- This topic has 32 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
-
Posts
-
If you are worried about a pressure spike, I would lower the powder charge by 0.2 grains and use that as a starting point.
I had previously loaded 124 gr. bullets at 1.125 col with no problems so went and loaded 150 rounds of the Nukes . That was a mistake. Should have done the plunk test as some have stated. I would have started with a lower charge and tested. I reseated 10 rounds at 1.060 and 38 more at 1.070. Went to the range and with safety gear and a little luck fired all those rounds without loosing any fingers etc. It was very cold out so didn\’t stay long and at 25 yards my group was quite large but all on the paper. Next I will wait for a warmer day to see what they can do for group.
I really do get what\’s happening here..that its due to the shape of the bullet. The variable chamber thing I think could, due to the bullet shape (dimensions) be a factor. However, if we as reloaders make some vague attempt to follow SAAMI standard while we reload, it stands to reason the component maufacturers have some rationale to maintain those standards as well. The MIN length by SAAMI for a 9MM cartridge is 1.095 in. That minimum..certainly a far cry from the 1.060 folks are attesting to here. And, the maximum SAAMI is 1.169in. Which..who the heck would do that (at least from this blog). Are we saying here that some of these chambers won\’t accept factory white box 115 ? Do you do \”plunk tests\” when you go to the range with a box of white box ? I really doubt it. By the way, yes, I know that many munitions folks (Hornady at 1.060 and Sierra at 1.090) load some of their ammo outside of that standard and I understand the rationale, but how can ammo pundits and keyboard warriors excoriate the sittin\’ at the table reloader when said reloader goes outside the \”box\” It appears we all do ! Why is there a standard? I dunno….
I\’ve often wondered the above myself. I have a couple of tight chambers in a Glock gen 5 where I have to seat the 147 match winners to 1.090, and 147 gr fmj\’s tp 1.100 to fit it.
A Springfield operator 1911 in 9mm I had to ream the throat because the lead was almost non existent, and I would of had to seat those same bullets very deep to 1.060 ish which made me nervous. The ramp on that 1911 was also very steep and I had to use a Lee U-die and crimp more than usual with every bullet weight I tried in that gun because bullet set back was .010-.020 in most cases.
That gun ended up with a squib load during an El Presidente drill and bulged the barrel so it will be on its way back to Springfield Armory and I can\’t wait to see what that\’s going to cost me 🙁
Having the same issue with my G45 – this is the only gun I have that requires such a short COL (1.065) which makes me uncomfortable. Can you name any sources that would ream the chamber and a rough idea what that cost is? Are aftermarket barrels (ie KKM) any more generous with their chambers?
Sorry for the long delay…
I run 124 gr JHP\’s (nukes and the previous MPR\’s) with 5.4 gr. Silhouette, at 1.075\” and it gives me consistent chrono readings of 1050-1075 fps in my 4 and 4.25\” barrels.
I could run them longer as some have mentioned, but this works in every gun I\’ve ever loaded for and is a very soft shooting and controllable load. Yes pressure increases as OAL decreases but 1.075\” fits most book data for 124 gr. JHP\’s and isn\’t considered \”short.\”
I bought a throat reamer for the Springfield, and did it myself. I got my OAL to 1.120 with the nukes, and 1.100 with the 147 Match winner FP\’s.
The Glock gen 5 I thought about reaming but it seemed to \”break in\” after 2000rds and I am able to seat longer now.
A KKM barrel my have a tighter chamber also due to them being more accurate barrels. Not sure though.
Sorry to answer so late.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.