QAL and X-treme 9mm 124 gr HP


PDA






RussellC
June 29, 2013, 05:02 PM
Recently I posted a thread about "Grains on Unique and OAL" and received advice that led to me loading Berry's 124 gr RN with 5.1 grs of Unique at 1.165 OAL for my Glock 17. These bullets performed remarkably well. During that thread one poster mentioned that the OAL he told of was for RN ammunition! I hadnt really thought of varying OAL because of bullet shape, but as he pointed out, "HP bullets have the tip cut off" and this makes perfect sense. I have 500 X-treme 124 grain hollow points, and I would like to try the "recipe" out on them.

Now the Berry's RN I used, when placed in my digital calipers measure .592", while the 124 grain X-treme HP bullets measure .535".....I guess I cant use the same 1.165 OAL without changing the powder load? Or do you just set the HP bullet shorter by the measured difference in the 2 bullets? I hope not as this OAL is really working in the Glock!

Thanks for any clarity on how these bullets loading OAL should vary from my RN load.

Russellc

If you enjoyed reading about "QAL and X-treme 9mm 124 gr HP" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
RussellC
June 29, 2013, 05:06 PM
Obviously, the header should be "OAL" not "QAL":D

Russellc

AK47TIM
June 29, 2013, 05:07 PM
What does your book say min OAL is for that bullet. As long as your not under that and the round chambers fine should be good to go.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

RussellC
June 29, 2013, 05:58 PM
Most of the book recipes I have want it to be a much shorter bullet. Lyman shows a 125 gr JHP, at only 1.075". Another from Alliant with a 124 gr bullet is at 1.12" OAL. Still another from Rainier for 124gr FP is 1.09".

The thing is, and the crux of my question is, how if at all can this be adjusted so as to be closer to the 1.160-1.165 my Glock shoots so well? Or are HP and FP rounds simply required to be seated shorter than this?

Its not the minimum I am worried about, its how (if at all) to get closer to the maximum? My Glock will plunck test any size round, not just the maximum 1.169, but I have tried a dummy bullet at 1.188, and it passed just fine. This being the case, the longer OAL is really improving my accuracy. As the bullets get shorter (and lighter) they seem to generate more fliers. The longer OAL really worked in the Glock. Even at 1.165 I still get a lot of soot on the sides of the brass.

Thanks,

Russellc

Walkalong
June 29, 2013, 06:08 PM
I am loading the X-Treme 124 Gr HP at 1.060 OAL. That would seated deeper than your load with the Berrys at 1.165 OAL.

An OAL of 1.100 with the X-Treme would be seated just about the same depth. That is the OAL I would try them at with the same powder charge. (Assuming my math is right)


I recorded the length of the X-Treme 124 Gr HP bullet at .536 +/- .002.

RussellC
June 29, 2013, 06:28 PM
Yes, thats about the same length I had for the X-treme HP. 1.160 wouldnt be so far off.
You dont happen to be using Unique do you? If not and I want to keep as close to "My load" I should up the charge just a little. Looks like HP bullets just cant go out to the really long OALs...until I hear different any way!

Whoops, I just noticed you said 1.06, not 1.16!

Russellc

RussellC
June 29, 2013, 06:34 PM
Normally, or for another gun I would load to the 1.100 like you said, but I want to take advantage of the increased accuracy I am getting with the Glock with these longer OAL bullets. At least Iknow these bullets can be set to 1.160. Maybe my question should have been "What is max OAL with X-treme 124 gr HP?" But the charge question still remains. I guess I should load a few of the X-treme HP at 1.160 with the same 5.1 grains and work up from there. Anyone gone longer with this bullet?

Russellc

Walkalong
June 29, 2013, 10:15 PM
Maybe my question should have been "What is max OAL with X-treme 124 gr HP?" Let your chamber (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=506678) tell you that, but then what feeds is another matter. I have them loaded fairly short, with almost all of the full diameter portion in the case. I just played around with one and I would not go much over 1.115 to keep a reasonable amount of the bullet in the case for good neck tension.

You might try 1.110 and start at 4.9 Grs of Unique. I expect you will be able to safely go to 5.1, but it pays to back off a bit and work back up.

I am using N320 and running them at 1050ish from a 5" 1911 with a 14 Lb spring and small radius FPS. Very light, very accurate, very clean, and the brass just tumbles out at my feet.

RussellC
June 30, 2013, 12:04 AM
Ok, having seen the mis read I did, 1.06 vs 1.160 OAL, I knew this wouldnt work. So I took them down to 1.125, with the 5.2 grs of Unique. The Alliant site shows using a Speer GDHP 124 gr bullet, at 1.12 with a whopping 5.8 grn of Unique. I have a slightly longer OAL, and am WELL under 5.8! At least I can shoot it and see how it performs. Its only 19 bullets.

Russellc

RussellC
June 30, 2013, 12:54 AM
Let your chamber (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=506678) tell you that, but then what feeds is another matter. I have them loaded fairly short, with almost all of the full diameter portion in the case. I just played around with one and I would not go much over 1.115 to keep a reasonable amount of the bullet in the case for good neck tension.

You might try 1.110 and start at 4.9 Grs of Unique. I expect you will be able to safely go to 5.1, but it pays to back off a bit and work back up.

I am using N320 and running them at 1050ish from a 5" 1911 with a 14 Lb spring and small radius FPS. Very light, very accurate, very clean, and the brass just tumbles out at my feet.
Well, that's what started all this. Trying the plunck test on my barrel, no length failed it. Apparently this is a characteristic of glocks, or at least the 17. (The magazines 17 round capacity can be filled with ammo at the max OAL of 1.169. Anything longer than that clogs in the magazine.) I even made a dummy bullet 1.188" and it didnt stick or offer any resistance when turned. I then discovered some accurate loads from a members suggestion, and they were a little longer than standard, RN 124 gr at 1.160-65. And they were very accurate for me, an eye opener. I was/am convinced it was the extra length, but I could be mistaken. I have some comparison rounds to take to the range next time. It appears that HP ammo, or I guess FP ammo as well, just requires a shorter bullet, in terms of OAL, compared to the comparable RN bullet. Live and learn.

Russellc

Walkalong
June 30, 2013, 07:37 AM
Sounds like you are in great shape. Let us know how they shoot. :)

RussellC
July 15, 2013, 09:13 PM
They shot just fine. Maybe not as accurate as the 124 gr Berry's RN over 5.1-5.2
gr Unique at 1.160, but good enough to see that some of these shorter loads can be plenty accurate.

I loaded some 124 gr Ex-treme HP at 1.11 with 5.1 grains of Unique to try next. It should mimic the 124 RN at 1.160-165 w/ 5.1 gr Unique. (except the length, of course)

Getting rid of the last 50 Berry's 115 RN, I loaded them with 4.8 gr of HP-38 with 1.125 OAL. Hogden shows this as 5.1 max at this length, so should have a little margin here.

Russellc

If you enjoyed reading about "QAL and X-treme 9mm 124 gr HP" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!