Cartridge is from Ammo Manufacture: Parabellum Research PBR V Supreme 165gr FMJ (from Chucky2)
Ballistics Information: 10mm Auto
Muzzle Velocity: 1343 fps
Muzzle Energy: 660 ft. lbs
Brass Make/Headstamp: Star Line - Brass
Bullet Make/Weight/Construction/Info; Length 0.5620"/Dia. 0.4000": 165gr. FMJ
Actual weight 165.2 grains Crimp squeezed bullet to 0.3965"
MEPLAT 0.2485" (concaved base)
C.O.A.L.: 1.2525" / 1.2525"
Primer: Nickel color
Case: Diameter 0.4215" Crimp Diameter 0.4215" (Tight) Length 0.9865" / 0.9900"
Powder Description/Positive ID/Type/Charge Power Pistol Weight: 9.8 / 9.8 grains
Speer #14 book load is 10.0 grains @ 1314 fps, (measured a few and they were really consistent)
(https://s20.postimg.cc/5l99fnpfx/IMG_0170_zps200edfbc.jpg)
(https://s20.postimg.cc/b9fk6k1i5/IMG_0171_zpsc317cc86.jpg)
(https://s20.postimg.cc/58hv9hmlp/IMG_0172_zps2d3387b0.jpg)
(https://s20.postimg.cc/8s3szax19/IMG_0173_zpsf510981f.jpg)
The sheet has 10.0 from a previous pull-down. Just a metering thing?
Its hard to say, I pulled two of these and both were exactly 9.8grs, Power Pistol meters very well. They could have dialed it back slightly. :-\
Should I change the sheet to reflect 9.8?
I will start putting the velocity on the sent round bags.
You might could leave it as is or do a second listing in the powder column or a complete line to reflect that loading it if you wish. He wants me to test with the glock for FTF's, so I'll chrono them while testing.
Well, I got the invoice e-mailed to me on July 18th, 2013, so these are coming up on a year old. I'd say if your previous measurement was after that date, stick with the previous measurement. If it was before, maybe stick with mine?
Previous pull-down was March 2013
http://10mm-firearms.com/factory-10mm-ammo-pull-downs/parabellum-research-pbr-165gr-fmj-pull-down/ (http://10mm-firearms.com/factory-10mm-ammo-pull-downs/parabellum-research-pbr-165gr-fmj-pull-down/)
Quote from: The_Shadow on March 18 2014 08:59:02 PM MDT
You might could leave it as is or do a second listing in the powder column or a complete line to reflect that loading it if you wish. He wants me to test with the glock for FTF's, so I'll chrono them while testing.
Failure to feeds in a Glock? What's up with that?
I will just leave it. When PBR gets stock again, I plan on getting some more.
Quote from: 4949shooter on March 19 2014 04:24:12 PM MDT
Quote from: The_Shadow on March 18 2014 08:59:02 PM MDT
You might could leave it as is or do a second listing in the powder column or a complete line to reflect that loading it if you wish. He wants me to test with the glock for FTF's, so I'll chrono them while testing.
Failure to feeds in a Glock? What's up with that?
Unfortunately I have FTF...better now since mag spring stretching, though still not solved. http://10mm-firearms.com/10mm-semi-auto-handguns/g20-gen4-ftf-issues/ (http://10mm-firearms.com/10mm-semi-auto-handguns/g20-gen4-ftf-issues/)
Quote from: chucky2 on March 19 2014 06:50:43 PM MDT
Quote from: 4949shooter on March 19 2014 04:24:12 PM MDT
Quote from: The_Shadow on March 18 2014 08:59:02 PM MDT
You might could leave it as is or do a second listing in the powder column or a complete line to reflect that loading it if you wish. He wants me to test with the glock for FTF's, so I'll chrono them while testing.
Failure to feeds in a Glock? What's up with that?
Unfortunately I have FTF...better now since mag spring stretching, though still not solved. http://10mm-firearms.com/10mm-semi-auto-handguns/g20-gen4-ftf-issues/ (http://10mm-firearms.com/10mm-semi-auto-handguns/g20-gen4-ftf-issues/)
Oh okay, received.
I still think you should have Glock replace your magazine springs.
I'm not sure they'll do it. From their perspective the pistol shot fine when they had it. I probably will write the guy back after The_Shadow shoots the 50. If he has no issues, I'm going to wait for another user to get his Wolf 10% magsprings. If those solve his problem, I'll be writing Glock back asking what can be done about magsprings. Anyways, back on topic...
Tested the Parabellum Research 165 grain FMJ V-Supreme ammo today, 50 rounds...
My back is still a little sore, it went out last Friday, weather yesterday was horrendous, over 4"+ rain yesterday. Some of the ranges were closed; however I was able to get into one although it was sopping wet. Wind was stiff and moving clouds made some shots not register on the CHRONY.
Here are the results of the range trip, Glock 20 SF.
NO failures of any kind. I did fire 15, 5, 3, 2 from each of two different magazines.
Factory barrel/spring
1290, 1344, 1317, 1340, 1317, 1340, 1280, 1334, 1328, 1191,
1323, 1360, 1380, 1322, 1327, 1324, 1343, 1319, 1331
Factory Barrel Wolff Gun Springs 22lb non captive recoil rod and springs
1295, 1361, 1330, 1335, 1347, 1246, 1342, 1325, 1321, 1333,
1347, 1335, 1328, 1348, 1336, 1333, 1310, 1310
Those were the rounds that registered; I was sort of rushing through this, before anyone else showed up.
Case expansion was 04330"- 0.4340", typical of Glock Factory Barrels.
No problems with this ammo as tested. :D
What's the averages and ES for each?
I didn't retrieve that data, I was having some in the string that were not reading due to varying lighting conditions of fast moving clouds & wind, Front came through again this morning. Line of weather came through at 3am with some hail and potential for tornadoes. :o
There was a CWP class that was starting to show up...
Just glancing things over it looks like the 22lb setup gave better results. 1194?
Yes it did and ejected brass was slightly less for the 22lb as well. I sent a copy of the report to Chucky2, he was seeing issues with the ammo in the Glock 20 Gen4. However many were seeing the failure to feed, failure to pick up the last round in the mag, and some rounds were jammed into the feed ramps or just to the left of it.
The only thing I noticed when I cleaned the G-20SF up was a bright deposit of brass on the breech face, where the case heads where striking it after ignition, during and under recoil. Other than that the rounds burned very cleanly, of course Power Pistol is one of the cleaner burning propellants. ::)
Quote from: Intercooler on March 29 2014 03:06:37 PM MDT
Just glancing things over it looks like the 22lb setup gave better results. 1194?
1191 actually. I am wondering if this was due to an inconsistency caused by the 17 pound stock spring or if it was a weak loaded round.
That's bad for even a stock recoil sprung Glock. I think that reading was a Chrony error.
I would agree its probably a chrony error, wind was blowing things around, one of my homemade diffusers was blown across the field before I set up, and my cardboard target also flew out into a large puddle. Winds about 35 mph, as the backside of the passing front approached...It wasn't the best day to be out there, some places had 2" of standing water on the concrete shooting lanes and mud 1" deep in many areas.
It's possible the chrony was being shaken (not stirred) by the wind, even some of those lower 1200's could be because the 1st sensor caught the back of the bullet and the last sensor saw the front. That would affect timing.
Lets just say it wasn't ideal conditions.
However the main part of the testing was gun functions, I shot singles, double taps and triple taps, testing for any failures that could possibly cause a stoppage. However the Glock-20 SF pistol was flawless in stock configuration and with the use of the non captive Wolff recoil 22lb spring setup using different magazines, loaded with varying amounts of the ammo.
For those of us who don't know the changes in Glock Gen's from 3 to 4, do you have any idea about the magazines being any different? Right now the only thing I see that might be changed to create what the owners are experiencing is the recoil spring assembly.
It is said the gen 4 magazine has an ambi cut on the front to allow ambidextrous use of the mag release, internals are the same though.
I think that means you could still use the Gen 3 magazines? Has anyone tried that?
You can use Gen 4 mags in a gen 3 no problem.
I believe you can use a gen 3 mag in a gen 4 if the magazine release has not been moved to the right side of the grip, but not vice versa.
Someone with both give it a go and report back 8)
Quote from: Intercooler on March 30 2014 04:22:03 PM MDT
Someone with both give it a go and report back 8)
Buy a Gen 4 and I will send you a gen 3 mag to test. :P
Don't turn me on to that pain ;D
Just wanted to say thanks again for doing all that, along with everything else you do for the 10mm community. Question: Where does this rank as far as power on the 10mm scale? Medium High? High? Just medium?
Those are very strong upper medium giving 1345 FPS/ 662 LBS. Over 600 LBS is real 10mm and over 700 is in the Nuclear range.
But it's not outside the design spec of 10mm right? What I'm working towards is this PBR isn't something so hot on the 10mm scale that a 10mm pistol shouldn't be expected to handle it, right?
The PBR 165 grain V Supreme is well inside the realm of realistic 10mm ammo and inside the SAAMI MAP for 10mm ammunition.
As mentioned the Speer #14 book shows 165gr bullets loaded with 10.0 grains of Power Pistol @ 1314 fps from S&W1006.
Alliant 2006 shows;
155 JHP loaded with 9.5 grains of Power Pistol @ 1,320 fps 33,000 PSI well below the 37,500 PSI adv.
180 JHP loaded with 8.7 grains of Power Pistol @ 1,240 fps 34,900 PSI well below the 37,500 PSI adv.
Ok, then what I think I'll do is also reference this thread to the Glock guy when I e-mail him back, along with a couple of others. I really do wonder what ammo Glock tests with when they test pistols sent back? I've heard 200gr Blazer, but just no way to confirm unless they in fact did so.
We did test the CCI Blazer 200gr 1050fps / 490 ft. lbs Low to medium power for 10mm
http://10mm-firearms.com/factory-10mm-ammo-pull-downs/cci-200-gr-tmj-pull-down/ (http://10mm-firearms.com/factory-10mm-ammo-pull-downs/cci-200-gr-tmj-pull-down/)
Alliant listed 200FMJ Power Pistol 7.7 @ 1,145 fps - 35,600 psi from 5.5" bbl (well below the SAAMI 37,500 adv)
Here's another question I'd have for Glock:
What ammo do you use to QC test a new design like the Gen3SF or Gen4? Certainly we know that most off the shelf 10mm ammo is watered down, such as the 200gr CCI Blazer you linked below. So what full power 10mm, such as this PBR, are they using to ensure their design can handle full and top power 10mm, along with that % over top power 10mm to ensure the design handles everything? I wonder if they roll it in-house, private contract it out, or order the same stuff like Underwood and/or PBR that we order?
Did you have the two pieces of tested empty brass/aluminum cases in the manila envelope in the factory box? It would have a headstamp of the manufacture of that ammo used for the test shots.
Mine were aluminum CCI...I do not know if they have a contract for a specific loading or if it is the same as off the shelf to the public. Some companies test to a proof pressure value for barrel testing...
Proof Pressures for 10mm are 130% minimum and 140% maximum as set by SAAMI
The formula is based on the Maximum Portable Lot Mean MPLM of 38,700 psi
38,700 x 1.30 = 50,310 psi and 38,700 x 1.40 = 54,180 psi
Minimum and Maximum
50,310 psi - 54,180 psi these would be rounded to 50,500 psi - 54,000 psi
I seriously doubt that Glock is using proof rounds for firearms function test, and those aluminum cases don't show any signs of that high of pressure based on what I have personally tested and measured the effects of higher pressure rounds.
Glock seems to load two rounds in the magazine, rack the slide, looking for it to feed to the chamber and fire, ejecting that casing and looking for it to pick up and feed the next cartridge to the chamber and fire that one and eject it as well.
That is just a simple function test, do they study anything with regards to spent brass, looking for extractor marks or ejector marks, case expansion other, I don't know.
Being a handloader, and testing in various 10mm guns over the years has shown me many things, especially when loads approach higher pressures. Brass that fully expanded to chamber size(for the Glock this is 0.4340" at the start of the extractor cut), have seen ammo that started the flow at the feed ramp what we call a "SMILE". I have tested some ammo (Underwood) that blew primers out, locked the slide back but left the spent casing in the chamber.
My handloads for the higher power applications are on up there, but backed off from the point of "Smiles" and popped primers for added safety and reliability.
Yes I've got them...somewhere... :) I'll have to track them down and see what they say. Even if they're CCI though, we don't know what loading they had. I am thinking more of from a design perspective. I've got to think that when Glock did the Gen3SF, and then the Gen4, they just didn't make whatever design changes and then not test the pistols against a full QA workup, looking for problems like I'm/We're having with the Gen4. I'd be curious to know what medium to hot loadings they used (I'd expect that to be in the thousands of rounds, so they'd have used quite a lot) to ensure that over the expected life of the pistol there would be no issues. For example, we all know Underwood is loaded very hot. I'd expect Glock to perhaps maybe not actually use Underwood, but, at least, use hot loadings like Underwood offers to ensure that their pistol not only functions reliably, but, lasts, using ammo that is at the top of - but within - the 10mm spec.
Quote from: Intercooler on March 30 2014 04:22:03 PM MDT
Someone with both give it a go and report back 8)
Intercooler,
I have both Gen3 & Gen4 mags. Can't tell a difference in either the Gen4 20 that I had problems with or the Gen3 they replaced it with that has been flawless. When I had the Gen4, the PBR 165gr velocity extreme worked the same in both mags. Haven't had any PBR to try in the Gen3.
The_Shadow & chucky2,
When I returned my Gen4 the 1st, Glock had only CCI Blazer 10mm to try in it. Not a custom load for them by CCI, just the off the shelf loads. Then, when I sent it back later they received some Hornady 180gr XTP loads that they used to test mine. I think they just use whatever large manufacturer's ammo that they can find. They refused to try mine with something like Underwood even if I sent it to them.
So when they tested with the Hornady, did your Gen4 FTF?