What honest velocity would you like to see from a 10mm 200gr XTP factory load? Specifically in regard to 4.5" - 5.0" barrel lengths.
Two options can be chosen for those that would like to see two different power levels.
Votes can be changed at any time if you change you mind.
We have MFG's to cover them all which is good 8)
While the NORMA load was 1200 fps as the original loading for the 200 FMJ from a 5" barrel, we see 1250 fps being delivered safely from the Glock 4.6" and other 5" guns. It isn't till you get to the 6" barrels that these same loads achieve the 1280-1300+ fps.
What loads using Hornady's 200 grain XTP's deliver these numbers from 4.5"-5" barrels?
9.4 grains of IMR800X (Underwood loads uses this recipe)
9.4 grains of LongShot (SwampFox loads used this recipe)
The big question...Do this loads fit the SAAMI pressure MAP for 10mm? ???
These can and do produce "SMILES" and or serious bulges with barrels that exhibit lack of support or early unlock conditions.
Example being the Colt Delta Elite 1911, lacks cartridge support and the Glock 20's with older factory barrels.
Some of the newer Glock 20's seem to have early unlock with the higher impulse ammo.
Many things can affect the performance...Factory barrels vs. Aftermarket barrels, New vs. Used barrels and internal bore diameters can be different between barrels just to name a few. :-[
Quote from: The_Shadow on March 21 2013 03:16:33 PM MDTWhile the NORMA load was 1200 fps as the original loading for the 200 FMJ from a 5" barrel, we see 1250 fps being delivered safely from the Glock 4.6" and other 5" guns. It isn't till you get to the 6" barrels that these same loads achieve the 1280-1300+ fps.
There are some examples of platforms and aftermarket barrels that get us past 1250fps. Plus I remember some Swamp Fox 10mm 200gr XTP Aftermarket Barrel load being brought up around here a while back that was supposed to be good for 1300fps or more from a 4.6" barrel.
QuoteThe big question...Do this loads fit the SAAMI pressure MAP for 10mm? ???
I bet 800-X and Longshot can get us there (~1300fps from a 4.6" barrel) right around the 40,000 PSI mark. Just a WAG. ;D
Well Redline, do you believe the numbers from QuickLoads?
I think the numbers that a guy ran for me are higher than 40,000 psi for LongShot and QuickLoads does not have 800X in their data base...here is a screen shot of 9.4 LongShot based on the SwampFox loading.
(http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j441/_The_Shadow/HodgdonLongShot-1_zps3fad296e.jpg)
For what it is worth if it is any where close 58,823 psi is up there! :o
Quote from: The_Shadow on March 21 2013 06:05:07 PM MDT
Well Redline, do you believe the numbers from QuickLoads?
I think the numbers that a guy ran for me are higher than 40,000 psi for LongShot and QuickLoads does not have 800X in their data base...here is a screen shot of 9.4 LongShot based on the SwampFox loading.
For what it is worth if it is any where close 58,823 psi is up there! :o
It's really impossible to say without pressure testing equipment to back up the quickload numbers.
Some research on the Swampfox load in question led me to somewhere on GlockTalk where the owner of SwampFox said his 200gr XTP Aftermarket Barrel only load was doing 38,500-39,000 PSI. Is that true? Should we believe what he says? I don't know. I know that it does seem to me like the load should probably have been doing more like 40,000 PSI. But 58,823 PSI? I don't know, that's a bit hard to swallow for me. Bottom line is I really just don't know one way or another for sure and no one else here seems to either.
Maybe the owner of SwampFox was using a flawed method or equipment. I don't know. But he claims he collected his own data showing 38,500-39,000 PSI. Maybe he was a few thousand PSI off. But 20,000 PSI off? I don't know, I'm still finding that hard to swallow.
Anyway, what do you think? Does the QuickLOAD number seem right to you? Do you think the owner of SwampFox was that far off? What are your thoughts on it?
These 10mm polls always intrigue me.
REDLINE writes
QuoteAnyway, what do you think? Does the QuickLOAD number seem right to you? Do you think the owner of SwampFox was that far off? What are your thoughts on it?
I don't think the QuickLoad screen shot I posted is correct with those numbers in this particular report...(someone else ran the numbers for me)
SwampFox was selling the 1325 fps loaded with 9.9-10.0 grains of LongShot for the Aftermarket barrels ONLY. The other loading was 1240 fps loaded with 9.4 grains of LongShot. (I load and shoot that load which is what is shown in the QL screen shot) Mike of SwampFox said he had a pressure barrel for testing. (what type? or homemade? IDK)
There were places that you could send you ammo to be tested for some significant $$$. (I don't want to spend that kind of $$$) However if Kevin Underwood is having his ammo tested then what we are seeing in the his loads as purchased is a fair indicator that he is within the industry standard. (speculation on my part, but from a business and insurance standpoint his stuff needs to fit the SAAMI spec)(I feel the 800X load has slightly less pressure than the LongShot for equal charge weights) This is why Kevin is using the 800X instead of the LongShot powder.
The 1300's were a hoot to shoot. Unfortunately some of the 10's out there wouldn't be good with them. Somewhat scaled back fits more of what's out there.
Quote from: The_Shadow on March 22 2013 07:48:05 AM MDT
REDLINE writes QuoteAnyway, what do you think? Does the QuickLOAD number seem right to you? Do you think the owner of SwampFox was that far off? What are your thoughts on it?
I don't think the QuickLoad screen shot I posted is correct with those numbers in this particular report...(someone else ran the numbers for me)
SwampFox was selling the 1325 fps loaded with 9.9-10.0 grains of LongShot for the Aftermarket barrels ONLY. The other loading was 1240 fps loaded with 9.4 grains of LongShot. (I load and shoot that load which is what is shown in the QL screen shot) Mike of SwampFox said he had a pressure barrel for testing. (what type? or homemade? IDK)
There were places that you could send you ammo to be tested for some significant $$$. (I don't want to spend that kind of $$$) However if Kevin Underwood is having his ammo tested then what we are seeing in the his loads as purchased is a fair indicator that he is within the industry standard. (speculation on my part, but from a business and insurance standpoint his stuff needs to fit the SAAMI spec)(I feel the 800X load has slightly less pressure than the LongShot for equal charge weights) This is why Kevin is using the 800X instead of the LongShot powder.
IMO we're in overall agreement on a basic level without ironing out a few small details we don't know for sure anyway. I guess for now I wish I knew how Kevin was pressure testing his loads.
Quote from: REDLINE on March 22 2013 02:14:53 PM MDT......I guess for now I wish I knew how Kevin was pressure testing his loads.
I don't think he does. They're not talking about anything "pressure", and silence speaks volumes. Nothing more than a high volume shadetree handloader (not that it's a bad thing). I can estimate pressures, comparing known values to my results, but it's by no means empirical. I suspect he's doing the same. Merely claiming "within SAAMI spec" means nothing without controlled standard testing. I've seen the results, and many of them certainly aren't "within SAAMI spec", in some respect or another. Until some real numbers are published, I'm not convinced. However, he provides what his customers want/demand (high power, at honest velocities claims), at a good price. This is not without some risk, and the same may apply to many products of any market.
i have found QL for pistol to be variable and unreliable and dont trust in the least, but QL it does give real good insight on what powders to explore, imo
Quote from: The_Shadow on March 21 2013 06:05:07 PM MDT
Well Redline, do you believe the numbers from QuickLoads?
I think the numbers that a guy ran for me are higher than 40,000 psi for LongShot and QuickLoads does not have 800X in their data base...here is a screen shot of 9.4 LongShot based on the SwampFox loading.
(http://i1086.photobucket.com/albums/j441/_The_Shadow/HodgdonLongShot-1_zps3fad296e.jpg)
For what it is worth if it is any where close 58,823 psi is up there! :o
The only 200 grain loads I ever shot were my reloaded cast TC's. Have too keep the velocity down to keep the barrel from leading too fast.
Quote from: gandog56 on March 23 2013 09:17:49 PM MDT
The only 200 grain loads I ever shot were my reloaded cast TC's. Have too keep the velocity down to keep the barrel from leading too fast.
There's a LOT more to leading, than velocity alone. I get NO leading with 180 and 200 grain cast bullets, at over 1500 FPS. Powder, lube and bullet diameter choices play a larger part. Nearly all component combination recipes will have a speed limit, which will usually vary from platform to platform.
I have pushed them 2200 fps in my Garands with no leading.
Fit. Fit, fit, fit.
Leading is the result of improper fit and too hard bullets 95% of the time in handgun rounds.
No issues at all with 200 grain bullets in 10mm at full power as long as they fit. I cast them from isotope lead, both quenched (22 bhn) and air-cooled (11 bhn). Only have issues when they don't fit. Learned the hard way that you HAVE to slug the bore. Both my Witnesses are about .001" oversized, and I had leading with the hard bullets or light loads. Soft bullets and heavy loads were fine, I supposed becuase the base bumped up to seal the bore. Slugged the barrels and starting sizing my bullets .402"+ and no more issues.
And I've gotten leading from pushing them about 1200.
My Precision Bullets 185 grain "black bullets" don't lead up no matter how fast I seem to push them.
What diameter lead bullets, what alloy, and what is the groove diameter of the gun in question?
Quote from: sqlbullet on March 25 2013 08:54:51 AM MDT
What diameter lead bullets, what alloy, and what is the groove diameter of the gun in question?
You talking to me? Or the original poster?
You....
I am a guy, which means I can't hear about a problem without trying to solve it :D
Well, it's a Precision Bullets 185 grain RNF. Looks like this.
(http://www.precisionbullets.com/IMG/40-185rnf.jpeg)
It uses a proprietary coated, they ain't saying what, but I bet there's moly in the mix since it looks like a "black bullet". Look what happened when they took a propane torch to one. Lead melted out but the coating is pretty much intact.
(http://www.precisionbullets.com/IMG/bullet2.jpg)
I believe THAT'S why I am getting no leading with them. Unfortunately, with a weight of 180 grains, I have to extrapulate a powder charge between a 180 to 200 grain bullet. Just see none for 185 in any of my manuals.
I've used their bullets, and that magic coating isn't "proprietary". It's just plain ol' moly-d. Nothing new. Been around for over 50 years. I've done my own in the past, and will likely take it up again soon. The "melt" test is the reason I quit using it. I recycle bullets (remelt, recast, reload, reshoot), and the "skins" were just a PITA in the pot. No worse than copper, and since I'm doing that anyway, might as well mess with it.
I was actually curious about the 200 grain bullets you had leading with...And even more curious about the groove diameter and details about the gun that had the leading issues.
Quote from: DM1906 on March 25 2013 08:16:24 PM MDT
I've used their bullets, and that magic coating isn't "proprietary". It's just plain ol' moly-d. Nothing new. Been around for over 50 years. I've done my own in the past, and will likely take it up again soon. The "melt" test is the reason I quit using it. I recycle bullets (remelt, recast, reload, reshoot), and the "skins" were just a PITA in the pot. No worse than copper, and since I'm doing that anyway, might as well mess with it.
Would regular moly keep intact like that? Not being smart azz, really don't know. I was just assuming a thin moly coating would not hold up to a propane torch that melted the lead inside.
Quote from: gandog56 on March 29 2013 05:12:10 PM MDT
Quote from: DM1906 on March 25 2013 08:16:24 PM MDT
I've used their bullets, and that magic coating isn't "proprietary". It's just plain ol' moly-d. Nothing new. Been around for over 50 years. I've done my own in the past, and will likely take it up again soon. The "melt" test is the reason I quit using it. I recycle bullets (remelt, recast, reload, reshoot), and the "skins" were just a PITA in the pot. No worse than copper, and since I'm doing that anyway, might as well mess with it.
Would regular moly keep intact like that? Not being smart azz, really don't know. I was just assuming a thin moly coating would not hold up to a propane torch that melted the lead inside.
Well, considering that lead melts at around 500 degrees, and moly melts at over 4K, I'd say so. A propane torch is capable of about 2K. Thin is relative.
Quote from: sqlbullet on March 26 2013 08:34:28 AM MDT
I was actually curious about the 200 grain bullets you had leading with...And even more curious about the groove diameter and details about the gun that had the leading issues.
The gun was a Dan Wesson Razorback. I have never measured groove diameter on it as it loves those Precision Bullets 185 grainers, which is awful close to that 200 graisns. Also remember I used AA #9 powder, but do not remember the weight used.