Underwood 220gr Hardcast (New Load)

[The_Shadow]

We'll be glad to take a look see! 

[4949shooter]

According to Shadow's chart in this link:

http://10mm-firearms.com/factory-10mm-ammo/10mm-ammo-history/

The 220 grain loads in the 1200 feet per second range are nuclear level 10mm loads. Those manufacturers offering 220 grain loads at this level should specify for fully supported chambers only (much in the same way the late Mike Willard of Swampfox specified his nuclear loads).

The chart specifies 220 grain loads in the 1150 range as full power, and should be fine in all standard 10mm pistols out there.

I am just using information from the chart provided.

[mt10mm]

I was happy to hear UW is going to back off a little

[Intercooler]

It says supported chamber.

[4949shooter]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-n5GJjpF9Y

[4949shooter]

http://firearms.fortreg.com/?p=750

[Intercooler]

Revolver is the only fully supported.

[4949shooter]

Technically yes, but I know you get the point.

[Intercooler]

  A ramped barrel should get a Semi the proper support. If it's made correctly!

[4949shooter]

Haha yep!

The thing is, a company like Glock has been making a helluva reliable sidearm for decades. The barrels are throated to be reliable for combat situations, where reliability is of the utmost importance. Then comes along the .40 S&W which is a higher pressure cartridge than 9mm (I know the 10mm came first, but please bear with me), and shooters start to have KB's. There are some reloads involved here, some sloppy loading practices, some ultra throated barrels, etc. Glock realizes the KB issue and begins throating their barrels less in order to offer more support for the cartridges. The ammo companies realize this also (my opinion) and start tailoring their ammo to the specific guns, because we all know that Glocks ride in the holsters of 60% of America's police officers, and the ammo companies want the contracts. Anyway, the barrels get better and the ammo gets better. Have you ever seen a Gen 2 Glock 20 barrel? Google them....they aren't supported much. But back in the early nineties with the Norma level and below 10mm ammo available this didn't matter a whole lot.

Then the .40 S&W surpassed the ten mike mike in popularity (gotta love those female FBI agents), and our beloved cartridge almost dies. Colt revives it with the Delta Elite, and Mike McNett nourishes it with his full power (at the time) ten millimeter ammo. Glock puts out the G20, and the ten is saved for the time being! Then...the full power ammo is fired in the Glock 20 barrels lacking support, and the guns go boom boom. You can search this over on Glocktalk, as there were a few threads on this if Eric didn't purge them out already. So the Gen 3 G20's have much more support than the Gen 2 G20's because Glock did their homework and got it right. My personal G20 is very well supported, as I have yet to get any smiles using Kevin Underwood's ammo (200 XTP, 180 tmj, 165 tmj). But we must remember that as a combat weapon, the number one priority is reliability. Without reliability we lose confidence in our weapons, but more importantly we could die in a combat situation with an unreliable weapon. Don't believe me? I lost a coworker who died with a broken weapon in his hand. These things unfortunately do happen.

So....all this jibberish gets me to my point. Kevin's ammo is awesome and I like it a lot. But there is a trade off between the highest pressures and reliability. In order to make the weapons safe with the highest pressure ammo (Kevin's 200 and 220 grain) we need to ramp up our barrels. When we ramp up our barrels there is a tradeoff. That tradeoff is reduced reliability. Don't believe me? Ask Lone wolf why they started throating their 10mm barrels which now offer less support. We as 10mm shooters want the greatest support when we shoot our guns because we want them to go "bang" and not "boom." This is great for the range when an angry jihadist or desperate drug dealer isn't breathing down our necks. But when we have to fight it out on the street with little or no back up, we need our weapons to operate at 100% reliability. Glock knows this, and designs  there barrels with enough support now to accommodate the higher pressure .40 and 10mm ammo, but leaves enough room for reliability. Remember, these guns are meant to be combat weapons and not range queens. Now, is the highest pressure ammo meant to be for range use only? Or do we carry revolvers so we can use it safely and have reliability? I would love to carry Kevin's 220 grain hardcast in the woods with me at night. But, it has to be 100% reliable in my platform. That means there has to be a balance of support, pressure, and velocity. We have to find the right balance if we are going to carry this ammo for defensive purposes.

This topic has been going on at least two forums now, and maybe three. Do we tailor our guns to the high pressure ammo, or do we tailor the ammo to our guns which were built for reliability. Or....if manufacturers want to put out the greatest, hottest product, do they put disclaimers on their boxes? Sort of like the "Not for Delta Elite" disclaimer which is a great idea. Where is the balance? Or is there any balance at all?

[Intercooler]

I don't know. I just shoot it all 

[mt10mm]

I feel if Kevin backs the 220 down to 1100 or so it will be a good balance of speed and weight

[The_Shadow]

I would like to know one way or the other, if Underwood is sending out his ammo as loaded, for official pressure testing by a certified lab and does it actually meet SAAMI specifications for 10mm?

Based of the data we have seen from Quick Load program, the pressures are off the chart for powders supported by QL program.  So we can assume some things are out of whack when we see guns with very high slide speeds, brass being squirted out at the feed ramps.

Does the brass meet the proper internal dimensions and strength for the pressure specs of proof 10mm loads?  In other words is the brass partly to blame for the server ballooning and "smiles" that we are seeing?

   

[Geeman]

I would like to know one way or the other, if Underwood is sending out his ammo as loaded, for official pressure testing by a certified lab and does it actually meet SAAMI specifications for 10mm?

Based of the data we have seen from Quick Load program, the pressures are off the chart for powders supported by QL program.  So we can assume some things are out of whack when we see guns with very high slide speeds, brass being squirted out at the feed ramps.

Does the brass meet the proper internal dimensions and strength for the pressure specs of proof 10mm loads?  In other words is the brass partly to blame for the server ballooning and "smiles" that we are seeing?

   

I don't think they are under SAAMI specs.  I don't think they necessarily need to be either, as long as they inform which firearms are capable of handling the load.  45-70 trap door loads and the modern loading of that cartridge are examples.

I sometimes think those nasty pressure peaks shown Quickload must be in error.  They are sometimes in excess of anything I run in my high pressure centerfire rifle reloads.  The problem is that Quickload predicts the velocity very closely, barrel length to barrel length, which lends credibility to the program's estimates.  There are some very hot loads that would have me stepping back down if it were my handload.  Pressure signs are there to be respected.  Fail to heed a high pressure sign at 50 degrees might mean a trip to the hospital at 85 degrees.

I see a smile, I'm done with that load.  I see primers too flat and flowing where they shouldn't, I'm backing down the load.  Part of why I like loading my own is the joy of building loads in search of safe and high performance in the same package. 

I could be wrong, but these custom ammo makers may be running into the same issues as the rest of us.  Components are tough to come by, and constantly changing componets based on availability leads to less than thoroughly vetted loadings. 

Greg

[mt10mm]

UW has the 220 HC back in stock