The goal is a 200 grain XTP at a good honest 1,200 fps average...doesn't matter if its 1,201 or 2,251 fps, as long as it averages over 1,200.
I fired these rounds a couple weeks ago...the Federal primers were some strays I found laying around, the only large pistol primers I had at the time...I prefer CCI.
Chrono data - stock 6" barrel.
200 grain XTP bullet
7 grains of Longshot
Federal 150 primers
~1.26" oal
1,080 fps...ES was pretty bad (35 fps)
200 grain XTP
8 grains of Longshot
Federal 150 primers
~1.26" oal
1,190 fps...ES was pretty good (6 fps)
For tomorrow, I have some loaded with:
200 grain XTP
8.2 grains of Longshot
CCI 300 primers
~1.26" oal
I'm expecting that to get me well enough above 1,200 fps, probably 1,215 fps or so...we shall see tomorrow.
I run 9.2 grains of LongShot for 1225- 1240 fps from the S&W1006 and Glock 20 from the Glock 29 they are 1190-1200 fps
Quote from: The_Shadow on February 03 2017 09:20:02 PM MST
I run 9.2 grains of LongShot for 1225- 1240 fps from the S&W1006 and Glock 20 from the Glock 29 they are 1190-1200 fps
180 grain bullets?
The rounds averaged 1,206 fps....ES was 18, SD was 6.
But, most of the brass has a faint "Glock smile".
Quote from: Ridgerunner665 on February 03 2017 09:29:12 PM MST
Quote from: The_Shadow on February 03 2017 09:20:02 PM MST
I run 9.2 grains of LongShot for 1225- 1240 fps from the S&W1006 and Glock 20 from the Glock 29 they are 1190-1200 fps
180 grain bullets?
200 grain XTP's but my guns have extra power non captive recoil springs, 1006 and G-20 with 22 lbs and the G-29 having 21 lbs
I looked into extra power springs, but the G40 slide is 5 oz. heavier than the G20 slide.
That is alot, as slide weight goes, I figured that would be good enough with the stock spring.
Case support.... The stock barrel has decent support but I've learned something this morning.
All these pics you see online showing case support for various barrels are done wrong.... They are all taken with the round crammed down in there as far as it will go, but that isn't where the round sits during firing.
The round sits against the breech face, flush with the top of the barrel hood... In my stock G40 barrel, that reduces the case support by a fair amount.
That method of checking case support will be the same for all makes of barrels... I'd be curious to find out the measurements from other barrels.
Case support illustrated with the slide/barrel locked up as the should be...
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc137/Ridgerunner665/IMG_20170204_113409_zpsbe7qhni6.jpg) (http://s217.photobucket.com/user/Ridgerunner665/media/IMG_20170204_113409_zpsbe7qhni6.jpg.html)
Shown the other way...
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc137/Ridgerunner665/IMG_20170204_114035_zpsqru3v35i.jpg) (http://s217.photobucket.com/user/Ridgerunner665/media/IMG_20170204_114035_zpsqru3v35i.jpg.html)
Starline brass is softer than most, especially on the first or second firing, it gets stiffer as it is reused. Give that thing a good cleaning, especially in and around the extractor, breech face.
Being you have the longer barrel you may see more pressure longer over the pressure curve. My measurement with the non captive vs. the captive has shown a measurable difference...Yes it makes it a little tougher to rack the slide, but it hold in battery a little longer as well. My Glock 20 is an SF and the G-29 is pre SF.
Its brand new, about 20 rounds fired... I'll clean it after some break in.
I've loaded 10 rounds at 8.1 grains of Longshot... The Hodgden data was shot with a bullet that is a few thousandths shorter than the 200 XTP.
I'm thinking 8.1 grains is about all she wants under the 200 XTP without getting overly happy about it, lol.
Back down the hill to see what happens with these...
Still smiles, just under 1,200 fps...
On my way to the gun shop for some Accurate #9.
Watching this thread closely.
Success....
12.5 grains of #9 gave 1,210 fps with absolutely no signs of pressure at all.... None.
Even the normal "Glock bulge" is less with #9.
I'm gonna try 13 grains later today just because Hornady says I can, and the brass appears to agree.
Quote from: Ridgerunner665 on February 05 2017 08:36:02 AM MST
Success....
12.5 grains of #9 gave 1,210 fps with absolutely no signs of pressure at all.... None.
Even the normal "Glock bulge" is less with #9.
I'm gonna try 13 grains later today just because Hornady says I can, and the brass appears to agree.
200gr bullet? Nice!
I'm always seeking those slower powders.
Yes...200 XTP.
You'll need a modified seating stem, otherwise you'll crush the bullet nose on the XTP.
The loads are getting a little compressed at 12.5 - 13 grains.
http://10mm-firearms.com/index.php?topic=5816.0
What's not to like about #9?
Meters like fine grained sand (literally).
Cleanest burning powder I've ever used.... And I've used a lot of them over the years... The brass is still shiny inside after using #9 ... The hotter you run it the cleaner it burns (common for most powders).
I don't think you could get enough of it in the case to get yourself in serious trouble.
And no worries about bullet setback.. . The bullet is sitting on the powder.
Quote from: Ridgerunner665 on February 05 2017 08:48:46 AM MST
What's not to like about #9?
Meters like fine grained sand (literally).
Cleanest burning powder I've ever used.... And I've used a lot of them over the years... The brass is still shiny inside after using #9 ... The hotter you run it the cleaner it burns (common for most powders).
I don't think you could get enough of it in the case to get yourself in serious trouble.
And no worries about bullet setback.. . The bullet is sitting on the powder.
Are you talking to me? I've got nothing against #9. I just don't load (or have not yet run) 200gr bullets. Last year or 2015 I spotted it on the burn rate chart, and in my books. On paper it looks great, but not many people use it (maybe the reason for your comment). I used to use a lot of #7, it's fine for plinking - but not for hot loads, IMHO.
I wasn't talking directly to anybody... Just making an observation.
13 grains of #9 just barely, and I mean BARELY, left a smile on the brass... Not one you can feel, but you can see where the chamber left a mark....1,256 fps.
I want to leave a little room for variables.... So I'm gonna concentrate the rest of my load work between 12.5 and 12.7 grains of Accurate #9.
This is great to hear. I have a full pound of No. 9 that I have never even opened -- and a new Model 40 ...
I have settled on 12.6 grains of Accurate #9 for 1,216 fps (10 round average)...ES 11, SD 4.
Thats a good stout load that isn't so pressurized as to be worrisome...650+ ft. lbs. of energy and plenty of penetration with the XTP.
How is the accuracy with the 12.6 grain load? If it's accurate that would be a tough load to beat with the 200 grain XTP.
Quote from: sep on February 05 2017 02:09:11 PM MST
How is the accuracy with the 12.6 grain load? If it's accurate that would be a tough load to beat with the 200 grain XTP.
From as solid of rest as I can muster (rear bag rifle rest across the seat of my 4 wheeler, pretty solid) I'm getting 3-4" at 50 yards.
The gun/ammo could surely do better...I am the limiting factor :))
Quote from: Ridgerunner665 on February 05 2017 12:47:03 PM MST
I have settled on 12.6 grains of Accurate #9 for 1,216 fps (10 round average)...ES 11, SD 4.
Thats a good stout load that isn't so pressurized as to be worrisome...650+ ft. lbs. of energy and plenty of penetration with the XTP.
Can you help a 10mm bro' out? I'm well-stocked with many canisters of
AA #7 - arguably, I'm
overstocked. :-X
Can you - or anyone else - recommend a "hot-ish" AA#7 load with the same 200gn bullet, ...
... and if you know, a stout AA#7 load with a 220gn hard cast bullet?
It would be appreciated. Thanks! 8)
Here is the Accurate Arm data I have from early years...This should help out.
(http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j441/_The_Shadow/AccurateArms10mm121_zps532817c3.jpg)
(http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j441/_The_Shadow/AccurateArms10mm122_zpsaeb8eff2.jpg)
(http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j441/_The_Shadow/AccurateArms10mm123_zps4f54ecb4.jpg)
I haven't used AA7 so I don't have anything to offer.
AA#7 just isn't going to get you there safely with bullets over 180 grains. 200 grain and heavier bullets need a slower powder.
Grab some 165-180 grain bullets and #7 will be great. Or grab some #9 for your heavies.
Fun facts...
4 inch 44 mag, 240 grain JHP bullets, standard loads...........................................1,165 fps, 723 ft. lbs.
4 inch 44 mag, 310 grain Garrett Defender, premium ammo...................................1,020 fps, 716 ft. lbs.
6 inch 10mm, 200 grain JHP bullets, full power 10mm load...................................1,280 fps, 726 ft. lbs.
I know they make much heavier loads for the 44...but the guns that can use them get pretty big and heavy...the above is just a comparison of similarly sized handguns.
A long slide 10mm and a 4" 44 mag are very similar in length at around 9.5" or so....and it would appear they are very similar in power as well.
Something to be said for a handy 15 rounds, vs 6.
First rounds on target with the Deltapoint Pro optic on my G40 MOS... This is actually 2 separate groups, the 5 rounds farthest to the left were some old stray 40 S&W rounds (155 Silvertips) I had left over from back when I carried the Beretta 96, they fed and fired fine in the 10mm Glock... The other 5 rounds were handloads I threw together with 7 grains of Power Pistol powder under a 200 grain XTP.
All rounds fired from 50 yards, sitting, using shooting sticks.
Looks like it needs to be adjusted a little to the right, and up a click.... I want it sighted for 75 yards, that gives me a point blank range of just over 100 yards, which is about as far as I care to shoot a pistol at a game animal.
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc137/Ridgerunner665/IMG_20170513_191831_zps0ieki3e3.jpg) (http://s217.photobucket.com/user/Ridgerunner665/media/IMG_20170513_191831_zps0ieki3e3.jpg.html)
First, thanks for this thread and the info that it has generated. Haven't reloaded anything past 180gr, yet.
Second, Did I understand you correctly when you said you fired 40 S&W thru a 10mm barrel? I thought the cases used the case mouth to set in the chamber which would make the round set too deep for the firing pin. I'm not looking to run out and buy 40S&W vs. just curious.
In this case the extractor tension holds it against the breech face. But, you are correct.
Quote from: PCFlorida on May 14 2017 08:55:56 AM MDT
In this case the extractor tension holds it against the breech face. But, you are correct.
Thanks, makes since now. It should be noted that I do not plan to partake in this activity and will continue to only run 10mm thru my G20.
Yes some firearms can hold the 40S&W back against the breech face and allow them to fire from the 10mm barrels.
Here is what you all should know; The end of chamber cut is about 1/8" away from the end of the 40S&W case mouth, this allows carbon fouling to deposit and will need to be cleaned before using 10mm cartridges otherwise you risk a failure to full go into battery. There is excessive blowby until the bullet enters the bore to seal it.
Another issue is that the bullet can be shaved by the edge of the end of chamber cut and leave a deposit rolled up against this area and it can be difficult to remove, this can also cause wear to that area.
So while it can work, having an aftermarket conversion barrel chambered for the cartridge (reasonably priced) is the safest route to get the most out of your shooting pleasure.
Quote from: The_Shadow on May 14 2017 10:56:58 AM MDT
So while it can work, having an aftermarket conversion barrel chambered for the cartridge (reasonably priced) is the safest route to get the most out of your shooting pleasure.
I think this should be discussion of (40SW in 10mm) closure right here. It's the policy I follow and to consider and use a 10mm barrel for .40SW, when the .40 barrel is just not that expensive. In fact, groupthink or 10mm-firearms.com should not be seen as recommending .40SW in 10mm barrel, especially when doing it correctly is so inexpensive.
I agree.... There is no good reason to habitually? fire 40 S&W in 10mm barrels... For all the above reasons.
But, I had a specific reason for doing it...I wanted to see if they cycled the action, that's the only reason I did it.
Why? The fact that they functioned fine tells me the G40 comes with a spring that it too weak for the loads I plan on shooting.
Glock should ship it with a 20# dual spring... Currently, nobody even offers a 20# dual spring, but that is what the G40 needs.
To each his own, but I never understood running 40 S&W (or 40 case loaded long with heavy bullets) through a 10mm barrel.
As Shadow pointed out there's at least the possibility of inconvenience, no to mention what can go wrong from firing the wrong cartridge.
Pablo hit the nail on the head, go guy a conversion barrel for $90 and do it right!
Edit: Was typing a general reply, wasn't aimed at you Ridgerunner :)
Notice the timestamps.... This is me having this discussion on Facebook yesterday and earlier today.
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc137/Ridgerunner665/Screenshot_20170514-125110_zpsj2whpdz5.png) (http://s217.photobucket.com/user/Ridgerunner665/media/Screenshot_20170514-125110_zpsj2whpdz5.png.html)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc137/Ridgerunner665/Screenshot_20170514-125137_zpsde98fvwb.png) (http://s217.photobucket.com/user/Ridgerunner665/media/Screenshot_20170514-125137_zpsde98fvwb.png.html)
No harm, no foul guys.... Just wanted to make sure everybody was clear.... I don't agree with it as a normal practice either.
But if the world ever came to an end and there was no more 10mm ammo...
Hell I don't even fire 38 Special in my 357 Mag.....I load some pretty weak loads in it, but I use 357 brass.
Quote from: Ridgerunner665 on May 14 2017 12:08:09 PM MDT
Hell I don't even fire 38 Special in my 357 Mag.....I load some pretty weak loads in it, but I use 357 brass.
Same here. I download all the time, but always use brass that is the right dimension.
The revolvers and rifles chambered for the 357, 44 and others have a smooth tapered section that guides the bullets through the transition using shorter cased ammo like 38 Spl and 44 spl. However the shorter casings still allows some carbon deposits which can hamper chambering of the longer casings if not cleaned. The semi auto chambers have a end of chamber cut which is squared up. They can accumulate all sorts of particulate, lead, copper and carbon fouling even with the proper length cartridges. Use of shorter casing ammo like the 40S&W in a 10mm just accelerates the issues.
Think of those 410 revolvers, 2 1/2" and 3" chambers which also will utilize the 45LC and some the 45ACP. Drastically different lengths of cartridges.
I have shot many 38's from mt 357 mag revolvers and rifle, but it became the reason I carried a range box with cleaning supplies to clean things up before leaving the range. That insured my then carry pistol was not going to have any chambering issues.
Now I carry my 10mm firearm and want to add to my skills using 40S&W ammo, 357Sig and 9x25 Dillon, I just switch out barrels...DONE! :D
Got the G40 sighted in today.
From a solid rest I can reliably hit a 12"x12" steel plate at 150 yards...I honestly didn't expect it to come that easily.
I'm confident I can take game with it at 75 yards, maybe even a bit more.
I fired 50 rounds of full power 10mm reloads (200 grain bullets at over 1,300 fps)... I now understand very well why the FBI watered the 10mm down... It's not brutal, but a 9mm it is not!
I'm looking at trigger options... The trigger itself (the part you pull) is uncomfortable to me, my finger is sore after those 50 rounds. The trigger won't be a problem for hunting but it makes it less than ideal at the range.
The trigger pull... Is hard to work with... You try to do a slow steady squeeze and it starts and stops 2-3 times before it goes bang....I don't much like that, looking at spring combos that might help there.
Also.... That's about 70 rounds through the new 7" KKM barrel.
No malfunctions of any kind.... And it is ACCURATE!
Decided to try a 20# spring in the G40...the factory RSA has been working fine, no issues at all, but as I got used to shooting the pistol I noticed I can feel the slide bottoming out on the frame pretty hard.
Didn't notice it at first, but as I got accustomed to the feel and sound of shooting it...I noticed it quite handily.
Did some crude math and decided that for my slide/barrel weight (slide, 7" barrel, and a Leupold Deltapoint Pro) a 20 pound spring was more or less equal to a 24# spring on a bare topped G20 slide.
I got the Glockmeister version...I've always used Wolff springs but since they're behind the curve on the Gen 4 Glock assemblies I guess I'll see what ISMI is all about.
I wish someone would get some dual captured setups on the market in increased spring weights...I like the dual spring concept myself.
Quote from: Ridgerunner665 on July 26 2017 06:04:17 PM MDT
Decided to try a 20# spring in the G40...the factory RSA has been working fine, no issues at all, but as I got used to shooting the pistol I noticed I can feel the slide bottoming out on the frame pretty hard.
Didn't notice it at first, but as I got accustomed to the feel and sound of shooting it...I noticed it quite handily.
Did some crude math and decided that for my slide/barrel weight (slide, 7" barrel, and a Leupold Deltapoint Pro) a 20 pound spring was more or less equal to a 24# spring on a bare topped G20 slide.
I got the Glockmeister version...I've always used Wolff springs but since they're behind the curve on the Gen 4 Glock assemblies I guess I'll see what ISMI is all about.
I wish someone would get some dual captured setups on the market in increased spring weights...I like the dual spring concept myself.
Ridge Runner,
Thanks for the post about the slide bottoming out on your G40. Mine is still fairly new and I have not noticed it yet. What load were you shooting when you noticed the bottoming out? What barrel as well?
So far most of my shooting has been with the 200gr WFN Montana hard cast bullet and 8.6gr of Longshot.
Thank you
KKM 7" barrel, various loads, all of them at or near max loads from various manuals.
Thanks. Good answer. I imagine you are getting some outstanding velocities out of that 7" barrel.
1,365 fps with 200 grain XTP's is the most powerful load I've fired from it, I don't foresee exceeding that... If I need more than that I'm gonna need a bigger gun.
Man that is moving along! 1,365 fps is awesome. Along the spirit of this thread I need to finally try AA9. The 200gr WFN has done fine IMO with the Longshot but the 180gr XTP's (9.5 gr Longshot) seem just too hot in a the G20's. Way too hot for the G29's. I don't know what but something is just not right with the load. It does 1,225 in the OEM G20 barrel and 1,281 fps in the G40 OEM barrel. It does not feed well and jams the guns fairly often (only once in the G40 so far). I suspect I'm pushing the Longshot too hard and getting too high a slide velocity. Just a guess but this thread inspires me to get out the AA9 and see what happens. Then on to seeing what is possible with the 200gr XTP. ;D
10mm is a disease. A good one.
AA9 will leave Longshot way behind....
Having good luck with AA 9 and gold dots out of my KKM barrel haven't chronographs yet but happy with accuracy and no fireball unlike bluedot
Quote from: Ridgerunner665 on February 12 2017 09:07:22 PM MST
Fun facts...
4 inch 44 mag, 240 grain JHP bullets, standard loads...........................................1,165 fps, 723 ft. lbs.
4 inch 44 mag, 310 grain Garrett Defender, premium ammo...................................1,020 fps, 716 ft. lbs.
6 inch 10mm, 200 grain JHP bullets, full power 10mm load...................................1,280 fps, 726 ft. lbs.
I know they make much heavier loads for the 44...but the guns that can use them get pretty big and heavy...the above is just a comparison of similarly sized handguns.
A long slide 10mm and a 4" 44 mag are very similar in length at around 9.5" or so....and it would appear they are very similar in power as well.
I'm not too sure where you got your 44 mag data from but an 8.25" barrel with a 240grain at max book load is over 1500fps
I have a 3" 44 mag and with 23 grains of H110 I get 1275fps (23 grains is the start load too, go up to 24 grains for max, and some guys choose to push past that) --- compare that to your 6" barel 10mm with 200 grain bullets
I prefer to compare the 10mm to both the 357mag and 41mag for energy levels depending on bullet weight, but it doesn't come close to the 44mag in my books
on a side note---I pushed 180 xtp to over 1400fps with No.9 from my 6" RIA 10mm (which is right on par with my 357 magnum 6.25" barrel 185 xtp's at 1440fps)
I have some 200 WFN's loaded up with No.9 to test also (have not gotten to the range yet though) --- with the 200wfn hard cast, even at max book load it does not seem to compress the powder like the 180 xtp's did at max load so it looks like more powder could be fit under the hardcast lead 200 than the xtp 200 ---I'll have to see how it goes at the range next time
The comparison I was making was based on the loads that were in use when the 44 built its reputation.
The point is... Today's 10mm will do anything the 44 was doing 30 years ago.
My 10mm, with the 7" barrel, is shooting 200 grain XTP's at 1,365 fps with max loads.... That is well in excess of the original Keith loads and any 240 grain factory load that was available until some time in the 1990's.
Quote from: Ridgerunner665 on July 28 2017 08:10:46 AM MDT
The comparison I was making was based on the loads that were in use when the 44 built its reputation.
The point is... Today's 10mm will do anything the 44 was doing 30 years ago.
My 10mm, with the 7" barrel, is shooting 200 grain XTP's at 1,365 fps with max loads.... That is well in excess of the original Keith loads and any 240 grain factory load that was available until some time in the 1990's.
got ya, it didn't really make sense to me to compare old 44 mag data to new data ( kinda like saying a new car gets 30mpg, but a 30 year old one only gets 10) -- but I guess it's hard to compare 60 year old 10mm data when there is none---the "original" 44 mag data you have even dates back to just over 60 years ago, pretty impressive back then for sure, just figured comparing new to new reload data would be more relevant but you still make a good point.
maybe we can get clint eastwood to carry a 10mm in his next movie ;D --
I love my 10mm to me it is basically a 17 round semi-auto 357 magnum with quick reload possibility--- considering I have 4840 ft/lbs of on-tap energy in my 44 mag before a reload, but 13,330 ft/lbs of energy in my 10mm-- I'd say that the total capacity of my 10mm outshines most other big bore revolvers for total energy on tap
Uhhh...
Elmer Keith's 44 Magnum load was 22 grains of 2400 under a 250 grain bullet for 1225 fps from a 4" barrel model 29, and over 1400 fps from a 6.5" barrel. I don't know how you get more "original" than the load by the guy that invented the cartridge.
http://www.sixguns.com/range/elmersloads.htm
Also, that load is a couple of grains over MAX with modern load data. 44 Mag has gotten lighter, not heavier, over time. This is due to both better measurement equipment and broader test environments showing edge cases that could make the higher load dangerous.
Another fun fact...That Garrett Defender load is downloaded. Alot. They load the same bullet in the "Hammerhead" load at 1200 fps from a 4" barrel.
Look, I love the 10mm. But is isn't anywhere near the capability of a 44 Mag, or a 41 Mag. And saying it is by comparing do downloaded 44 mag ammo is like saying the 40 S&W is comparable to 10mm because the FBI load can be reproduced in the 40.
Yeah... How is a 200 grain bullet at 1,365 fps not "comparable" with a 250 grain bullet at 1,225 fps?
41 mag is the same story...
The original spec was for 210 grain bullets at 1,300-1,400 fps.
With a 200 grain bullet at 1,365, I'm pretty sure a 7" 10mm is right in there.
Everyone seems to think I'm trying to say the 10mm is the equal if the current Magnum rounds..... I'm not.
I'm just saying, give it some barrel length to work with, and it can approach, and even equal some of the original Magnum loads that made the magnums popular.
I get what you are saying. And I am not trying to be a jackwagon* about it.
Comparisons, at least to me, are all about neutralizing as many factors as possible to compare the actual rounds. And the methodology you are describing is all about stacking the deck in favor of one cartridge or the other and then saying:
Quote from: Ridgerunner665 on July 28 2017 10:12:52 AM MDT
...[the 10mm] can approach, and even equal some of the original Magnum loads that made the magnums popular.
By the same token, I can say my M1 Garand can approach and equal a 300 Win Mag. Assuming the 300 Win Mag is fired from a 16" barrel and the Garand keeps it's factory length of 24", 50% more than the other cartridge.
And, the 44 WCF nearly doubles the performance of the 44 Magnum, as long as you give a 24" barrel to work with. 1800 fps and 1,438 lbs-ft of energy with a 200 grain bullet.
I guess where is what you are saying worded in a way with which I agree: "Given 40-50% more barrel length the 10mm can equal the terminal ballistics of a 44 Magnum"
*I am revisiting repeatedly because someone who doesn't get internal, external and terminal ballistics like you and I do will come here, read a snippet and then start saying the 10mm is a 44 magnum all over the internet.
I hear you.
Noticed something in the vast majority of the load data I've been studying lately....
Dang near all of it uses WLP primers for everything from 45acp to 44 Mag.
I'm no fan of Winchester primers after all the bolt faces I've seen them burn, but that does speak to the usability of other magnum primers in non-magnum rounds.
I think I'm going full on CCI 350 for the 10mm, not because I have to, or even need to.... But simply because I have them.
I'm curious to see the velocity difference between 12.6 grains of #9 with the magnum primer.... It was 1,300 fps with the standard primers.
The only powder I'm pushing hard is #9, with all my other loads, the less powder I use to get the performance I want the better.
Lot of times I develop a load using the magnum primers this insures that swaps don't cause issues.
I use CCI for many of my loads but use other brands when testing things out as well.
I think the reason is the WLP produces enough flame/heat to ignite heavy charges of 296 or H110. And in general, the least primer that will do the job is the most accurate. That is what drives a lot of benchrest guys to small primers. It reduces the size of the variability of the primer.
15 fps....
Thats the difference the mag primers made... From 1,300 fps, to 1,315 fps.
Over the past couple of weeks I have been reloading once fired brass with Ranier 180 grain TCJ hollow points and 180 grain lead flat nose (unknown manufacturer). My Lee Auto powder dispenser throws between 11.4 and 11.6 grains of AA9. From what I understand in this thread this is a mild load for the bullet weight. If not please let me know.
While I have the press set up I thought I would load 20 or 30 rounds of new Star Line brass with 200 grain WFNGC at 11.4 to 11.6 grains of AA9. I plan to get one of the Lee micrometer measure for a more precise charge level.
These rounds will be fired in my (new to me) G40 and possibly my G20. Appreciate any comments from the learned folk here, positive or negative.
Thanks,
Nick
Quote from: Hamopr on August 07 2017 02:07:33 PM MDT
Over the past couple of weeks I have been reloading once fired brass with Ranier 180 grain TCJ hollow points and 180 grain lead flat nose (unknown manufacturer). My Lee Auto powder dispenser throws between 11.4 and 11.6 grains of AA9. From what I understand in this thread this is a mild load for the bullet weight. If not please let me know.
While I have the press set up I thought I would load 20 or 30 rounds of new Star Line brass with 200 grain WFNGC at 11.4 to 11.6 grains of AA9. I plan to get one of the Lee micrometer measure for a more precise charge level.
These rounds will be fired in my (new to me) G40 and possibly my G20. Appreciate any comments from the learned folk here, positive or negative.
Thanks,
Nick
my most accurate load with the 180gr berry's FP is 12.2gr of No.9 @ 1150fps from my 6" RIA (not G40) ---though I did run them up to 13.0 grains for 1250-1275fps
you should be fine with the 11.4-11.6 gr with your 200 WFNGC ---I tried 12.4 gr of No.9 behind a 200gr WFNPB hi-tek coated montanna bullet this past week end and it gave me 1290fps but I was at my max for my gun with these bullets --- the grizzly 200gr WFN loads clock at around 1270 (they use longshot not No.9) and they are pretty much hit max pressure in my gun ----IMO around 1250 is a comfortable max with 200gr WFN hardcast bullets from 6" barrels
After a larger sample size, the 1,305 fps average I originally recorded has dropped to 1,290 fps.
That is with 12.6 grains of #9 under a 200 grain XTP with a CCI 350 primer.
The 1,290 fps explains why I couldn't get the 190 grain CEB bullets past 1,285 fps...just not enough case capacity for that long bullet to get above that speed.
Another thing may be case neck tension if using used cases, they can work harden some and spring back, using the slower burning powder will need a good case to bullet tension for full igniting of the powder charge...
All new cases on the full power loads...
I only use fired brass for range loads in 10mm...150's @ ~1,400 fps from the 7 inch barrel...its a mid range load using Unique, Power Pistol, or Longshot.
QuoteI hear you.
Well I for one am impressed. I'm a newcomer to the 10mm but a longtime .44 Mag fan.
The standard factory 240 gr .44 load was long catalogued at @1250 and about 750fpe...and usually out of at least a 6 inch revolver which is
considerably longer than even a 6" semi-auto. And fatter. And heavier. And holds 6 rounds. And was reputed to break your hand. ;D
That a 30 oz factory semi-auto is in the same league at all powerwise indicates that we've come a long ways. Of course revolvers have not stood still either so we have "super magnums" which fill the role that the .44 used to.
I can't see a lot of room for advancement in power past the .500 S&W but there is likely something left on the table for semi-autos. A durable, packable factory .460 Rowland... A high-pressure .50 counterpart to it... I suppose the ultimate would be something like the .50AE (limited by grip size) in a duty sized gun. All that's required is for someone to engineer it and enough others to figure out that they "need" such a gun.
Gonna switch to the Nosler 200 grain bullet in my 10mm.
I'm tired of waiting on Hornady to make a run of the 200 XTP.... I called them months ago, they said they'd have them by the end of October... But they don't.
Tired of messing with them... So Nosler it is, I'd prefer a little tougher bullet than the Nosler... I wish they'd make their 10mm bullets in bonded form... Same bullet, just bonded.
On the bright side... I don't expect any issues with expansion at 100 yards (~1,075 fps)... From 25 - 100 yards I believe they'll be ok....it's that shot at 50 feet that worries me, from the videos and pictures I've seen, this bullet isn't quite tough enough for 1,300+ fps in every situation.
I'm a shoulder shooter, don't like tracking much... Not that I cannot do it (I have a really good blood trailing dog now too)... I'd just prefer to anchor them with a shoulder shot.... But with the Nosler bullets, I'm staying off the shoulder in all cases.
12.6 grains of AA9 was a little light under the Nosler...
Went to 12.8 grains with the CCI 350, a little bit of a squeeze to get it in there, but it works without crushing the nose of the bullet.
1,306 fps according to my new chrono (using IR lights) which was double checked against a friend's Labradar...the Labradar came up with 1,307 fps.
The 5 shots and the average are at 15 feet from the muzzle.
(https://s19.postimg.org/krarksw5v/Screenshot_20171125-100258.png) (https://postimages.org/)
Shadow was talking about carbon build up with loads and it reminded me of a common problem with bullseye shooters. Larry Carter came up with a fix which I'll paste from his instructions on my Hammerli, but I find it applies to just about every gun I shoot. The problem centers around failures to feed, etc. Keep in mind the caliber mentioned is .22. I upgrade the size of the chamber brush just like with the .22 when cleaning all calibers just to eliminate chambering issues.
Solution: Have you cleaned your chamber?
If yes, have you done it correctly and thoroughly? 9 out of 10 feeding problems can be remedied by cleaning your chamber. When cleaning your chamber, use a .25 caliber brush bent in the shape of an L. Twist the brush to clean. Next, spray Brake-free oil on your patch and pull it through barrel. When the chamber is clean, you should be able to remove the slide, stand it up on end and drop a round into the chamber. If the round has to be pushed into the chamber, continue cleaning and/or send your pistol in for service.