I am not passing through the Lee FCD.
RMM, so you were using the FCD to do your final crimps, and that squeezed the case and the cast bullet down to a smaller diameter and this was what was causing your leading issues if I read you report correctly! ???
Sounds like your results got better without using the FCD to finalize...Good for you!
Quote from: DM1906 on June 12 2013 06:51:10 PM MDTYou suggested a hypothetical powder, and I suggested a real powder that falls into the groove you suggested.
We'll have to agree to strongly disagree on that one. 8)
Quote from: RMM on June 14 2013 12:24:51 PM MDTFinally got out shooting yesterday night (around 8:45) but the sun was not cooperating with the chronograph. I shot one 13.0 AA#9 200 gr. XTP (no smiley), one 165 gr. BBI 10.2 gr. 800x (no smiley), and one 180 HST 9.4 gr. 800x (no smiley). All through the factory Glock barrel. I will chrono another day and report back here.
I did shoot about 65 165 gr. BBI through the factory barrel and the leading and deposits are gone now that I am not passing through the Lee FCD.
Thanks for sharing! What does
BBI stand for?
Quote from: REDLINE on June 16 2013 02:00:45 PM MDT
Quote from: RMM on June 14 2013 12:24:51 PM MDTFinally got out shooting yesterday night (around 8:45) but the sun was not cooperating with the chronograph. I shot one 13.0 AA#9 200 gr. XTP (no smiley), one 165 gr. BBI 10.2 gr. 800x (no smiley), and one 180 HST 9.4 gr. 800x (no smiley). All through the factory Glock barrel. I will chrono another day and report back here.
I did shoot about 65 165 gr. BBI through the factory barrel and the leading and deposits are gone now that I am not passing through the Lee FCD.
Thanks for sharing! What does BBI stand for?
https://blackbulletsinternational.com/
Thanks. Love the overall design of that 165.
(https://blackbulletsinternational.com/images/fa93b79a5bceb2f5bb745058fbbd0e0e.jpg)
They are also a really good deal. 8.7 cents each if you buy a case, 10 cents each if you buy 1000 (free shipping). I bought 1000 to start with and depending on how things go with these 1000 (so far so good after fixing the sizing issue) I will buy a case next time.
Hopefully the chronograph will cooperate next time I go out but I think that I am loading these ~1,300 FPS with no leading/excessive deposits in either the Glock or KKM 6" barrel (9.2 gr. Longshot). The first 50 I ran leaded the Glock barrel badly (was pulling out strips) and 25 the KKM lightly (brush took it out) but the last 65 I shot without running through Lee FCD through the Glock barrel didn't leave anything that a few passes with just a cotton patch w/ CLP didn't take out.
Quote from: REDLINE on June 12 2013 03:32:59 PM MDT
Quote from: DM1906 on June 12 2013 12:51:06 AM MDTAA9 powder. The powder is too slow, and not dense enough to get the pressure up (unless you are trying the "lite" versions, which are misleading)..
What would be cool for a new Accurate powder would be a No.8, where charge weights would be similar to No.7 but with the potency of No.9.
Something like that could hypothetically give Longshot and 800X a run for their money.
/////////////
I already load and shoot with AA #8. It is my standard go to with 155gr XTP bullets.
my AA #8 powder is a 50-50 mixture of #9 and #7. What I have done is slowed
down the #7 and sped up the #9. I got my incentive from the pressure data from
Accurate Arms 3.2.2 10mm load data. Look at the pressures for the 155xtp bullets
with AA#7 and AA#9 in the load data see attached. I load with Starline brass
and 16gr of my special mix AA#8 to exceed any of their velocity numbers and
I am pretty confident I am not exceeding the 37.5K pressure max I 1st described this
about 2 years ago on another forum and was criticized for breaking the sacred rule
of not mixing powders. I actually feel that I was just adjusting burn rates as the
powders are nearly identical in most respects. Anyway, just wanted to report about
2 years of success with this approach and about 450 rounds fired. I did approach this
incrementally however and built up to my loads. I began with 10 percent increment
increases with #7 added to 16gr of #9 till I reached 50/50 and everything stayed cool.
BTW, I am shooting with SW 1006 but I dont feel like these are nuclear loads.
Just well balanced loads with a perfectly tuned power for the bullet weight,
case capacity and barrel length.
[attachment deleted by admin]
Preventec47, do you have any velocity numbers from your testing? ???
I did remember when you were discussing the mixing both the #7 & #9 powders but don't remember if you have velocity numbers.
Wherever I was posting the info I am pretty sure I posted the velocity info as I purchased
a new chrony for the specific task and it worked great till I killed it. Chrony devices
do not work nearly as well as gel for penetration testing.
Sorry about your Chrony...I was just inquiring about some numbers based on the blended powders as tested...
Could you provide or share the load data and velocities as tested, so others can get a feel for your work?
I'm quite sure others will find the data useful as well. :D
No I am sorry, I did not keep up with the data. But it exists in the forum where
you saw me present it which I dont exactly remember where.... Was it Glock Talk or AR-15.com etc ?
I am a bit rusty now but I did major investigation and study of internal ballistics and all I can
say is if ever anyone reaches a maximum load and there is still space in the case for
extra powder, then the powder for that load is not optimized. More mass of powder equals
more gas that can potentially be developed to push the bullet out of the barrel for a longer
duration. Such was my thinking with the AA data for the 155XTP. At 12.7gr of powder, the
max pressure had been obtained with the AA#7 and there was still room in the case. Thusly,
the powder is too fast for that load.
Remember that the weight or mass of gas developed can never be heavier than the
powder from which it is generated. So if pressures are limited to say a SAAMI max,
the powder producing the greatest mass of gas will push longer down the barrel and
create a greater average pressure for the time the bullet stays in the barrel.
With respect to the the Accurate Arms load data.......for 10mm 155gr XTP ,
At 15.9gr of AA#9 clearly no more powder could be fit into the case yet the max pressure
was only 32,500. Thusly, the powder is too slow. By combining both powders, a compromise is made between AA#7 and AA#9 whereby the case gets
filled with the perfect speed powder that exactly fills the case and precisely meets the
SAAMI max pressure specification. There may be loads of faster powders that generate
faster velocities, but I would bet good money that they are generating higher pressures.
Laws of physics dictate it. I could put it another way, for any two identical loads where
the powder weights are the same and bullets are identical and same COL and crimp etc.
the higher velocity load is generating the greater pressure. Conversely if you had two
loads with the same pressure but one was a higher velocity, then that load had to generate
a greater mass of gas... hence greater volume and pushed longer down the barrel.
The powder that was converted to gas in the higher velocity load HAD to weigh more than the other.
So, we STILL don't have any data for what kind of speeds a 200gr XTP w 13.0gr AA9 does in a 6" tube with CCI300's?
Darn....
Lemme know if someone maps this ....
I'm interested in this load for my M-T and my 6.6" barrel in my G20sf - I don't have a chrony - no where I can use it :'( ( yet)
Doug
I do remember loading the 200Grain XTP's using the micro sphere AA#9 and it is a compressed loading and the nose of the bullet will start to show closure on the HP with some seater plugs. In some instances the bullet can be pushed back out! This was noticed even at 12.6 grains... ???
Use the least amount of case expansion as possible, to maintain best tension and avoid the bullet pushing back outward!
200gr XTP and 13.0gr of AA9 ( Surplus WC820) in my STI 10MM -6" barrel got 1164 fps and yes a compressed load.
Sean
Yea but I remember you got higher numbers from AA7 Than AA9 and I thought it was weird when you first posted that data, too.
I think your results are the exception rather than the norm...
For example, Taterhead got a 200gr XTP to 1200fps avg from a stock G20 barrel with 13.0gr. I suspect a 6" would get 30-60fps more, at least.
Anyone else have the data?
Quote from: 475/480 on May 29 2014 02:02:02 PM MDT
200gr XTP and 13.0gr of AA9 ( Surplus WC820) in my STI 10MM -6" barrel got 1164 fps and yes a compressed load.
Sean