I will be reloading Berry's 115 in 9mm. I have one, easy question.

[eyeshot]

I have read the "Plunk Test" thread in the "Library of Wisdom" multiple times. I decided to try the pencil version of setting an OAL for my plunk test. Seems simple enough.

My bolt face to barrel end measurement is 3.366. I then dropped a Berry's down the pipe and held it in place with a factory cartridge. The bullet to end of barrel was 2.145. Subtracting out it comes to 1.221. That would be to the rifling if it actually gets there. Backing it off .015, as suggested, gives me 1.206. So, in theory, not taking into consideration feeding and extraction a 1.206 should fit my pistol. Or . . is this not as simple as I thought?

All my factory RN cartridges sit up pretty high, .081 on the south-end of my barrel. Maybe that's because it is a Beretta rotating barrel. Heck, I don't know. That's why I chose the pencil method.


Poor, massive photos I know. I'm just going to reload to the factory OAL until I get a handle on this. Feed it to me with a small spoon.

 

[LiveLife]

This is what I do for my load development with a new bullet - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-and-discussions.778197/page-10#post-11419509

• Resize several cases and make sure they drop in the barrel chamber freely and fall out - This checks proper resizing of brass

• Measure the resized cases and use shorter length cases for dummy test rounds (No primer, No powder) - Shorter length brass allow more bullet to extend above case mouth when loaded to same OAL as longer length case

• Determine max OAL - Using the barrel and dummy rounds, starting at SAAMI max length of 1.169", incrementally decrease the OAL (say by .005") until rounds fall in the barrel chamber freely with a "plonk" and spin without hitting the rifling

• Determine working OAL - Lock the slide back and feed/chamber dummy rounds from the magazine without riding it. You may need to decrease the OAL (say by .005") for reliable feeding. NOTE: While many factory barrels can accommodate 115 gr RN OAL to 1.169", due to 9mm having shorter bullet base with neck tension issue at longer OAL, many use shorter OAL like 1.130"-1.135"

 

[fxvr5]

1.206" might fit in the chamber, but that doesn't mean it will fit in your magazine. Most 9mm magazines are built around a maximum 9mm Luger OAL of 1.169". Anything longer than that often won't fit them.

 

[Metal God]

1.206. So, in theory, not taking into consideration feeding and extraction a 1.206 should fit my pistol. Or . . is this not as simple as I thought?

That is your max allowable COAL and not what you likely want for reliable cycling . Also and this may be hard to believe but Berry's recommendations are not accurate ( I mean by a lot with some bullets ) I don't have my notes in front of me but I think the longest I seat my 115gr RN from Berry's is 1.100 and the flat nose are way shorter then that . You don't wont just a little bit of the bullet seated into the case , you want it pushed in a bit for good bullet hold . I generally base my seating depth off the baring surface and case mouth . Meaning just a little bit of baring surface above the case mouth .

Here's a pic of the 9mm Berry's 115gr RN , Case on the left seated to 1.200 , case on the right to 1.100 and the bullet in the middle showing how far the bullet is seated into the case at those depths .



You do not want to seat that bullet to 1.200

FWIW I load for several 9mm including a PX4 storm . The plunk test on there barrel only shows if the bullet is seated to long and jams in the rifling . For the PX4 storm if the cartridge drops in and plunks and falls freely out with no resistance then it passed the plunk test . on most other semi auto pistol barrels the plunk test also tells you if you need to trim your cases as well if the case head is flush with the rest of the barrel . The PX4 storm does not allow for that based on the barrel design .

.

This is a PX4 storm plunk test that passes . How do I know it passes ? It drops in and falls out no problem and I trimmed the cases .



This is an example of how Berry's COAL suggestions are off
115gr flat nose - Berry's says 1.200 COAL
Bullet on right is 1.175 , middle 1.080 , left .900 - I went with the middle seating depth

 

[LiveLife]

This is an example of how Berry's COAL suggestions are off

115gr flat nose - Berry's says 1.200 COAL

Actually, according to this pdf, Berry's recommends 1.060" for 115 gr FP - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?attachments/berrys-col-pdf.896428/

And 1.130" for 115 gr RN

Caliber - Type - C.O.L​

• 9mm 115 gr FP 1.060
• 9mm 115 gr RN 1.130
• 9mm 115 gr HBRN 1.130

 

[bersaguy]

FWIW, I recently worked up a load for use in my CZ75 with Berry's 115 RNFB over 4.5gn Bullseye. I set the COAL to 1.155. That's as long as I can go and makes a very accurate round that feeds well in that pistol. I used the plonk test until I could drop the round in the chamber, spin it freely and have it drop out freely. Then seat it another .005 deeper. I'm within SAMMI spec, but after looking at some of the numbers here, I may do some more testing before firing these in any other 9mm

 

[fxvr5]

This is an example of how Berry's COAL suggestions are off
115gr flat nose - Berry's says 1.200 COAL
Bullet on right is 1.175 , middle 1.080 , left .900 - I went with the middle seating depth

The information I found at Berry's website under "loading tips" says the loaded 115 FN bullet OAL is 1.12".

https://www.berrysmfg.com/product/bp-9mm-356-115gr-fp
Bullet O.A.L.: .478"

Cartridge Name: 9mm
Cartridge O.A.L.: 1.12"
Max Velocity: 1250 fps

Actually, according to this pdf, Berry's recommends 1.060" for 115 gr FP - file:///home/chronos/u-cb07b9aa1a32fb243c11b4084eb32eda82f2081f/MyFiles/Downloads/Berrys%20COL%20(3).pdf

That link is dead.

 

[LiveLife]

The information I found at Berry's website under "loading tips" says the loaded 115 FN bullet OAL is 1.12".

That link is dead.

Ooops, posted the wrong link.

Here's working link to pdf which listed 1.060" for 115 gr FP - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?attachments/berrys-col-pdf.896428/

And here's comparison picture showing 1.080" for RMR FP bullet

 

[eyeshot]

So why do my factory rounds sit so high in the pics? They cycle and fire flawlessly at a 1.152 avg. I expected them to plunk even or very close to even to the barrel surface. Like Metal God's pic. My pistol is a PX4 Storm Compact if that makes a difference in the plunk. (love that word)

Awesome answers, everyone. I'm digesting it all. I did forget that Berry's might just fall out of the case at 1.206 but I was trying to get the theory right in my head.

Thanks!

 

[LiveLife]

So why do my factory rounds sit so high in the pics? They cycle and fire flawlessly at a 1.152 avg.

Why do cars come with cheap factory OEM tires? Does that mean you must replace them with hard compound tires that roll easier for higher MPG but won't stop as quick or give you better lateral traction on corners as better tires with softer compound?

Of course not.

Who knows, factory rounds are often loaded with cheapest available bulk powders and perhaps a particular lot of less dense fluffy powder they got required longer OAL so as to not compress the powder charge. Who knows since ammunition manufacturers won't share what powders they use in their factory ammunition.

As to why I use shorter 1.130"-1.135" OAL for 115 gr FMJ/RN bullets instead of longer 1.150"-1.160", will they work at longer OAL?

Sure, in most factory/aftermarket barrels - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...let-max-working-oal-col-for-reference.848462/

But 9mm 115 gr FMJ/RN bullets have shorter bullet base which can produce neck tension/bullet setback issue - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...neck-tension-and-bullet-setback.830072/page-4

So while 115 gr FMJ/RN loaded to 1.150"-1.160" could work in most pistols/barrels, chances are, depending on the headstamp brass you use, you will likely experience more bullet setback (Yes, factory new ammunition do experience bullet setback) and decreased accuracy compared to rounds loaded shorter at 1.130"-1.135". And to squeeze out even more accuracy, I have used even shorter 1.110"-1.115" for some loads.

And I have done cursory 1.155" vs 1.130"-1.135" OAL comparison test and shorter OAL loads seem to produce smaller groups - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/myth-busting-oal-col-long-vs-short.819257/

Here's 25 yard comparison 10 shot groups with RMR 115 gr FMJ loaded to 1.155" on the left and 1.130" on the right

 

[LiveLife]

So while 115 gr FMJ/RN loaded to 1.150"-1.160" could work in most pistols/barrels, chances are, depending on the headstamp brass you use, you will likely experience more bullet setback (Yes, factory new ammunition do experience bullet setback) and decreased accuracy compared to rounds loaded shorter at 1.130"-1.135". And to squeeze out even more accuracy, I have used even shorter 1.110"-1.115" for some loads.

BTW, while posting for another thread I noticed something.

Atlanta Arms match ammunition is used by several match teams and their 9mm Elite Match 115 gr FMJ used to be loaded to 1.130" OAL but is now loaded shorter at 1.105" +/- .005". I wonder why they decreased the OAL? Perhaps for greater neck tension for more consistent chamber pressures?

https://atlantaarms.com/products/elite-9mm-115gr-fmj-match-amu.html

"Elite Ammo - 9mm 115 gr FMJ Match AMU - This ammunition is designed for extreme accuracy at 50 yards.

This ammo is used by the Army Marksmanship Unit and the Marine Service Pistol team for service pistol matches. Accuracy test requirement: 5 ten-shot groups at 50 yards with an average group size not to exceed 1.5 inches."​

 

[fxvr5]

Here's 25 yard comparison 10 shot groups with RMR 115 gr FMJ loaded to 1.155" on the left and 1.130" on the right

Both those groups measure ~ 4 7/8" (on screen) by my ruler. They are identical.

 

[rfwobbly]

The simple answer to your question is that the Berry RN is such a narrow or "slim" ogive shape that they rarely give reloaders any trouble, and Berry OAL numbers resulting from chamber testing are most always longer than the SAAMI max of 1.169". Obviously then, about the longest cartridge you'll ever want to build is ~1.160".

However, it's important to remember that chamber testing simply gives you the Longest Usable OAL, and that is not always an Optimal OAL. You could have feed or accuracy issues with a cartridge that long, and only further testing will tell you this.

Given your set of circumstances, I also would suggest starting at a much shorter OAL around 1.125".

Hope this helps.

 

[higgite]

So why do my factory rounds sit so high in the pics?

Take a sized piece of unloaded brass and drop it in to the chamber. Does it protrude the same amount as a your loaded round or a factory round within reason? If so and your loaded rounds pass the plunk test, you're GTG.

 

[Metal God]

You guys were 100% correct on that COAL , hmm I guess Gods can be wrong
and what's up with the PDF being different then there web page ?

However my point was correct I just had the measurements wrong and is why in reloading you never base anything you are doing off memory , always consult your notes or the manual . I did say I didn't have my notes in front of me and yet still posted incorrect info , I should not have done that sorry about that .

Here is what I meant to say .





I knew what I meant was accurate I just had the wrong numbers . IMO that is not enough of the bullet seated into the case and that COAL does not pass a plunk test in my pistol . I'm not sure if Berry's is giving what they believe is there Max COAL but it still seems long to me . I load those FP to 1.010 which might be a tad short but I worked up from minimum charge so I was gtg .

 

[Metal God]

Here's 25 yard comparison 10 shot groups with RMR 115 gr FMJ loaded to 1.155" on the left and 1.130" on the right

Man you guys shoot WAY better then I ever could , I can barely shoot one hole groups at 25 feet . I can barely see the target at 25yds little lone shoot a group that far away like that . what gun is shooting like that , I know it isn't a shield lol

 

[LiveLife]

You guys were 100% correct on that COAL , hmm I guess Gods can be wrong
and what's up with the PDF being different then there web page ?

Well ... webmasters and IT techs have known to make mistakes, as they are mere mortal humans.

When Alliant Powder released online load data for BE-86, they made a duplicate mistake with different powder charge/velocity for 115 gr FMJ bullet and we pointed out to have it corrected - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/be-86.760289/#post-9599564

I did find something odd. Looking at load data for 9mm, I see 115 gr FMJ listed twice with different powder charge/velocity. Perhaps one of them was meant for 115 gr JHP? If you look at the screen capture below, 6.1 gr/1,219 fps shows for 115 gr FMJ but 6.3 gr/1,238 fps shows again for 115 gr FMJ

I see you guys have found a typo in our data. Thanks for bringing that to light.
I have the root data that should have been entered, and the 6.1gr charge 9mm 115gr load is for the FMJ bullet. The 6.3gr load is for the 9mm 115gr JHP load.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/be-86.760289/page-2#post-9601310
​

Man you guys shoot WAY better then I ever could , I can barely shoot one hole groups at 25 feet . I can barely see the target at 25yds little lone shoot a group that far away like that . what gun is shooting like that , I know it isn't a shield lol

As expressed in the link, it's scoped 17" Just Right carbine with Glock magwell shot with bipod.

 

[lordpaxman]

So why do my factory rounds sit so high in the pics? They cycle and fire flawlessly at a 1.152 avg. I expected them to plunk even or very close to even to the barrel surface.

9mm headspaces on the case mouth. Presuming the factory rounds case length is in spec, perhaps that’s the design of your gun, barrel and chamber. You did say it fires factory ammo ok. The plunk test does not care where the case head ends up. If you want to earn extra credit, you can measure the depth of the chamber relative to the end of the barrel. Good luck!

 

[eyeshot]

9mm headspaces on the case mouth. Presuming the factory rounds case length is in spec, perhaps that’s the design of your gun, barrel and chamber. You did say it fires factory ammo ok. The plunk test does not care where the case head ends up. If you want to earn extra credit, you can measure the depth of the chamber relative to the end of the barrel. Good luck!

I ran 50 resized cases through the plunk and all the heads look to be .018 above the barrels end. So I am moving forward under the premise that the Italians designed it that way. This is my first semi-auto and it is somewhat of a learning curve. Rifle was easier to pick up, IMO.

Thank you, for the reply.

 

[Metal God]

is somewhat of a learning curve. Rifle was easier to pick up, IMO.

Lol , yeah me too . I loaded for precision rifle for years before I started loading for pistol . When I started loading pistol I was confused not because I didn’t understand the loading process but rather how less consistent pistol loading can be .

Oh man guys telling me you don’t need to separate brass, you don’t really need to trim brass etc. . The problem is I started on a single stage and I could feel all the inconsistencies which after loading for Percision rifle really messed with my head . I could tell when I was sizing a thin walled case compared to a thicker walled case I could tell that the crimp wasn’t the same as the last or the next round . I could feel all these things that every fiber of my being was telling me I was loading a crapy round .

It took me about a year and 1000 rounds or so to get over it , well that and having to separate my brass is a must or all those inconsistencies rear their ugly head . It also helps that I went to a Lee classic turret press which allows me to move much quicker through each stage .

So although it seemed more difficult than rifle it’s really nowhere near as hard in the complexity And Consistency needed .

 

[eyeshot]

Metal God: I completely missed this paragraph in one of your replies.

"FWIW I load for several 9mm including a PX4 storm . The plunk test on there barrel only shows if the bullet is seated to long and jams in the rifling . For the PX4 storm if the cartridge drops in and plunks and falls freely out with no resistance then it passed the plunk test . on most other semi auto pistol barrels the plunk test also tells you if you need to trim your cases as well if the case head is flush with the rest of the barrel . The PX4 storm does not allow for that based on the barrel design ." If I had read this I wouldn't have kept beating that dead horse.

LiveLife & others: I am going to go with the 1.130-1.135. I ran a 1.215 plunked no spin, 1.168 plunked spun but some drag, 1.160 plunked and spun and a 1.155 plunked and spun. The 1.215 and 1.168 both failed my fancy, multi-tiered Shooter's Box case gauge. Sooo . . I think I'm ready to reload at the 1.130-1.135 for my first go-around. I believe I have a handle on the sizing, expanding, seating and taper crimp after reading and doing all you-all's suggestions.

I know, at times, it must be tedious educating and re-educating the new and/or forgetful. It is appreciated more than you know. If we don't say it we're thinking it. Peace of mind is priceless when working your way through all that needs to be learned.

Thank you, everyone.

 

[Metal God]

That piece of mind statement could not be more true . I remember the first time I worked on a electrical main panel , I wanted no part of it , I was so nervous , after 20yrs of experience and now It doesn’t effect me at all .