Short term reloader, would appreciate advice re:147gr TMJ in 9mm

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gimme30

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2020
Messages
4
Hi guys!

I'm new to this so please bear with me. I have SO many questions but I'll try to limit them to what is currently pertinent to me now-loading 9mm with Speer's 147gr TMJ. I've read plenty here on THR about that particular weight bullet, but any data presented is always for plated bullets. Which apparently, it turns out this is, according to this video:https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...9F3A4A01444C604DD6669F3A4A01444C&&FORM=VRDGAR

I was under the impression a TMJ was essentially a completely enclosed FMJ based on Speers product description here:https://www.speer.com/bullets/handgun_bullets/tmj_handgun_bullet/19-4006.html

That being the case, I decided to start with data from Lee's 2nd for 147gr FMJ, using WSF. I loaded 10 at the start load of 3.9gr seated to 1.169, and had just finished another 10 at 4.1gr when my used copy of Lyman's 49th showed up in the mailbox. Turns out Lyman had the exact bullet listed, but with a starting load of 3.5gr maxing at 4.4gr and seated to 1.115. From what I gather published OAL is more of a guideline and most people load to the longest length that will fit in the mag and cycle reliably through their gun.

So in my typical lumpy headed way I decided ok fine, let's try some 231 using the Lyman data. And that's where I've run into a potential problem. Seating to 1.115 at the 3.5gr start load puts the bullets base VERY close to the charge, and while I loaded another 10 at 3.6gr I decided I'd stop there or risk compressing the load. (I tried to measure with the depth gauge but I just can't see into the tiny case well enough with the calipers sitting on top)

I think charge-wise I should be ok, but I'm worried I may have screwed up as far as OAL. Am I taking an unnecessary risk here?

I have some CFE pistol I'd like to try as well. Speer lists starting loads at 4.1gr seated to 1.130. I'm considering seating to 1.169 as that fits the magazines and passes the plunk test in my G17. Are there any potential issues I should look out for here?

One last thing, if you don't mind. :) In trying to sort through all the conflicting information out there I assumed the powder manufacturers would be the most reliable source of information, but apparently Hodgdon only uses Hornady XTP, because that's always the bullet that comes up whether I search 9mm, .45, or .40s&w. Well, that, or Berrys plated. I realize they couldn't possibly test every bullet out there but you'd think they'd check more than one or two!

Thank you gentlemen!
 
I did, and they don't. But thank you!
I'll try a dedicated reloading forum.
 
gimme30, I would just use Speer's data.
https://reloading-data.speer-ammo.c...m_caliber_355-366_dia/9mm_Luger__147_rev1.pdf


Loading to the max OAL of 1.169" is generally not advised for flat nosed bullets as they can jam in magazines. I have to limit FN bullets to 1.150" or less in my Glock mags, or they will get stuck as more are loaded in the mag. Speer's data should be about ideal for your use. No need to deviate from it.
 
For those using Hodgdon powder I have found the $10 for their printed magazine looking reloading manual is money well spent every year(some years I get 2 so I have one at the office in case I need to look something up). It has many more loads than the online data.
Todd
 
gimme30 said:
I did, and they don't. But thank you!
Click to expand...
Those manuals don't because, for the general populace, W231 is too "fast" for 147gr in 9mm.

Most people that are loading 147gr are wanting the extremes, either faster self defense loads or slower target loads. So those people would use a much different powder. For "general use" a slower powder is recommended. If you'll look at the powders listed in the on-line loads, then you'll see they are all much slower than W231. And therein lies your problem.
 
fxvr5 said:
gimme30, I would just use Speer's data.
https://reloading-data.speer-ammo.c...m_caliber_355-366_dia/9mm_Luger__147_rev1.pdf


Loading to the max OAL of 1.169" is generally not advised for flat nosed bullets as they can jam in magazines. I have to limit FN bullets to 1.150" or less in my Glock mags, or they will get stuck as more are loaded in the mag. Speer's data should be about ideal for your use. No need to deviate from it.
Click to expand...

One of the best purchases you can make is a cartridge gauge. In the case of flat nose bullets, you can certainly have trouble with OAL - ask me how I know this. If you're using a plated bullet like those from Hunting Shack, you might not want to go by the flat nose specs in the Hornady manual. The HS has a longer shank. Enter the cartridge gauge. I think one is about $30. You can buy them from almost any gun store or internet source. Wilson, Hornady, Dillon - even can find them on Amazon, Insert your finished cartridge, and the gauge will tell you if you're good right away.
 
gimme30 said:
So in my typical lumpy headed way I decided ok fine, let's try some 231 using the Lyman data. And that's where I've run into a potential problem. Seating to 1.115 at the 3.5gr start load puts the bullets base VERY close to the charge, and while I loaded another 10 at 3.6gr I decided I'd stop there or risk compressing the load. (I tried to measure with the depth gauge but I just can't see into the tiny case well enough with the calipers sitting on top)
Click to expand...

There is no reason to be concerned about compressing the load. Here's what Hodgdon says:

"Hodgdon notes in its reloading data if the subject charge is a compressed load. A full case, or lightly compressed charge is an ideal condition for creating loads with the most uniform velocities and pressures, and oftentimes, producing top accuracy."

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/reloading-education/reloading-beginners/compressed-loads
 
NMexJim said:
One of the best purchases you can make is a cartridge gauge. In the case of flat nose bullets, you can certainly have trouble with OAL - ask me how I know this. If you're using a plated bullet like those from Hunting Shack, you might not want to go by the flat nose specs in the Hornady manual. The HS has a longer shank. Enter the cartridge gauge. I think one is about $30. You can buy them from almost any gun store or internet source. Wilson, Hornady, Dillon - even can find them on Amazon, Insert your finished cartridge, and the gauge will tell you if you're good right away.
Click to expand...

Except the case gauge might not have the same dimensions as the gun's chamber. The gun's chamber is the best case gauge. Make sure the loaded round fits the gun's barrel.
 
gimme30 said:
I'll try a dedicated reloading forum.
Click to expand...

The best advice I can give is: don't go to any forum for reloading advice. Many forum members don't know what they are talking about (though that doesn't stop them), and it's hard to filter the good stuff from the BS.

You have perfectly good data from the Speer website and Lyman's manual. Find data for your particular bullet, and use that.

Don't overthink the OAL issue. Use the OAL listed in the manuals and you'll be fine.
 
Guys thank you all, I really do appreciate your help. I was hesitant to post because I know how tiresome it can be for long time members to answer ignorant newb questions, but I've spent hours searching through info either printed or online and and couldn't find a definitive answer anywhere. The one constant in my search has been THR-nearly every query pulled results from here and everything I read indicated you were a sensible group with real world experience and not just a bunch of keyboard jockeys. There's so much to learn, so many variables and conflicting information, to be honest I'm overwhelmed. Turns out I really enjoy reloading, kind of a zen thing, but it's not like baking a cake, where you don't have to worry about a little extra sugar blowing your face off when you take the first bite.
And then there's this :
fxvr5 said:
and it's hard to filter the good stuff from the BS
Click to expand...

Exactly! And that's not limited to forums-I've run across starting loads from one (presumably reputable) source that are near max from another!

rfwobbly said:
Those manuals don't because, for the general populace, W231 is too "fast" for 147gr in 9mm.

Most people that are loading 147gr are wanting the extremes, either faster self defense loads or slower target loads. So those people would use a much different powder. For "general use" a slower powder is recommended. If you'll look at the powders listed in the on-line loads, then you'll see they are all much slower than W231. And therein lies your problem.
Click to expand...

Yep, I realized too late, that I've made the wrong choices with both bullet weight/style AND powder, so I've definitely put myself in this boat! Not that it's an excuse for my stupidity, but I assumed since my gun likes the 147gr rounds, that'd be the place to start. Should have looked at a manual first. And I didn't do it just once, but twice! I thought I was lucky to grab some .40 165gr FMJ and there's even less data available for those than the Speer TMJ's!

George P said:
No, they aren't, but they are good enough
Click to expand...

George, by that do you mean I could use FMJ data? I'm still a little confused over the whole TMJ/FMJ thing, especially since apparently Speer is too.
Btw love the avatar, cracks me up!
 
Sage advice:
fxvr5 said:
The best advice I can give is: don't go to any forum for reloading advice. Many forum members don't know what they are talking about (though that doesn't stop them), and it's hard to filter the good stuff from the BS.

You have perfectly good data from the Speer website and Lyman's manual. Find data for your particular bullet, and use that.

Don't overthink the OAL issue. Use the OAL listed in the manuals and you'll be fine.
Click to expand...
 
George P said: ↑
No, they aren't, but they are good enough
George, by that do you mean I could use FMJ data? I'm still a little confused over the whole TMJ/FMJ thing, especially since apparently Speer is too.
Btw love the avatar, cracks me up!
Click to expand...

I do all the time; if you looked at the data I screenshot, the loads and OAL are the same as the Speer manual
 
George P said:
I do all the time; if you looked at the data I screenshot, the loads and OAL are the same as the Speer manual
Click to expand...

Except those OALs are bogus. That WSF data is copied from Winchester's 15th Edition Reloader's Manual (copyright 1997). In a section titled "Maximum Overall Lengths with Bullet Seated" on page 44 it lists the SAAMI maximum lengths, which is 1.169" for the 9mm.

But they don't indicate the OALs used for individual bullets, which is a problem because some bullets at the maximum SAAMI OAL won't fit in magazines or chambers of even get the bullet in the case. Therefore, that OAL is not useful and downright not correct.

For example, how are you going to seat a 95 gr FMJ round in a 9mm at 1.169" when the bullet is .414" (Sierra 95 FMJ bullet) and the maximum 9mm case length is .754"? Do the math . . . .754 + .414 = 1.168".
 
gimme30 said:
Guys thank you all, I really do appreciate your help. I was hesitant to post because I know how tiresome it can be for long time members to answer ignorant newb questions, but I've spent hours searching through info either printed or online and and couldn't find a definitive answer anywhere. The one constant in my search has been THR-nearly every query pulled results from here and everything I read indicated you were a sensible group with real world experience...

Yep, I realized too late, that I've made the wrong choices with both bullet weight/style AND powder, so I've definitely put myself in this boat! Not that it's an excuse for my stupidity, but I assumed since my gun likes the 147gr rounds, that'd be the place to start. Should have looked at a manual first. And I didn't do it just once, but twice! I thought I was lucky to grab some .40 165gr FMJ and there's even less data available for those than the Speer TMJ's!
Click to expand...
Look, everyone makes mistakes. The only stupid question is the one you didn't ask. If you're on a forum that jeers or makes fun of you for a occasional lapse, then you need to leave that forum. When you think about it, even the wisest and best reloader among us is "standing on the shoulders of giants". We've all been helped by the numerous reloaders who came before us.

If you never ever want to "fall down", then the 2 hobbies you should not aspire to are the unicycle and reloading.

All the best.
 
Last edited:
fxvr5 said:
Except the case gauge might not have the same dimensions as the gun's chamber. The gun's chamber is the best case gauge. Make sure the loaded round fits the gun's barrel.
Click to expand...

This is a true statement. The "plop" test is where you drop your loaded cartridge into your barrel chamber to see if all looks good, and it works very well. However, gauges let you see much more about your cartridge.

I agree that you need to follow a manufacturer's recommendations for bullet/powder combinations. It's what they do and about the liability they face. And, I definitely agree that you should not follow blindly any thread you find on the internet - although I will say The High Road is better than most.

I'm inserting a clip from your original thread - this is a Speer TMJ and stands for Total Metal Jacket and is a plated bullet (plating used to reduce airborne lead dust) just as seen in your attached Speer site. An FMJ is a Full Metal Jacket which is a bullet that had a formed, thick jacket around it. This is the bullet used by most NATO Force member countries in combat. These are not the same. The TMJ is not shaped like a FMJ. The TMJ has a flattened point and the FMJ a round nose point. COAL will not be the same unless perhaps the ogive is moved in the TMJ which does not appear to be the case.

Ok, so in the clip given us by George above, it lists 1.169 OAL for a JHP (jacketed hollow point) and 1.169 again for an FMJ (round nose, full jacket) like on the right.

4006.jpg 3993.jpg


Alright, so now I'm going to include a screen clip from Speer on their current website.
upload_2020-11-20_15-3-54.png

Note the COAL listed is now 1.130. And, that makes a bit of sense in that neither of these bullets are a round nose, FMJ profile. My guess is for a COAL of 1.169 is that the cartridge will sit high in the chamber or perhaps you'll have trouble with feeding. And, here where gauges enter in, you could catch this right quick with a gauge. Not bad to spot check as you go either. Hey, I used a barrel for many years. Then I bought a gauge and haven't looked back.

Go to the SAAMI site and download the cartridge and chamber dimensions for 9mm. Study it closely. Ah heck, I'll just include it as an attachment. Note in the chamber drawing the length where the forcing cone comes down to .354 (remember, the bullet diameter is .355). That dimension is .8113. That's where the ogive (profile) of your bullet is going to stop the cartridge from chambering any deeper. The round nose will extend past this point. Flat nose, not so much. Same, same hollow point.

As the profile changes, the COAL changes. A Speer 115 gr GDHP suggested COAL is 1.125. A 124 gr GDHP is 1.1.20. It just all depends.

I've loaded out to 1.150, but I can't remember going much past that with anything. I've become happy with 1.130.

Now, for WSF. In my opinion, Speer has given you the COAL. They've accounted for any compressed loads during their testing. I would recommend that you start low and work high, but I would certainly use their data, at least for a time.
 

Attachments

  • 9mm SAAMI.PNG
    9mm SAAMI.PNG
    93.3 KB · Views: 1
My Speer TMJs look EXACTLY like my Speer FMJ - no truncated point but a rounded one just like a FMJ.
 
George P said:
My Speer TMJs look EXACTLY like my Speer FMJ - no truncated point but a rounded one just like a FMJ.
Click to expand...

Hi George - just out of curiosity, would you look over this screen cut from Speer's site and check the bullet product number against those that you have? I'm just curious. I use Gold Dots on occasion but really don't know their other products. I appreciate it. Jim

upload_2020-11-20_17-30-31.png
 
George P said:
My Speer TMJs look EXACTLY like my Speer FMJ - no truncated point but a rounded one just like a FMJ.
Click to expand...

The 124gr TMJ's I have on hand are definitely RN. The 147's aren't though, they're more FP like described above.

gimme30 said:
have SO many questions but I'll try to limit them to what is currently pertinent to me now-loading 9mm with Speer's 147gr TMJ
Click to expand...
Everyone here was "new at this" at some point, and a lot of them didn't have THR as a resource way back when they started. (I've reloaded off an on for a few years, but only gotten serious about it in the last year or so. I've picked up some very useful advice from other members) Lots of very helpful folks around here. Even though opinions on processes may differ, nobody's going to steer you in an unsafe direction.
 
NMexJim said:
Hi George - just out of curiosity, would you look over this screen cut from Speer's site and check the bullet product number against those that you have? I'm just curious. I use Gold Dots on occasion but really don't know their other products. I appreciate it. Jim

View attachment 956875
Click to expand...
Speer Lawman
9mm Luger
124 gr TMJ
STK # 53651

looks just like a FMJ and shoots like one.

Bought them but the thousands from TargetSports USA
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Powder Charge for 147gr TMJ RN 9mm.
Replies
8
Views
3K
jtap1957
J
CopperFouling
  • Locked
Speer 9mm 124 gr. TMJ
Replies
11
Views
1K
wst38tx
wst38tx
C
  • Locked
147gr. 9mm OAL
Replies
10
Views
5K
REB
R
mongoose33
  • Locked
Speer TMJ--Plated?
Replies
7
Views
829
Jim Watson
J
ManFromMontana
9mm 147gr Berrys bullets...where's the load data?
Replies
14
Views
2K
Metal God
Metal God
Back
Top