Got out to chrono some loads today and got some impressive numbers, especially with my 6" Fusion.
I shot a ladder out of my G20SF (stock 4.6" bbl, Wolff 22lb RSA)
I also shot one round of the the max AA9 load from my Fusion 6" 1911 Hunter.
200gr XTP over Accurate #9 (the newest version of the powder, flattened ball)
CCI300 primers
new Starline brass
92 deg, sweltering
Here are the numbers....
Data format is as follows: LO-HI-AVG-ES-SD
I'll be measuring the cases later but no smiles and no obvious signs of pressure other than some normal swelling from the G20 loads.
12.4gr
1147-1183-1161-36.4-15.9
12.6gr
(error, accidentally shot these on the prior string, corrupting the data ... I did see small velocity increase as expected, FWIW)
12.8gr
1169-1197-1185-28.2-11.9
13.0gr
1187-1211-1201-23.7-11.5
13.2gr
1215-1220-1217-4.2-3.6
The following string was from my 6" Fusion 1911 Hunter
13.2gr
1360-1382-1371-21.9-15.5 <--- HOLY SCHNEIKIES!!!
I'm a little skeptical of this particular string. I WAS a good 12-14ft back from the chrono so I believe this to be good data... but I will be revisiting this one. I would EXPECT about 1260-1290fps going from the 4.6" to 6" so this is a little surprising Very high numbers from the 6" fully supported Fusion barrel. Absolutely no case swell and the load felt really good... less recoil that I remember my nuclear Longshot loads in the same pistol that didn't get this level of velocity. I'm guessing that the combination of heavy bullet, slow powder and new cases allowed this load to really build up some steam.
I will be loading lots more of the 13.0 and 13.2gr AA9 / 200gr XTP's for further accuracy testing with both the G20SF and the Fusion for deer season this fall. Smasher of a load and, from what I've seen with OTHER Accurate loads through this Glock, will probably be EXTREMELY ACCURATE with low relative pressure.
I also fired a quick string of 13.5gr AA9 over a Rainier HP from the G20SF. Here are the numbers.
13.5gr
1129-1236-1188-106.9-45.5
This load seems a bit slow since I thought it would be making 1200+ on every shot. I'll probably shoot a few more of these to double check for consistency. SUPER accurate load though, as I shot quite a few 1" groups with the G20SF/FF3 at the range on my last trip.
I also have quite a few more loads to test using both WSF and 800X (IMR) but that will have to come later. It was too hot today and those results will obviously be in their proper respective threads here on this loading forum.
Here are a few pics of where I was shooting today....
http://s1253.photobucket.com/user/nickE10mm/library/PAPAs%20land%20-%20chrono%20tests%20-%20July%202014 (http://s1253.photobucket.com/user/nickE10mm/library/PAPAs%20land%20-%20chrono%20tests%20-%20July%202014)
Have a good one, guys!
Just curious if you've ever slugged the bore and measured the chamber of the Fusion. I've noted quite a bit of increased velocity between rounds fired from my G20 SF and Delta. Not as much as what you saw here. :o, but a substantial difference.
I've slugged both BARRELS in question here but not the chambers ... But I have MIC'd them.
Fusion slugs out at .4000", chamber mics at .4265" or so
Glock slugs at .401" and chamber mics at .4350-.4355"
Other than the obvious barrel length difference, I don't normally see anything that surprises me about the different velocities of the two.
Interesting, as I was just curious. As I remember the difference was quite a bit more than I would have expected from just the 0.60 barrel difference. Different weight bullet and powder so probably doesn't mean a whole lot.
Keep in mine I'm not comparing pistols with a .6" difference. I'm comparing barrels with a 1.4" difference. There is usually 100-150fps difference with lighter bullets and 25-100fps difference with heavy bullets. These particular test results, however, was different than most.
Got the difference, Nick. ;D Seems like I was seeing 50-70 fps with the 180s......about twice what I would have expected from the length difference in my Glock and Delta. Were any of these a compressed load? I've never used AA9.
Anyway, I look forward to what you find with the 800-X.
Ah, gotcha :) that IS quite a bit considering your small difference.
With AA9, I believe anything 12.8gr and up is compressed slightly, yes.
Regarding 800X.... I've already tested the stuff I have loaded up in my Fusion ... Just not the G20.
Not to sidetrack your thread ;), but what did you get from the 800-X?
I take it your goal was to get 1200 fps out of the Glock with AA9 and a 200 gr bullet?
A few years ago (but with this same exact can of IMR 800x), this Fusion with 180gr XTP's averaged 1380fps over with 10.0gr of powder. A 200gr XTP over 9.4gr averaged 1275fps. Standard disclaimer advised.
And yes, 1200fps from a stock G20 was the goa todayl. :)
Nick, Thanks for the range reports, tell us more about the AA#9 powder was this the newer flattened ball or the older microbead styles for your testing? ???
AA#9 ball powder Microbeads (older style)
(http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j441/_The_Shadow/IMG_0210.jpg)
AA#9 flatten ball (newer style)
(http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j441/_The_Shadow/AccurateArms9newer2_zpsd0920c8d.jpg)
Shadow, it's in my original post. I'm using the newer flattened ball powder. :)
Nick...thanks for the 800-X info. I've got some 180 XTPs loaded with it but haven't shot any of them. In fact, I haven't fired my Glock long slide since installing the trigger I bought from you. I keep getting off on other calibers. :)
Quote from: EdMc on July 14 2014 10:29:07 AM MDT
Nick...thanks for the 800-X info. I've got some 180 XTPs loaded with it but haven't shot any of them. In fact, I haven't fired my Glock long slide since installing the trigger I bought from you. I keep getting off on other calibers. :)
Well GET OUT THERE AND SHOOT IT!! :-P
Yes sir! :-[
Quote from: nickE10mm on July 14 2014 10:20:42 AM MDT
Shadow, it's in my original post. I'm using the newer flattened ball powder. :)
Thanks Nick, I know I had to have read that either here or on GT, just getting a head of myself sometimes! 8)
So....any reported appreciable differences in the two versions? I've got a pound of AA9 I've never used. Had for awhile so it's the older type.
EdMc, you can look at the two pictures and ten look at your's and you should clearly be able to verify which one you have.
They are supposed to be the same by weight, I think the "older microbeads" occupy more space and don't compress as much. ???
Thanks Wade. I was mostly asking if there had been any mention of velocity/pressure differences between the new and older configurations at the same loadings. I don't regularly frequent as many gun forums as others.