Loading 9mm for 995 Carbine with slow powder results in impressive performance boost.


PDA






Crosshair
February 21, 2006, 02:47 AM
This load data is from the first round of testing and is still experimental, use at your own risk.

I have just finished testing some of my 9mm reloads in my Hi-Point 995 carbine. I wondered if a person could improve the performance of the 9mm by using slower powders in compressed loads to take advantage of the longer 16" barrel. From what I have found out the answer is yes, and quite a dramatic improvement as well. Here is the chrono data. I recorded the chrono output with my video camera and wrote down the numbers afterwards. Made for much faster testing.

My reloads: CCI small pistol primer, 115 grain Winchster HP bullets, and range pickup 9mm brass. (All numbers are in FPS.) Temp was about 15F. Chronograph was about 4 feet from the muzzle.

7.5 Blue Dot

1599
1640
1640
1620
1650
1569
1549
1580
1608

8.0 Blue Dot

1590
1735
1687
1653
1607
1673
1691

8.5 Blue Dot (Max non +P load)

1838
1719
1817
1763
1694
1724
1649

I have come to find that the 995 really hates hard primers like CCI and the result is haphazard ignition. Several round did not ignite on the first try and I removed them from the testing. I will probably use soft primers (Like Federal) when I try again. Below is standard factory 9mm being fired from my 995

Wolf 115 grain FMJ

1232
1251
1282
1263
1285
1293
1263
1295
1325
1290
1263
1247
1295
1282
1275

My 995 hates the hard primers in Wolf as well.

Winchester White Box 115 grain FMJ

1284
1271
1307
1294
1312
1280
1317
1344
1301
1330

This ammo is 100% reliable in my 995.

From the results I have seen, it is possible to get the 9mm to almost achieve .357 Magnum handgun performance while not exceeding SAAMI spec on the 9mm if slower powders are used. I believe that the performance increase will be the same in other brands of 9mm carbines like the Kel-Tec and Beretta. I hope to explore and experiment further with different powders and OAL to find the best loads for autoloader carbines.

Your thoughts?

If you enjoyed reading about "Loading 9mm for 995 Carbine with slow powder results in impressive performance boost." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
BillinNH
February 21, 2006, 09:47 AM
Very impressive results. Many thanks for the report and hard work.

How did the bullets hold up to the greater velocity?

Do you plan to work up slow powder carbine loads for any other caliber, eg, 45acp?

I have Marlin Camp carbins in 9mm and 45acp, Keltec Sub2K in 9mm, Hi point in 9mm, will get a hi point in 45 as soon as available.

Please post any future results. You might want to post a pointer to this in the Rifles section.

Bill

renaissance
February 21, 2006, 09:53 AM
Likely a combination of:
Longer Barrel
and
Cold Weather
( Fifteen Degrees ???? Wow ! )

I would not want to shoot under those conditions to get
" 10 Pounds of anything into a 5 Pound bag "

Charles S
February 21, 2006, 09:59 AM
Likely a combination of:
Longer Barrel
and
Cold Weather
( Fifteen Degrees ???? Wow ! )

I would not want to shoot under those conditions to get
" 10 Pounds of anything into a 5 Pound bag "

It has been my experience that really cold temperatures produce slower velocities and lower pressures.

Some great info. I would really like to see what you can do with a good 124 grain bullet. I like Blue Dot as a pistol powder in my BHP.

Charles

Crosshair
February 21, 2006, 02:31 PM
This was the first test so I was only looking at the velocity of the loads. The next step will be to test terminal performance as well as accuracy. I feel long range performance will be better due to the flater trajectory. 100 yards is easy with factory ammo in my carbine.

I am thinking the same thing Charles S, while the numbers are great, I feel better performance could be had by using a heavier bullet at lower velocity. I bought a bag of remington 124 grain HPs for this next step. I also need to stop by Cabelas and get some Federal primers so I can eliminate the hard primer problem I currently have.

I too plan on getting a 45 carbine as well BillinNH The only problem with the 45 Auto is that there is not as much powder capacity to play around with. Not that I would step down from a challenge like that.:D After I perfect the 9mm loads I think I will move up to the 40 S&W and do the 45 Auto last. I will probably not be able to do a comprehensive test of all powders due to time and cost limitations. However I hope I can at least give other people a starting point if they wish to develop loads using other slow burning pistol powders.

grendelbane
February 21, 2006, 05:31 PM
My suggestion is to experiment with Alliant Power Pistol.

I would also suggest heavier bullets if your intended target is larger than a groundhog. The lightweight bullets do indeed go faster, but the heavier bullets are more accurate in my AR-15 carbine, and are longer, which better suits my too tight twist.

Lots of room for experimentation in this arena. I have loaded 147 grain bullets in 9mm cases to a higher velocity than factory W-W 145 grain Silvertips from my 6" Ruger. 10" of extra barrel can make up for much of the .357 mag's higher powder capacity.

Not exactly an apples and oranges comparison, but still an interesting one, I think.

MCgunner
February 21, 2006, 05:52 PM
I have often wondered what a slower powder would do in a 9mm carbine. I load a very hot Unique load, though, that is compressed and never figured you could get enough blue dot or 2400 into such a small case to do any good, but I guess you can. :D

However, it's no .357. My .357 carbine loads push a 180 grain JHP to over 1600 fps and my 158 grain casted, gas checked bullet is clocking just shy if 1900fps, this with 2400. W296 can produce slightly better speed in that caliber.

That 9mm load would be a good one for survival in the wild, though. I mean, if you had to, you could take a deer with it. I wouldn't hunt with it, of course, but it gives the little 9mm carbines a little more usefulness I reckon. The neat thing about the little Hi Point carbine and the 9mm cal, though, is the cheap ammo. Great plinker with more snap than any rimfire. Your loads sort of remind me of the M1 Carbine ballistically, actually, bigger bullet, a bit less velocity.

Thanks for the info. I have all the components and if I get a 9mm carbine, I WILL remember this load data.;)

Crosshair
February 21, 2006, 06:47 PM
MCgunner

Yea, I could not find any good info about the 9mm with slow powders in a carbine barrel so I decided to go blaze my own trail. I agree that heavier bullets will be the direction to go, I just used the 115 grain bullets for a starting point. Just to clarify, the reloads out of my carbine are near .357 HANDGUN performance. .357 in a carbine will still kick the 9mm eight days a week.:p An interesting thing I may want to research is dual purpose loads that perform well in a handgun with minimal muzzle flash while still giving the improved performance in a carbine much like there are loads that work very well for both .357 rifles and handguns. While the slow loads may work great in a handgun I still want to minimise the flash that results from the slow powder.

R.W.Dale
February 21, 2006, 09:01 PM
I don't wan't to sound sour, but I seem to remember reading in the manual that a chronograph will give erronious readings below 40 degrees. I've chronographed the infamous Hertenburger +P+ ammo in my 995 and it was nowhere near as fast as the readings you've listed

Travis Two
February 21, 2006, 10:16 PM
Not surprising as Blue Dot was the original spec powder for the 9mm NATO loads. Dean Grennel in ABC's of reloading got some impressive results in a 9mm carbine using WW748.

wolf_from_wv
February 22, 2006, 01:10 AM
Not sure were all his data comes from:

http://stevespages.com/355_1.html

Crosshair
February 22, 2006, 01:11 AM
I don't wan't to sound sour, but I seem to remember reading in the manual that a chronograph will give erronious readings below 40 degrees. I've chronographed the infamous Hertenburger +P+ ammo in my 995 and it was nowhere near as fast as the readings you've listed
Hmm, Yes I see after looking that the operating temperature for my chronograph is 32F to 110F. However I have chronographed the Wolf ammo when it was 60F out in the past and the velocity results where nearly the same. As for the Hertenburger +P+ ammo, from what I understand, that ammo was still loaded with rather fast powder compared to what I am using, IIRC that ammo used powder in the AA #5 burn rate, Blue Dot is much slower. Peak pressure is not that important compared to the pressure curve. Further testing (as it gets warmer) should show if is really is the Chrono.

444
February 22, 2006, 01:29 AM
This is all very interesting. I would really enjoy seeing further results as well as constructive comments by others who have played with this.

I would like to see you play around with Power Pistol also.
Actually, I should jump in and start conducting my own experiments again. http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=45283&highlight=Chrono
Note that your Blue Dot loads are WAY hotter than the one I tried (not sure why I used that charge now.)
What about +P loads, you say that 8.5 grains is non-+P ?
The hottest load listed on the Alliant website is 8.0 grains of Blue Dot. The load they list using Power Pistol is giving them 90 FPS more velocity than the Blue Dot load. But, it doesn't say if these loads are max loads, suggested loads, or what. No, actually way back at the beginning, it says "DO NOT EXCEED THE LOADS DISPLAYED ON THE SITE OR ALLIANT'S RELOADERS GUIDE" So, I dunno.

I was about to jump all over you about that .357 comment but you have seen the error of your ways.
Your 9mm loads are approaching .30 Carbine performance, out of a carbine.
I get over 1900 fps out of a 6 1/2" .357 Blackhawk and a 110 grain bullet. Out of a .357 Carbine, forget about it.

Crosshair
February 22, 2006, 02:56 AM
I was using the Speer #13 reloading manual for my reloading data. They list the maximum load as 8.5 grains. I was not aware that Alliant only listed max load at 8 grains. That is interesting.

444
February 22, 2006, 08:24 AM
Well, I don't have an actual Alliant manual. That is just the one and only load they list on their website. That is why I said that I dunno. They don't list a range of safe charges, they just list one load (with that powder). So, I don't know if that is a max load, or a suggested load. I don't know if that load is +P or not.
What is the SAMMI max pressure for 9mm Luger ?
Here is the link to the Alliant website data: http://recipes.alliantpowder.com/rg.taf?_function=pistolrevolver&step=2&bulletID=20&cartridgeID=1014&caliber=9mm&cartridgedescr=Luger&bulletdescr=115%20FMJ

Here is the link for Power Pistol: http://www.alliantpowder.com/products/power_pistol.php
"Remarks: Best choice for high performance 9mm, .40 S&W and 10mm"

FWIW, I checked a number of on-line powder burn rate charts and they all show Blue Dot as being a far slower burning powder than Power Pistol.

The_Antibubba
February 23, 2006, 07:31 PM
The HiPoint is a fun little gun, but is it up to a possible increase in pressure?

Crosshair
February 23, 2006, 07:58 PM
The HiPoint is a fun little gun, but is it up to a possible increase in pressure?
All Hi-Point 9mm guns are rated for use with +P+. However I am trying for the time to stay within non-+P load data.

R.W.Dale
February 23, 2006, 08:00 PM
The HiPoint is a fun little gun, but is it up to a possible increase in pressure?


As per the owners manual and Hi-Points website, all Hi-Points are +p and +P+ rated.

therealsteamer
February 25, 2006, 02:34 PM
4 years ago I had to send my 996 carbine back to the factory due to the slide having two rather long cracks in the metal on either side of the firing pin channel. They replaced the slide and all other components that could have been compromised. They said that it was because I had been shooting loads of Wolf ammo, they enlightened me that Wolf was loaded way too hot and recommended that I shoot Blazer aluminum case exclusively.

That being said, since recieving the gun back I have had NO real problems what so ever. I have shot small batches of +p Gold Dot, a few thousand rounds of Wolf, thousands of WWB, a large mix of others, and probly close to 5k of mid/hot reloads. I have had no other issues other than some expected wear on the bottom of the slide.

This will be an interesting thread to watch. I have been using Unique about 98% of the time and have recently been trying some Green Dot. Anyone have zinger loads for this powder.

Steamer

mbartel
February 26, 2006, 01:39 AM
I too plan on getting a 45 carbine as well BillinNH The only problem with the 45 Auto is that there is not as much powder capacity to play around with. Not that I would step down from a challenge like that. After I perfect the 9mm loads I think I will move up to the 40 S&W and do the 45 Auto last.

Do I understand you correctly? Do you think the 9mm has more powder capacity than the .45 acp? The way that you worded your post, indicates that you think the .45 acp has less powder capacity than the 9mm. Of course, the .45 has MUCH more powder capacity than the little 9mm.

Crosshair
February 26, 2006, 02:44 AM
Sorry mbartel. I meant that the 45 ACP does not have as much case capacity for the weight of bullet and quantity of slow burning powder that I currently think I will need for a significant boost in performance. (However, the proof is in the pudding so I will of course test that theory given the chance.)

The 9mm Luger round using a 115 grain bullet has a case volume to bullet weight ratio (Case volume / bullet weight) of 0.008435.

A 124 grain bullet has a ratio of 0.007823.

The mighty 45 Auto with a regular 230 grain bullet has a ratio of only 0.004957.

While there is loading data for use with slower powders. (I love my Lee loading manual) I am worried that there will not be enough case capacity for the bullet weight to give increases in perfomance that I have seen with my 9mm loads. I will still try of course given the chance. I just don't think there will be as large a performance boost as I have seen with my 9mm loads. I really want to get out to the range again, but the weather up here has been really lousy lately.

mbartel
February 26, 2006, 04:18 PM
Crosshair-

I see where you are going with it.....but there is another factor to consider.
The cross sectional area of the bullet's base. Remember pounds per square inch? Well the more square inches of bullet base, the more total force is used to accelerate that bullet at any given chamber pressure. This will apply to straight walled cases only. For example: at equal pressure ratings, and equal case lengths, the .357 magnum is surpassed by the .41 mag, and the 41 mag is surpassed by the .44 mag, and the .44 mag is surpassed by the .45 colt, and the .45 colt is surpassed by the .50 AE. in foot pounds of energy, if all are loaded to the same chamber pressure. It doesn't matter which bullet weights are used. The total force exerted on the inside of a .44 mag case, is way more than the total force exerted on the inside of the .357 mag case at equal chamber pressures....it's POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH...that's the key phrase. And because of the large increase in TOTAL internal pressure, the .44 mag produces the corresponding increase in power (muzzle energy).

So.........in a straight walled case, case volume to bullet base area is a very significant ratio in predicting performance increases. Probably more so than just case volume to bullet weight by itself.

Crosshair
February 26, 2006, 04:49 PM
Hmm, I see your point. I failed to consider that aspect. As I said, there is no substitute for live fire testing. Imput like yours is very helpfull. Though now I have alot of math to do, thanks alot.:uhoh: :neener:

Crosshair
February 27, 2006, 12:44 PM
I have finaly goten around to loading the 124 grain Winchester HPs for testing. I used 8 grains of Blue Dot loaded to aprox 1.145 OAL. I hope to get out to the range soon to test their performance.

mbartel
February 28, 2006, 08:59 PM
Keep us posted on your test results. Your data will be especially interesting to those who have longer barreled carbines...9mm, .40, & .45acp.

trickyasafox
February 28, 2006, 09:44 PM
very interesting. good to see a nice 9mm carbine specific load. im pretty interested for the 124gr data too :)

Crosshair
February 28, 2006, 11:00 PM
Thanks for putting the pressure on me guys.:p I'll probably start a new thread to post the 124 Grain data, but I will be sure to post a link to it in this thread. Good to see that there is interest from others on this subject.

Crosshair
March 2, 2006, 12:54 AM
OK, I don't have the Data compiled and I don't know when I will have time to do it. Might be tomorrow, might be next week. Here is the summary of what happened today at the range.

Average for the shots was about 1500 FPS with the 124 grain bullet.
Bolt is moving back too soon and allowing powder gas to escape. Spent casings where black with burned powder and there was visible flame coming from the ejection port. I did not have a case failure, but it is seems to me that heavier bullets with slower powder simply take too long to exit the barrel and relieve pressure before the case has started to be extracted. This allows gas to escape around the casing and is simply unsafe IMHO. The cases are really trashed up. I will try and get a photo online when I post the compiled data. It seems that I will be stuck using lighter bullets or I will have to increase the mass of the bolt to prevent early extraction. Accuracy was good with 25 yard shots being about 3" standing unsupported. I do need to get and shoot some factory 124 grain ammo for comparison.

Hope this quenches your thirst for info until I get everything put together.

444
March 2, 2006, 01:16 AM
But what load were you using ?

Crosshair
March 2, 2006, 01:45 AM
The 124 Grain Winchester HP over 8 Grains of Blue Dot powder.

Beepy
March 9, 2006, 09:49 PM
After months of searching, I finally found some 9mm carbine data!! I was thinking the same thing about using a slower burning powder to take advantage of the longer barrel. Following this post finally got me to register with THR instead of just lurking.

Inspired by Crosshair I loaded 20 rounds of test ammo at the following:
124 gr Remington JHP
8.2 gr BlueDot
Mixed Headstamp

This is the max load listed from my Lee Reloading Manual for 125 jacketed 9mm. I went and shot them today in my 16" Uzi Carbine. I do not have a chrono but none of the cases showed any sign of over pressure. I do not know how much diffrence there is between an Uzi bolt and a HiPoint bolt, but I did not get any excess flash and the cases were not dirty. I was told that the Uzi likes really hot loads, so I am thinking of increaseing this slowly.

I am interested to findout about the chronoy results from crosshairs new loads.

USE THESE LOADS AT YOUR OWN RISK

Crosshair
March 9, 2006, 10:39 PM
Woa, I completly forgot about this. I have been waiting for my order of 1000 9mm bullets to some in. The Data is still on my digital camera. I'll have to go compile it.

444
May 14, 2006, 12:13 PM
Let's keep this going.
I just got done loading 2500, 147 grain 9mm rounds using 5.7 grains of Power Pistol. According to the Alliant website, this load should give me 1095 fps out of a 4" barreled handgun. On their website, this is the highest velocity listed using that bullet and their powders. Blue Dot comes close and is the second fastest powder they list. Since Blue Dot is a slower burning powder, you have to wonder if it would perform better out of a carbine length barrel.
I am going to have to get off my butt and check this out. I have a Colt 9mm carbine with a 16" barrel, a 11.5" barrel, and a suppressed upper which won't be much use to us because it bleeds off gas to make any 9mm round subsonic ( http://www.lrmfirearms.com/pages/863787/index.htm ). I think I even have some Blue Dot powder to try.

Crosshair
May 16, 2006, 03:48 AM
I have been busy with work and school lately. (I have been offered alot of overtime hours because of the store remodel. Making nice $$$.) I don't have much of anything for data in front of me, but from continued testing I have found that Blue Dot powder is in the "Sweet spot" of burning ranges. I have tried different powders, but for some reason Blue Dot is the only one that seems to work well. Also, 124 grain bullets do not see much of a gain, it seems to work the best with 115 grain bullets. My theory is that the blowback action limits the amount of time that the powder has to push the bullet. Cases from my 124 grain tests where often black on the outside, meaning that much of the powder was being wasted.

The best combination so far is about 8.1 grains of Blue Dot under a 115 grain bullet loaded to about 1.150" OAL. This gives about 1650-1700 fps when lit by a Federal small pistol primer.

I have not been to the range for almost two months, so I have been going through "shooters withdrawl". But I need to work overtime since it is not always available. (Also means more $$$ for gun stuff.:rolleyes: ) Though I REALLY want to try out my CZ-52. (Darn thing was on backorder since August of last year.)

joneb
May 16, 2006, 06:44 PM
I have Marlin camp 45 I installed a 18 # recoil spring and mostly load 7.7 gr of unique with a 185 jhp , I've loaded some (25rnds of each) 230gr gold dot with 8.6, 8.9 grns of blue dot both loads shot well . Sorry I don't have a chrony :( yet. I tried AA#7 but the loads did not cycle the action well, I had quite a few jams , this was with the stock 11# spring .

444
May 16, 2006, 06:58 PM
Ok, here are the numbers for one Power Pistol load.
The load is 5.7 grains which is the load listed on their website, coupled with a 147 grain Remington FMJ round nose bullet. I was trying to come up with the most effective load to be used in a carbine, which to me means the heaviest bullet driven at the highest velocity. I was hoping the load would be subsonic since I will be using the load with a couple suppressors, but as you can see, the load is supersonic in pretty much everything. Oh well.

Kel-Tec P11, 3.1" barrel: 1017 fps. ave.
Glock 34, aftermarket Bar-Sto Barrel approx. 6 1/4", 1159 fps ave.
Hi Point 995 carbine, 1248 fps ave.
So, we have an increase of 89 fps using the carbine compared with the Glock, and we have an increase of 231 fps using the carbine over the Kel-Tec. The difference between the Kel-Tec and the Glock is 142 fps giving us about 47.3 fps per inch of barrel. I don't know the barrel length of the carbine so I can't do the calculations for it.

So now I guess I need to try some experiments with 115 grain bullets and compare your results with my results using both Blue Dot and Power Pistol.
Again, checking the Alliant website, they show Power Pistol producing higher 9mm velocity than any other powder they make including Blue Dot in handgun barrel lengths.
Their load using Power Pistol gives them 1280 fps using a 115 grain bullet. Their max load using Blue Dot is 8.0 grains which gave them 1190 fps. Your chrono results using 8.0 grains of Blue Dot out of the carbine gave you and average of 1456 fps. That's a difference of 266 fps.
That is certainly reasonable. There is no reason to believe your chrono results wern't accurate.

One thing that is kind of interesting: Using my carbine, I can shoot a 147 grain bullet faster than a handgun shooting a 115 grain bullet and a max load of Blue Dot.

Crosshair
May 18, 2006, 03:24 AM
I really need to get more data using the Federal Primers. The first set of data was with CCI primers and I was having ignition problems with them in my 995. So while I like to use them as a starting point, those numbers are not ideal since I do not know how the issue of ignition affected the velocity. Velocity with Federal Primers is alot more consistant than with the CCI primers. (Though I lost the notes that I had writen the numbers on so I am going from memory.:( )

444
May 18, 2006, 12:01 PM
Well get on it: :neener:

I am having fun with this. Let's keep the data flowing. I will do my part. :D

Crosshair
May 24, 2006, 09:22 PM
OK, I went out to the range today and got more data and have a final load that gives both consistant performance and higher velocity. a 115 grain bullet over 8.1 grains of Blue Dot powder and lit by a Federal small pistol primer. (I wish I could have used 8.5 grains of Blue Dot, but could never get consistant velocity with that much powder. This load is the best trade off IMHO between higher velocity and constant velocity.) All loaded to a 1.150" OAL. Here is the velocity for 20 rounds in FPS.

First mag

1492
1554
1557
1552
1550
1540
1561
1528
1553
1568

Second mag

1492
1597
1493
1535
1526
1540
1492
1571
1517
1575

For some reason the fist round in the mag seems to be slower. Mabee it is how it seats in the chamber when I cycle the action to load the weapon.

A note I have to make is that while the gun happily ate these rounds with no problem, the recoil was PAINFULL. I don't know how to explain it. I shoot my M1 Garand with no recoil pad but the 995 with these loads leaves me sore. Probably has to do with how sharp the recoil is. I am probably going to install a recoil pad on my 995. Since energy increases with the square of velocity These rounds are much more powerfull than your standard 9mm ammo. I use the "lazy man power factor" :p to figure this out. Take the velocity divided by 100. Then square it and multiply it with the bullet weight in grains.

Regular ammo, 115 grains at about 1200 FPS: 12x12x115 = 16560 LMPF

My 995 handloads, 115 grains at about 1550 FPS: 15.5x15.5x115 = 27628.75 LMPF

We can then find how much more powerfull these handloads are compared to standard 9mm.

(27628.75/16560)x100 = 166.84027% = 66.8% increase in muzzle energy.

So by using the proper powder we can see a 66% improvement in performance in muzzle energy while maintaining weapon reliability. Compared to my first experiments (first post) we can see that CCI primers seem to give higher velocity, however they are too hard and not reliable in the 995 as well as producing inconsistent velocity. I had about a 10% first strike failure rate with CCI primers. Swaping to softer Federal primers solved this problem and reliability has been 100% with them.

/I should get a job with an ammo company.:cool:

wolf_from_wv
May 25, 2006, 02:28 PM
Lyman Reloading manual
9mm Luger (Rifle data)
Ruger PC9 carbine

115g JHP
1.090" OAL
Powder / sugg. start / max load
power pistol / 5.9 / 6.5
blue dot / 6.8 / 7.6compressed

125g JHP
1.075" OAL
Powder / sugg. start / max load
power pistol / 5.1 / 5.7
blue dot / 6.3 / 7.1compressed

130g JHP
1.160" OAL
Powder / sugg. start / max load
power pistol / 5.1 / 5.7

147g TMJ
1.115 OAL
Powder / sugg. start / max load
Unique / 4.0 / 4.5
power pistol / 4.5 / 5.0
blue dot / 5.9 / 6.6

120g #2 alloy
1.065" OAL
Powder / sugg. start / max load
power pistol / 5.0 / 5.6

147g #2 alloy
1.058" OAL
Powder / sugg. start / max load
power pistol / 4.1 / 4.6

========================

I have other data (mainly "pistol" loads):

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v151/wolf_from_wv/9mm_book.jpg

Organized by:
Powders
Accurate
ADI
Alliant
Hodgdon
IMR
Ramshot
Vihtavuori
Winchester

Bullets
Hornady
Lyman (Pistol and rifle data)
Nosler
Penn
Ranier (not factory loads)
RCBS
Sierra
Speer

Websites:
www.reloadammo.com
www.handloads.com
www.reloadbench.com

Other
Magazine articles
Book articles

Crosshair
May 26, 2006, 02:51 AM
Wow, those are some light loads for the Blue Dot. Even with 8.1 grains the powder is only lightly compressed.

Nhsport
May 26, 2006, 09:01 PM
Interesting. My thought is this. If the extra velocity is due to same preasure over a longer time period (slower burning power) this is a good thing. The down side is I am not sure how well the cases are supported around the head (basicly how large the ramps may be) in these diffirent pistol caliber carbines. If you do increase preasure you might have case seperations or ruptures. This is not a good thing to happen. Another concern would be that most or all of these pistol caliber carbines are blowback in operation and therefore designed around standard ammo . With increased performance ammo you could be speeding up the the bolt and overcomeing the ability of the recoil spring to slow the bolt and slam it back at a certain speed. In short you might be beating on the gun.Bolt might start to open too soon also. I believe the military carbines such as the Colt are rated for 9mm+p+ but I don't know what type of saftey margin is built into the berettas or the marlins .
I would expect your tests if keep on the conservative side might be ok but any time one one goes boating in uncharted waters you run the risk of finding a rock just below the surface . One also needs to be very cautious about how you might be encourageing someone with less handloading experience to go plowing ahead. A load that works fine in your particular firearm might be a bomb in some other gun designed differently. You sound like a careful sort but don't push it too far.

Crosshair
May 27, 2006, 01:22 AM
Good points Nhsport. The Hi-Point is rated for +P+ ammo so no worries there. The case support is very good in the 9mm, less so in the 40, but better than a Glock. The problem I have had is since these guns are blowback you have to have the powder burn fast enough to burn before the bolt opens, but slow enough so you can keep peak pressure longer. I tried some 1680 powder and it was WAY too slow, dispite me craming ALOT of it into the case. I have added two small pieces of lead tape to the bolt in an effort to slow it down. It seems to have a minor effect on bolt velocity and keeping it closed longer. Is it possible to replace the recoil spring on a 995 with a heavier one???

jjohnson
May 27, 2006, 11:30 PM
Okay, this is a concept with real merit - I'm one of those folks with a 9mm carbine (Marlin Camp 9) that also shoots PILES of 9mm in pistols....

Great idea making up ammo just for your carbine - especially looking at your results. I'll have to play with that myself. I was wondering - if you have a carbine and are looking for most punch you can get, anybody tried doing that with the 147gr hollowpoints that *don't* have a good reputation in the pistol?
Seems to me if you're picking up some real velocity - and you are - at carbine range (for me, that's 50 yards) the extra boost might make the heavier bullet worthwhile, right? Anybody got data? I am also interested in the overall idea, since I do have lever action carbines in .357, .44 mag, 45 Colt. I'll have to get out my chronograph and fire up QuickLoad... please do post results with the load data....

R.W.Dale
May 27, 2006, 11:50 PM
Okay, this is a concept with real merit - I'm one of those folks with a 9mm carbine (Marlin Camp 9) that also shoots PILES of 9mm in pistols....

I would not try the above loads in a camp 9. The little marlin just doesn't have the bolt mass to be able to shoot these kind of loads. The recoil buffers and stocks have a hard enough time coping with standard 9mm ammunition. The little marlins are nifty guns(I owned one) but they are not rated for +P loadings.

Crosshair
May 28, 2006, 02:30 AM
The problem with loading for a blowback weapon is that you have an unlocked bolt. You only have so much time before the gas seal is broken and gas starts to leak out the rear of the weapon. You can only have the bullet in the bore and have pressure in the barrel for so long. With a locked breech you don't have to worry about such things since until the bullet passes the gas port or tilts out of battery you have a perfect gas seal. It may not seem like it, but I did alot of thinking about bolt mass and timing while figuring out loads using dfferent burning rates. I have modified my 995 by adding some weight to the bolt(lead tape), this helps, but is not the best solution. The best solution would be to use a locked breech, but that is not going to happen so tinkering with the bolt mass is the only method I have. I have thought about putting in a stronger recoil spring, but the idea of a recoil buffer would seem to be more practical and I will have to explore this option.

The problem with using a 147 grain load is that you would have to increase the mass of the bolt, to maintain gas pressure, to the point of possibly sacrificing reloability of the weapon if you wanted to see a significant increase in performance. You have to think in action/reaction. What happens to the bullet affect the case/bolt/gas seal and vise versa. To get a significant increase with a lighter bullet you only need to maintain high gas pressure for a slightly longer period of time and that can be acomplished with the proper burn rate and a slight increase in bolt mass. With a heavier bullet (as I found in my tests) you need that pressure to stay for a longer period and with blowback that becomes a problem because the gas seal at the breech is broken too soon.

444
May 28, 2006, 12:17 PM
"at carbine range (for me, that's 50 yards) the extra boost might make the heavier bullet worthwhile, right?"

The data I posted is for a 147 grain bullet.

grendelbane
May 28, 2006, 02:16 PM
The 147 grain bullets have a disadvantage. They can easily go trans-sonic, but are too heavy to get much above the speed of sound.

However, if kept sub-sonic, they do shoot accurately. The subsonic velocity is close to where the hollow points are designed to operate, so they do not have the over expansion/under penetration problems of the lighter bullets.

The Hornady 147 even has a boat-tail.

If not using expanding bullets, then the 124's seem to work well.

I tend to think of my 9mm carbine as being the same in terminal ballistics as my .38 Super Gov't model.

One of these days I am going to try 9x23mm in a 16" carbine.:)

Dave R
May 28, 2006, 02:58 PM
I can't believe I missed this thread before. Excellent primary reasearch. I really appreciate you folks sharing it here. Now you're making me want to get a 9mm carbine!

dfaugh
May 29, 2006, 09:57 AM
I've been watching/reading this thread from the beginning, as I was curious about getting maximum performance for a pistol caliber carbine vs. a pistol. I thought that +P+ would perform exceptionally well, but its really interesting to see that even more "standard" (albeit HOT) loadings, with the right powder, can give impressive performance.

As far as Hi-Point durability, my 995 has over 5000 rounds through it, mostly Wolf and Blazer, the balance being +P+ loads. No failures of any kind. Good test bed.

444
May 29, 2006, 07:59 PM
The point of this thread (if I may be so bold) is to determine if you can tailor loads for a carbine by using a slower burning powder. In order to determine this, it isn't enough just to post data from a carbine. We must measure the amount of increased velocity obtained from the longer barrel VS. a shorter barrel. We all know that we will get higher velocity from a carbine. But will using a slow burning powder give us more than using a fast burning powder ?

Ok, let me provide the data I collected today:

Two loads were tested.
124 grain FMJ bullet over 8.2 grains of Blue Dot
147 grain FMJ bullet over 6.2 grains of Blue Dot
These two loads are both max loads according to the Alliant website.

Out of the 3.1" barreled KelTec P11 I got an average velocity of 1113 fps with the 124 grain load and an extreme spread of 17 fps. I got an average velocity of 940 fps with the 147 grain bullet and an exteme spread of 23 fps .

Out of the 6.25" barreled Glock 34 I got an average velocity of of 1334 fps with the 124 grain load and an exteme spread of 56 fps. I got an average of 1066 fps with the 147 grain load and an exteme spread of 73 fps.

Out of the HiPoint carbine I got an average velocity of 1445 fps with the 124 grain load and an extreme spread of 130 fps. Using the 147 grain load out of the carbine, I got an average velocity of 1077 fps and an exteme spread of 165 fps.

Ok, so that gives us an average increase in velocity of 332 fps when going from the little KelTec to the HiPoint carbine using the 124 grain bullet. When going from the 6.25" barreled Glock 34 to the carbine we get an increase of 111 fps using the 124 grain load. When going from the 3.1" barreled KelTac to the 6.25" barreled Glock, we get an increase of 221 fps.

Using the 147 grain load, we get a boost of 137 fps when going from the KelTec to the carbine. We get ONLY 11 FPS when going from the Glock to the carbine. And finally we get 126 fps when going from the KelTec to the Glock. A much bigger increae with the shorter barrels than with the longer barrel.

It looks like the 124 grain bullet loads get a much bigger boost with the longer barrel than the 147s.

Also FWIW, these two loads out of the LRM M169 integrally suppressed 9mm AR15 upper:
124 grain load = 1194 fps, exteme spread= 47 fps
147 grain load = 976 fps, exteme spread = 37 fps
Note that dispite the M169's gas bleed off system, the 124 grain load remains supersonic. Also note that the Glock 34 gives you higher velocity with all loads tested over the LRM M169 upper. This upper give you only slightly better balistics than the 3.1" KelTec.

Just as the Alliant website said, the 147 grain max load using Power Pistol is faster than the max load using Blue Dot out of all three guns.

Crosshair
May 29, 2006, 11:20 PM
Very true, however I don't own a 9mm pistol, that is why I posted data for factory ammo as a comparison. Mabee I should buy a 9mm Hi-Point to do this comparison. (Excuse to buy another gun.:D )

jjohnson
May 30, 2006, 11:57 PM
Hey, a couple of you cautioned about the Camp 9 being a blowback action and its capability to handle heavy loads. Good point - I do have an aftermarket bolt buffer (mine broke with standard loads after only a couple hundred rounds) and I use a 23 pound spring from Wolff, way heavier than the factory spring, and it STILL cycles even the 9mm "training ammo" that's Dutch surplus. Bottom line, if I shoot heavy bullets like 147 grains in mine, I pay close attention to pressures (QuickLoad program) to make sure I don't slam it to death. It's handy, but not sturdy like a Ruger. Thanks for pointing that out - it just might keep somebody out of trouble!

therealsteamer
December 21, 2008, 06:02 PM
Has anyone had any more luck with this endeavor....

Other than my 88 grain groundhog gitter over a case full of Unique and a few runs with green dot I've let this go... That lil screaming HP will open up a groundhog like a champ though...

italy176
November 18, 2010, 01:04 AM
This old thread helped me out... I loaded up some 9mm Luger for my Kel Tech sub 2k carbine and had the following results:

8.5gr Blue Dot 124gr FMJ (use at your own risk):
ave vel = 1505fps
std dev = 26fps
ave E = 623 ft/lbs
n = 25
elev = 6200ft
temp = about 50F

jfremder
November 18, 2010, 08:34 AM
I have finaly goten around to loading the 124 grain Winchester HPs for testing. I used 8 grains of Blue Dot loaded to aprox 1.145 OAL. I hope to get out to the range soon to test their performance.
I've been shooting 115 Missouri Bullet SmallBall over 6.0 of Blue Dot in my 995TS. Picked up that recipe over at the highpoint forum from a member called SV. It's a fantastically accurate, (1" @ 50yd w/ Iron Sights) clean burning load with zero leading issues.

The HP 995TS was a great value on sale at Cabela's for <$200 with a coupon. I've pumped several thousand reloads through it, without a hiccup. I use CCI Primers. The trigger pull smoothed out nicely after about a thousand rounds.

sansone
November 18, 2010, 08:51 AM
I would like to add, extensive load testing on my Marlin .357 levergun showed fantastic results with hot loads, Hodgdon "Lil-gun" powder. It burns a little slower than Blue Dot, but sandbagged & scoped that 18.5" levergun was shooting moa. As much as I love (faster burn) Unique, the accuracy was less good. All testing was with 125gr JSP

If you enjoyed reading about "Loading 9mm for 995 Carbine with slow powder results in impressive performance boost." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!