9mm Remington Range 124gr FMJ

[RDub01]

Cartridge is from Ammo Manufacture:  Remington
Muzzle Velocity; Advertised:  1110 fps
Actual Instrumental Velocity:   1125 fps 4.5" barrel







Brass Make/Head stamp:  G.F.L. 9mm LUGER

Bullet Make/Weight/Construction/Info: 124g FMJ
Actual Weight:  124.2grs Diameter; .3555" Length; .594"

Crimp diameter:  .3750"
C.O.A.L.:  1.155"

Primer: Nickel Colored

Case:  Brass  .748" Long;   61.9grs. w/o primer
Rim Dia; .3877"   Base Dia .3860"





Powder Description/Positive ID/Type/Charge Weight:  Small Flake; 5.0 grs.

[Kenk]

Nice job, Thanks RDub01

[The_Shadow]

Very Nice RDub...do you thing the powder is Bullseye or Power Pistol?

[RDub01]

Hey
It looks very similar to both...Power Pistol is out because you can't get that velocity with 5 grains.. You'd need to be closer to 6 grains. With Bullseye, four different sources say 4.4grs is max with 124gr FMJ bullets, Ken Waters likes 4.6 for max. I think 5 grains would be pushing it.. I was thinking BE-86, but even with that, you'd need something closer to 5.5grs.  Not sure with this one....

[Graybeard]

Hey
It looks very similar to both...Power Pistol is out because you can't get that velocity with 5 grains.. You'd need to be closer to 6 grains. With Bullseye, four different sources say 4.4grs is max with 124gr FMJ bullets, Ken Waters likes 4.6 for max. I think 5 grains would be pushing it.. I was thinking BE-86, but even with that, you'd need something closer to 5.5grs.  Not sure with this one....

I was thinking exactly the same thing. Could be a non canister version of either that Remington tested on their own and came up with this load. Could be a hot load of Bullseye, especially since you got more than the advertised velocity out of it. 6/10s of a grain seems like a little too much, though.

[The_Shadow]

Based on data from Speer #11 they actually show the 124 grain FMJ over 5.0 grains of Bullseye @ 1148 fps. It also shows the 125 grain soft point using the same 5.0 grains @ 1163 fps.
I think it is Bullseye, (may not be an altered form)   Speer #11 was before the data was getting watered down...
Defiantly not BE-86

[Graybeard]

Just out of curiosity Shadow, what was the COAL from the Speer #11? Also was it measured in CUP or psi?

[The_Shadow]

Just out of curiosity Shadow, what was the COAL from the Speer #11? Also was it measured in CUP or psi?

Based on data from Speer #11 they actually show the 124 grain FMJ over 5.0 grains of Bullseye @ 1148 fps. It also shows the 125 grain soft point using the same 5.0 grains @ 1163 fps.
I think it is Bullseye, (may not be an altered form)   Speer #11 was before the data was getting watered down...
Speer #11 showed 125 grain as being 1.100"  Based on RDub's data for COAL of 1.155" it seems to be spot on!
It also had a warning for bullets seated 0.030" deeper that pressures went from 28,000 CUP to 62,000 CUP
Cartridges in this #11 publication did not exceed 35,700 CUP

Here are 9mm COAL references
115 gr


124 gr


147 gr

[Graybeard]

Thanks Shadow. It probably is Bullseye. That would make sense from a cost standpoint, as well. I do find it interesting that Remington loads within .03" of a pretty serious pressure increase, according to Speer.

[RDub01]

I looked back through the archives and found the Speer manuals varying a bit with Bullseye and the 124-125gr load.. #8 lists 4.8grs, #9 4.2, #10 4.6, #11 5.0, #12 to present, 4.4grs. Speer 125gr bullets have gone through some design changes over the years. Each design no doubt had their own pressure curves.
Older Hornady liked 4.4grs. Hornady 9th didn't even list Bullseye..
Older Sierra liked 4.5grs.
Yet an older Alliant manual lists 4.9grs as max.

Could very well be Bullseye.. Maybe this comes from a lot that is on the slow side for this powder..

[Kenk]

I'm wondering if powder manufacturers are just backing off previous load maximum's due to liability reasons

[RDub01]

I'm wondering if powder manufacturers are just backing off previous load maximum's due to liability reasons

That's pretty much it..

[Kenk]

It even seems like Some of Underwood's stuff is slightly less hot

[The_Shadow]

I think another reason for the reduction in many loadings was the onset of polymer striker fired guns and many with less chamber support than that of the all steel guns in the past.
Yes the manuals have reduced probably for the same reasons but more so to keep handloaders safer over all, because not all guns are the same and neither are some peoples' loading practices!

I think of the people who run the progressive presses, that don't weigh every load, some might short stroke or even double stroke as the hurry through the loading process.
In the case of commercial loading such as Remington, Federal, Speer, Winchester, their powder dispensing is more sophisticated to finer tolerances as the load on the camdex machines. 

[Kenk]

Absolutely, at this point I run a single stage Rock Chucker and hand weigh and verify each and every rd. Yes, this is slow and somewhat cumbersome, but I'm not in a big toot, so it works well for me

Ken