If it shoots at the same speed, will a different powder be as accurate?

gun'sRgood said:

Ran out of one powder and switching to Tite Group.

If the new powder has the same chrono as the old, can I expect the accuracy to be close to the same as the old? 9mm 124gr RN.

Click to expand...

No.

USPSA minor power factor load around 125-130 PF pushes 124 gr bullet around 1050 fps yet different powders, even around similar burn rate produce different level of accuracy.

Just my experience:

• W231/HP-38 has been my reference powder for 9mm for decades.
• Bullseye/WST/Target/Titegroup/N320/Sport Pistol/BE-86 have produced smaller groups loaded to similar 125-130 PF (Promo produced smaller carbine load groups at 135+ PF)
• WST/BE-86 have produced smallest groups out of above powders.

gun'sRgood said:

The new powder is Titegroup. Thx. Need to bench this stuff. 4.4gr for 124gr. RN. Do you like this?

Click to expand...

I like Titegroup for 9mm but keep in mind you may obtain accuracy at lower powder charges for these reasons.

With 124 gr FMJ/RN bullets, depending on whether they are thicker jacketed or thinner plated (think plated as soft lead bullets with full-length gas checks that expand/deform base readily to seal the gas), you may obtain accuracy at lower powder charges. FMJ with open lead base trap expanding gas like parachute (Especially hollow base FMJ) and also may produce accuracy at lower powder charges.

Here's Speer load data for TMJ RN (Thick plated) and Titegroup - https://reloadingdata.speer.com/downloads/speer/reloading-pdfs/handgun/9mm_Luger__124_rev1.pdf

• 9mm 124 gr TMJ RN Titegroup OAL 1.135" Start 4.0 gr (1020 fps) - Max 4.4 gr (1095 fps)

It's been my experience that when using FMJ with exposed lead base or plated RN with thinner copper plating/softer lead core that expands well, 3.8 gr will actually start to produce accuracy and achieve 125-130 power factor. And when using lower 3.8 gr powder charge, consider using shorter 1.130" to produce greater neck tension and reduce group size.

With longer 1.135" OAL, 4.0 gr should produce greater accuracy trend and I suggest testing 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 gr to see if group size reduces further. If not, I would happily shoot 3.8 - 4.0 gr loads.

And if you are using coated lead/plated bullets, using Hodgdon lead load data would be more applicable - https://www.hodgdonreloading.com/reloading-data-center

• 9mm 125 gr Lead Cone Nose Titegroup COL 1.125" Start 3.6 gr (1,002 fps) - Max 4.0 gr (1,096 fps)
• 9mm 124 gr Berry's HBRN-TP Titegroup COL 1.150" Start 3.6 gr (957 fps) - Max 4.1 gr (1,057 fps)

I'm a big fan of 3.9-4 grains for accuracy in a glock your experience may differ.

I load for multiple 9mm pistols and as a result have developed loads that perform well in all as opposed to ideal in one. For all of my pistols, flat-base jacketed 124gr (Hornady) perform really well at 3.9gr of TiteGroup using a deep seat as recommended by the bullet manufacturer. For swaged lead concave base 125gr and 124gr plated (Alberts and X-treme, respectively) 3.4gr is most accurate and reliable. TiteGroup is not my favorite powder for 9mm but not because of its performance; it scorches cases. Annoying. W231 and Accurate No.5 are my preferred powders but these days you got to run with what you got.

Slamfire said:

It was well known in the long range community that the 168 Match bullet would go unstable past 600 yards. Back in the day when the M1a ruled the Across the Course firing line, the 168 grain bullet was the preferred bullet out to 600 yards. However, having tried this myself, the 168 would go unstable before it hit the 1000 yard target. The theory was, the 168 would go unstable during the transition from super sonic to sub sonic, which is about 1000 to 900 feet per second. The old military 173 FMJBT was in fact, better at 1000 yard than the 168 match, even though the 173 was a less accurate bullet out to 600 yards. It was not until the M1a faded from the firing line, around the year 2000, that Sierra introduced their 175 SMK, which looks identical in shape to the old military bullet, but is a hollow point. I have shot the 175 SMK and it is a great bullet, all the way out to 1000 yards, at M1a velocities.

Click to expand...

Slamfire said:

I am going to claim, that the accuracy issues you saw, were due to the bullet, not the powder. The slower 168's tumbled earlier. The faster ones would have too, some distance beyond.

Click to expand...

In reality, it was probably a combination of both the powder (IMR4895) and the bullet (Nosler CC 168,) in my particular rifle (24" heavy Savage 10TAC.) All things being equal, the IMR4064 did a better job, but at 700yds, they were both likely at the edge of stability... the IMR4895 load just petered out first.

I am aware of the issues trying to get a 168grn BTHP past 600yds or so with reliability, and that particular instance was, in fact, the first time I'd had the rifle beyond 100yds! My goal is to get a load worked out to 600yds, along with the dope (...the scope, not me...) and then move to the 175's and do the same, with a eye to reaching 1000yds.

OP is asking about pistol loading with Titegroup burn rate powders ...