Accurate #5 for .40

[Dudedog]

Same here.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I used up my pound of Longshot and Power Pistol because they shot well, but I did not replace them.

Same here.

I used up my Longshot too and did not replace it either.

But, I developed a replica load for the Speer Short Barrel 135gr .357 Magnum ammo using Power Pistol and haven't had time to replace it. It was developed with the aid of a Speer help rep and it's hard to tell the original from the replica. Some day I will take another run at it but for right now the half pound of PP I have left is reserved for that replica load. (I use AA#5 in the Speer SB .38 Spl +P replica load)

 

[Zathras]

To all, thank you for the advice. As I said, I went with Speer, cross-referencing other data, but ultimately went with the bullet manufacturer's numbers. I kept reading/hearing "get the manual - read it - follow it". I didn't hear "get 4 manuals, question the numbers from the manufacturer, etc...". No disputing that that was the wrong call here, and fortunately my gun (and I) lived to tell the tale. I reckon I should open some sort of correspondence with them (Speer) to find out why the extra grain(+) starting load. Maybe it's tribal knowledge to just not use their data among the more experienced, but I think it's confusing for new loaders who are trying to 'follow the manual'.

As to my current situation... I haven't had a chance to get back to the range since (or check the brass - still keeping it separate). I did get a few minutes last night though to pull my unfired Speer loads of 180gr's that were the old/high values. I only had 10 rounds. I checked Accurate's postings and cross-referenced with Hornady's (180gr FMJ-FP) this time. I filled 5 with 5.9gr AA5 and another 5 of my Speer TMJ 180gr with the same 5.9gr - all Blazer brass and all at 1.125-1.126 OAL. I might try several at 6 and 6.1 and see how they compare after firing the 5.9's. I also intend to put some Gold Dots (180gr) to the same 5.9, 6 and 6.1 to compare. Got some labels and several boxes to keep things all separated.

Again, thank you to all who've helped out here.

 

[luzyfuerza]

OP, welcome to the reloading journey!

BTW, the rounds that you made that were based on the Speer data were probably safe, if the other important variables your rounds had were similar to those Speer used when they did their testing. And if your barrels are similar to their test barrel. But if any of these key variables was different, the higher powder charge may have reduced your margin for error.

Have fun!

 

[rg1]

Only one test with AA#5 using 165 gr. FMJ-FP bullets, CCI 500 primers and Win cases. I didn't like how increasing charges didn't increase velocity consistently. Plus maximum charges varied in data manuals too much and some maximum charges never yielded the velocity they reported. All in a Glock 23. I find Speer's pistol data maximums are hotter than I like to load with multi-fired brass. I got much better results and matched advertised velocity with Winchester Super Field, WSF, and even preferred Unique and Power Pistol. Now I'm completely satisfied with AA#5 in 45 ACP. Just one test though and your results may differ. WSF is my favorite 40 S&W powder in pistols and a carbine rifle.

 

[Blue68f100]

Most all powders have a sweet spot in where there is a node where things flatten out before continuing. We see this all the time in rifle powders, we actually hunt for it. The long range shooters will use the node for they know the velocity will be the same if they stay within the spread. The node gives you a range that where the velocity is the same or very close with a few 1/10's of a grain increase or decrease. So it makes it easier in which you do not have to weight every charge to the 0.001 of a grain. It allows you to use a std powder dispenser and not weight every charge. If you do a 0.1 gr load step you find these sometimes in pistol powders but not always. Since shooting a handgun is not near as accurate as a rifle it's harder to detect. Some powders are more forgiving than others.

 

[Mowgli Terry]

I go along with those are suggesting working up loads. Also, make sure you are using current data. The most data I could find doing a quick search is 7.6 grains max with AAC-#5 with 165gr. bullet. One down and dirty way to clear up most confusion is to check out powder makers website. I have run into two situations in long guns where the minimum charge in the manual was max in the powder makers data. Wondered why the rifle was rocking me around. These guys are telling you right. Recheck your data and work up the load. The alternative is getting your butt blown into the bushes one day.

 

[Zathras]

Also, make sure you are using current data. The most data I could find doing a quick search is 7.6 grains max with AAC-#5 with 165gr. bullet.

Not sure where you see 7.6 Max from the quick search, but I double/triple-checked the numbers before loading, so not sure how much more current I could be here. 7.6 Start to 8.5 Max is what Speer has in their newest (#15) manual, as well as what is in their current website numbers:
https://www.speer-ammo.com/download...caliber-10mm_400_dia/40_Smith__Wesson_165.pdf

The only thing I did vary from the above list was, in addition to Speer brass, I used several other manufacturers of brass (all once-fired, much of it from the same CZ pistol). The rest was the same. Part number #4410/4397 Speer TMJ/GDHP, respectively, CCI 500 Primers, and COAL for many were 1.120. They don't list a barrel length for their test. My CZ P-07 .40 is 3.75". Again, it sounds like I need to follow-up with Speer if I want to try to make sense of the disparities here and find out why their given load is so high.

I definitely have gotten the message here from all of you, but my point since the start of this thread is if you are checking a manual and think you are doing the 'right thing'(tm), you can still be wrong, so I wonder who all else is doing so.

 

[Mowgli Terry]

I could have been more specific. The data in the Western Power Web site for the 165 gr. Sierra bullet give 6.2 to 7.3 grains for Accurate #5. as we speak. Please check for yourself. The other survey I did was on Loaddata asking for data for 40 S&W using AAC #5. There were half dozen sources for the data I cited. Go to the source to get the best answers-Speer.

 

[Dudedog]

I would imagine the main difference is you gun/barrel vs Speer's test barrel. Just bad luck that Speers data was on the high side.
Some barrels are tighter/have a shorter start to rifling that will cause higher pressures/velocity.
Two pistols could come off the line one after another and odds are the same ammo would shoot to a different velocity in each of them.
Powders are generally allowed a 10% variance in burn speed lot to lot, some powder are very close lot to lot other show more variance.
(Paul from Alliant could say what they allow I may be off with 10% # PS Thanks Paul for all your helpful posts nice to hear from a powder company here)

 

[Mowgli Terry]

Do a survey of load data from powders marker's website and all other data you can find. By all that data that I found the Speer loads, as reported, are excessive. What evidence is that OP's gun is the exception that allows these continued excessive loads? Time will tell-have at it.OP is responsible for the out come. He has asked and has gotten answers.

 

[Zathras]

To followup:

Speer got back to me, almost immediately, so props to them for that. They used a 4" barrel for their numbers, and their official stance on the higher powder recommendations is due to their bullet being more heavily plated than a standard jacketed round, thus requiring more powder. I loaded some 180gr's of Speer TMJ along with some Hornady FMJ FP's for comparison - all at 5.9gr-6.2gr 1.125-1.126" OAL. Using 5.9 as the recommended start from Hornady, which also matches Accurate's data. Unfired, at present - 60 rounds in all. 10 rounds are GDHP, 6.2gr - 2 sets of brass (5 of Speer and 5 of Winchester). We'll see how they compare.

 

[noylj]

Personal experience: AA5 should be used cautiously in .40 S&W. I don't go above mid-range with it. If I want full power loads, I go to Silhouette. AA5 is a very accurate powder for .40S&W, but it seems very rarely have an issue with hotter loads.
ALWAYS check several sources and START at the LOWEST START load and work up. EVERY manual for the last 10+ years has used the same pressure transducer testing technique as defined by SAAMI. The difference in loads comes from different lots of powder, different bullets, different COLs, etc.
Below is my load compilation from assorted manuals. I would start at 6.5gn and work up to 7.2gn—in fact, my most accurate load with 165gn bullets and AA5 is 6.3gn, for groups under 1.5" at 25 yards.

 

[Zathras]

Thanks again, everyone. I thought I'd follow-up on a subsequent range test after changing (lowering) the loads...

I had 60 of 180gr projectiles (5.9-6.2gr AA#5, in increments of .1gr)
15 TMJ
10 GDHP
35 Hornady FMJ

I had 40 of 165gr projectiles (6.5-6.7gr AA#5, in increments of .1gr)
20 TMJ
20 GDHP (I had more 165's).

I need a larger sample-size, but out of those I tested, I got my best results with:

165gr Speer TMJ - 6.7gr
165gr Speer GD - 6.5gr

180gr Speer TMJ - 6.2gr
180gr Speer GD - 6.2gr
180gr Hornady FMJ - 6.0gr

 

[Walkalong]

If I want full power loads, I go to Silhouette.

Maybe not full power, but with a coated Precision or SNS 180 Gr TrFP 6.1 Grs of Silhouette gave me the 950ish FPS from a 4" barrel that I was looking for and shot quite well. At least as well as I can with open sights anyway. 6.2 Grs did well with the X-Treme 180 Gr HP.

I have not tired AA #5 in .40 S&W because Silhouette has pretty much replaced AA #5 for me.