9mm Reloading Problem

[ReloaderEd]

Your bullets are seated out to far. They all need to be seated deeper maybe .006" less than the maximum length. My buddy has a Glock and his seating depth with the 125 gr RN Lee is 1.03". I would try to seat the bulllets deeper and if that isn't possible than an impack bullet puller is what you will have to do.
another thing I leaned using the Lee Facory crimp die is DON'T GET THE CRIMPING RING INSIDE UDER THE ALUMINUM ADJUSTMENT SCREW UP SIDE DOWN!!!Be Safe

 

[918v]

BDS:

It's not the blunter profile, but the diameter. Note the absence of rifling marks on the bullet. The ring was caused by the freebore constricting the bullet shank.

 

[LiveLife]

918v, OP already shot the rounds loaded to 1.080" OAL (and I am assuming they fed/chambered from the magazine since that wasn't mentioned as a problem). If so, OP now just needs to work up the powder charge that will reliably cycle the slide and produce accurate shot groups.

 

[918v]

So what?

Would you tell him to load MBC 200gr SWC to 1.200" if he had a 45 ACP?

His freebore diameter is too tight for his bullet diameter. The best answer is to reduce the bullet diameter, not to reduce the OAL.

 

[LiveLife]

Well, the OP could measure the bore, but I doubt the bore size would be smaller than .355".

No, I would tell him/her to determine the max OAL first using a dummy round with the barrel out of the pistol. Then determine the ideal OAL by feeding/chambering from the magazine by manually releasing the slide. I would note that 1.25" OAL is where I would typically load to fit most pistols/barrels and longer for greater accuracy without exceeding SAAMI max length.

 

[918v]

And if his freebore measured .452" would you then tell him to load short?

A Lee bullet sizing die is $15. Sizing bullets using this die is easy.

The OP's bore is likely closer to .355" than .357" being he is using a domestic 9mm. If his freebore is swaging his .356" bullets, his bore can't be smaller than .356". I'd bet his bore is .355" and his freebore .357". At least those are the dimensions Bar-Sto uses.

The OP may not even need to resize his bullets. If his slide goes into battery, he's good to go.

 

[Wrongcaptcha]

918v, OP already shot the rounds loaded to 1.080" OAL (and I am assuming they fed/chambered from the magazine since that wasn't mentioned as a problem). If so, OP now just needs to work up the powder charge that will reliably cycle the slide and produce accurate shot groups.

True and correct. They all loaded fine, just were to weak to reliably cycle the slide. Friday I'm going to run the batch with 3.7grs

I have encountered some guys who ran these bullets in their guns with similar success. The M&P guys could run them at 1.150, but some other guys shooting them had to seat them at 1.070. The profile of the bullet isn't that of most 9mm factory rounds.

 

[918v]

It's not the profile. It's the frebore diameter. The rifling is not limiting the OAL. It's the bullet's inability to slip into the freebore due to the diameter.

 

[LiveLife]

The OP may not even need to resize his bullets. If his slide goes into battery, he's good to go.

Yes!

 

[918v]

If you look at the round in the middle, right where the "Barrel" arrow is pointed, you should see a slight gap between the bullet shank and the barrel. That area is the part of the barrel without any rifling, aka the freebore. Most chambers have a freebore anywhere from .050" to .100" long and .001" to .003" larger than the bore diameter.

I believe the OP's bullet is being swaged by the freebore, hence the ring around the shank portruding past the case mouth. If his throat was too short, his round would have rifling marks on the bullet nose, not a ring around the bullet shank.

 

[LiveLife]

918v, I am not disagreeing with you where the rub mark/ring is coming from as you posted:

The rub mark is from the freebore. The rub mark is OK as long as the slide goes into battery. All this is showing is a nice tight fit between the freebore and the bullet. It will help to prevent leading by sealing the chamber and keeping all the hot gas behind the bullet.

I read your earlier post and thought you were telling the OP to resize the .356" diameter lead bullet down to .355". I see that you posted initially that resizing is warranted only if the slide won't close, but since the OP's slide closed, resizing is not needed.

If his freebore measures .356" and he is cramming a .356" bullet in it, a rub mark will form. Even if his freebore measures .357", a .356" bullet will rub due to the angle at which the round chambers. Reducing the diameter of the bullet slightly will make chambering easier.

If the bullet is too big and the slide won't close, you should reduce the diameter of the bullet and NOT seat it deeper. Lee makes a bullet sizer die for a standard press in .001" increments.

In this case, the bearing surface of the 125 gr SmallBall! extends up quite a bit so the rub/ring marking is made as the .356" diameter bullet's bearing surface approaches the (say .355") bore start/free bore and the "ring" marking is made just at the transition of bearing surface and the round taper of the bullet nose (my modified drawing on the left).

This issue is moot now as the OP used 1.08" OAL to do the initial range test, which did not produce the ring on the bullet nose. Now the question is which powder charge will reliably cycle the slide and produce accurate shot groups.

 

[LiveLife]

Just as a comparison, I dropped a 125 gr SmallBall! into the Lone Wolf barrel and tapped lightly. What I got is a shiny ring (blue arrows) around the transition between the bearing surface and the round taper "ogive" of the bullet.

 

[918v]

OK,

Since we are on the same page reference the cause of the rub mark, why are you suggesting a reduction in OAL? A correctly loaded round will have some of the full diameter bullet shank portruding past the case mouth. This allows the bullet to align itself better with the bore centerline. The freebore supports the bullet shank and the leade supports the bullet ogjive.

If the OP reduces his OAL to the point the bullet shank is no longer in the freebore, his bullet will have to overcome several obstacles: A shorter OAL changes the feed angle from the magazine and reduces reliability. It raises pressures and forces the OP to go outside published load data. It forces the bullet to jump into the freebore from a more severe angle, causing inherent instability- it will wobble down the bore and will be less accurate.

Now, if his slide goes into battery at a longer OAL, that OAL should be used despite the rub marks.

If the slide does not go into attery, the bullet diameter should be reduced.

For example, I used to have a Wilson CQB .45 ACP. It would not accept a 200gr Laser Cast SWC @ 1.250" OAL. The part of the .4525" bullet shank portruding past the case mouth would not enter the freebore and the slide would not go into battery. I ran these .4525" bullets through a Lee .451" die and they were swaged down to .4515". These loaded to the same OAL went into battery just fine. Now, I could have seated the Laser Casts, as is, to a shorter OAL, but that would have compromised reliability and would have caused leading due to bullet shaving upon entry into the freebore. No, I loaded them correctly and they worked correctly.

The OP should do the same with his 9mm, i.e. load them correctly and not take shortcuts. Loading RN bullets under 1.100" in the 9mm is not right. These short OAL's are meant for TC profiles.

 

[LiveLife]

Oh my 918v, you are really over thinking a simple issue.

As posted and range tested, 1.080" OAL fed/chambered from the magazine but the test rounds did not have enough powder charge to reliably extract and feed/chamber the next round from the magazine. All the OP needs to do now is to keep range testing with higher powder charges until he/she has reliable cycling of the slide and consistent shot groups.

I really believe this is an OAL issue and not a bullet diameter issue requiring a resizing of the bullet. I usually recommend to those new to reloading the more rounded nose SmallBall! to use the ideal OAL that will give them reliable feeding/chambering from the magazine even though the resulting OAL may be shorter than the typical 1.125" OAL.

Peace.

 

[918v]

If the OP manages to get his rounds to chamber at a standard OAL, then he will be able to use published load data and won't have this reliability issue. It's not about overthinking, but thinking correctly.

 

[LiveLife]

If the OP manages to get his rounds to chamber at a standard OAL, then he will be able to use published load data

Standard OAL? Other than 40S&W TCFP bullets that I load at 1.125" OAL, all of my 9mm/45ACP bullets OAL vary depending on the bullet type/nose profile and pistols/barrels used. Tell that to XD owners who have to load shorter than published for their pistol/barrel.

Most published load data list "minimum" OAL they used and we often post that we can use longer OAL than what was tested or OAL that will work in their pistol/barrel. Most reloaders will end up using longer OAL for greater accuracy or shorter for reliable feeding/chambering like reloading for XD pistols.

I will wait for OP's range test results.

 

[Wrongcaptcha]

Reporting back:

I made two trips and spent some time on the press today.

1.085" is the max OAL that I can use and still go into battery and manually pull back the slide.

3.5gr @ 1.085" gave me a round that loaded flawlessly but stove piped a few times in the 20 I made. I went home and made a batch of 3.7gr at 1.085" W231. These feed great and have a light recoil. In 100, I did have 1 stovepipe and the brass was falling at my feet. Factory ammo throws in 6 or so feet to my right. I also made 20 3.9grs that had awesome accuracy and a mild recoil. These rounds will be what I'm going to load for now on.

There was very little lead fouling, it seems like a solid load.

Thank you everyone for your input!

 

[LiveLife]

Great! I love happy endings.

You sure you don't want to try 4.0 - 4.1 gr? You never know ... may give you even more accurate shot groups than 3.9 gr (that's been my experience with minimal leading). On my initial load testing, I like to at least examine the accuracy up to high-near max load data.

But if 3.9 gr works for you and you are happy ... have fun!

 

[Wrongcaptcha]

I actually made some 4.0 and 4.1gr too, not to many but to try out.

I made 500 3.9gr today, I have to bring some folks shooting with me so I'm sure I'll go through it in no time. I'm probably going to get the smaller Missouri lead next time around.

 

[LiveLife]

When family/relatives/friends join us at the range, I have lighter recoiling "plinking" loads for some of them. That's the benefit of reloading, being able to load different charge loads.

I prefer the heavier 125 gr in 9mm over the 115 gr. I need to push the 115 gr high to near max load data to reliably cycle the slide in my pistols, which means more felt recoil. You have to use a larger powder charge for 115 gr. Having to force the bullets faster means you may get more leading with the 115 gr bullet. With 125 gr bullet, I can use start to mid range load data and they will cycle the slide with less felt recoil.

BTW, they are essentially the same price. A box of 115 gr is only 25 cents cheaper at Missouri Bullets ($29.50) and is the same price at Powder Valley ($27.42).

I would recommend the 125 gr over the 115 gr in lead bullets.