Carbine load testing with mixed range brass/plated bullets in 9mm-40S&W-45ACP

[LiveLife]

I'm curious how the 147 gr do too. Looking forward to seeing the results.

Me too.

Another factor we are seeing with pistol loads at 50/100 yards is vertical stringing from bullet drop (note mixed brass target on the next post was turned 45 degrees for the picture/group measurement) that we do not factor in when testing pistol loads at 15/25 yards. This is where consistency in muzzle velocities (SD number) play a greater part and I will continue to monitor that too as all the test loads are chrono'd against reference CCI 22LR Standard Velocity (1070 fps) rounds.

For now, I am simply trying to get an initial impression of various 95/100/115/124/147 gr 9mm loads to see how various factors such as trajectory/bullet drop/transonic effect/supersonic vs subsonic loads along with more typical powder/charge/OAL combination has on 50/100 yard accuracy. I am not aiming for MOA but minute-of-soda cans at 50 yards and minute-of-2 liter bottles/paper plates at 100 yards as my final level of accuracy.

 

[LiveLife]

I've never loaded mixed headstamps.

While I sort brass for .308 loads, I use mixed headstamp brass for pistol range practice/plinking loads.

And the premise of this thread is primarily about 9mm carbine loads to replace 22LR plinking loads for cost effectiveness hence the OP is titled "Carbine load testing with MIXED range brass/PLATED bullets"

With mixed brass, I anticipated flyers but what I found interesting from the last range test is that mixed headstamp brass (Winchester, RP, etc.) I shot several times actually produced smaller 2" shot group (with 2 flyers) than same .FC. headstamp brass with 3" 10-round shot groups (see comparison target pictures below).

Since I expected tighter group from once-fired same headstamp brass, I was perplexed. Only rationale I could come up with was somehow work hardening of brass shot several times by me have reached a point where brass expansion was more consistent than same headstamp .FC. brass to produce more consistent chamber pressures.

This illustrates we could talk/discuss all we want but in the end, it's the holes on target that matters.

For the next range session, I am planning to compare the 16" PSA carbine with 17" Just Right carbine with free-float barrel and retest mixed vs same headstamp loads.

3 rnd group from it at 50 yds

When I conducted my initial 50/100 yard carbine load testing with 5 round groups, jmorris questioned the validity of 5 round groups at longer distances and suggested I use 10 round groups.

I agreed and subsequent accuracy testings were done using 10 round groups. While I applaud the small 3 round group, I won't be impressed until I see consistent 10 round groups from multiple range sessions.

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

Me too.

Another factor we are seeing with pistol loads at 50/100 yards is vertical stringing from bullet drop (note mixed brass target on the next post was turned 45 degrees for the picture/group measurement) that we do not factor in when testing pistol loads at 15/25 yards. This is where consistency in muzzle velocities (SD number) play a greater part and I will continue to monitor that too as all the test loads are chrono'd against reference CCI 22LR Standard Velocity (1070 fps) rounds.

For now, I am simply trying to get an initial impression of various 95/100/115/124/147 gr 9mm loads to see how various factors such as trajectory/bullet drop/transonic effect/supersonic vs subsonic loads along with more typical powder/charge/OAL combination has on 50/100 yard accuracy. I am not aiming for MOA but minute-of-soda cans at 50 yards and minute-of-2 liter bottles/paper plates at 100 yards as my final level of accuracy.

That's where i want to be in accuracy. But its not been quite there. Last week was a disaster. The first chronograph test was close though with some groups showing signs of consistency Pop can @ 50 with a little consistency, yeah that would be awesome.

I could care less about chasing anything out past 100 yds. I dont see a need to go further than load development to see if it possible either.

 

[Walkalong]

Another factor we are seeing with pistol loads at 50/100 yards is vertical stringing from bullet drop

The first time I ever shot .38 Spl at 300 yards it was a real eye opener. That is when I started chasing more consistency in ES, SD, as well as the difference in powder back vs powder forward. If you are going to shoot pistols at long distance you need to get the powder in the same position every single time.

Many 9MM loads are 100% fill which helps, but they can still have too big ES numbers for shooting longer distances.

Here is a sample of some numbers. Mostly pretty good.

 

[Dudedog]

Walkalong,
Word doc?
Tired to open it and got garbage.
(Could be I am just having on of those days though)

 

[joneb]

When I conducted my initial 50/100 yard carbine load testing with 5 round groups, jmorris questioned the validity of 5 round groups

I sighted in the scope, I took three shots at the target and noticed chips of glass and on the third shot the cross hairs broke.

the premise of this thread is primarily about 9mm carbine loads to replace 22LR plinking loads

Sorry the thread title threw me off.

Carbine load testing with mixed range brass/plated bullets in 9mm-40S&W-45ACP

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

The first time I ever shot .38 Spl at 300 yards it was a real eye opener. That is when I started chasing more consistency in ES, SD, as well as the difference in powder back vs powder forward. If you are going to shoot pistols at long distance you need to get the powder in the same position every single time.

Many 9MM loads are 100% fill which helps, but they can still have too big ES numbers for shooting longer distances.

Here is a sample of some numbers. Mostly pretty good.

Yes it makes more sense when you look at load consistency and load accuracy just like you do in a rifle load. Changes in fps that is low to begin with should affect the vertical string fairly easy.

That did not hit me when bds mentioned the vertical string but it makes worlds of since. I had tunnel vision on the load as it pertains to powder and light vs heavy loads when the vertical string should have been the easiest and most obvious thing to look at first as a means to tighten the groups up.

I'm not looking to go all out to get a load i want. Its not the goal to trickle powder loads and working loads off of vibration nodes. Heck if you go that far why not separate the brass and load by head stamp too. Not going to do that. But its interesting to think about is all. And maybe some bored day i may decide to do that. But that is not on my list at all at the moment.

After all it seems that picking one round and working on finding one load with a little more care when workup by going .1gr at a time could possibly get the desired accuracy I'm not getting yet i would think? At least vertically.

I got a little scope mounted today. Test some accuracy tomorrow. Now that i will be able to alleviate the poor eyesight that is. If it improves enough il use a load i have already worked up and see what i get. Go from there.

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

Oh by the way i done even know if a pistol caliber carbine has a vibration node. I realized i put that in my last post. Must have drifted a little talking about loading for accuracy and all. Time for some rest before i start seeing little blue bunny rabbits, or worse start up conversations with one!

 

[Walkalong]

Word doc?

Yes. I could not upload a .docx, so I changed the extension to .doc, and it still worked for me. See if this is readable.

 

[LiveLife]

Another factor we are seeing with pistol loads at 50/100 yards is vertical stringing from bullet drop

The first time I ever shot .38 Spl at 300 yards it was a real eye opener. That is when I started chasing more consistency in ES, SD, as well as the difference in powder back vs powder forward. If you are going to shoot pistols at long distance you need to get the powder in the same position every single time.

Many 9MM loads are 100% fill which helps, but they can still have too big ES numbers for shooting longer distances.

working on finding one load with a little more care when workup by going .1gr at a time could possibly get the desired accuracy I'm not getting yet i would think? At least vertically.

Oh by the way i done even know if a pistol caliber carbine has a vibration node.

Very good points.

So for carbine loads, we may need to factor in variables we normally don't worry about for pistol loads:

Bullet drop - Smaller variations in velocities will reduce group size. Will try more powder/charge combinations to determine which loads produce smaller SD/ES numbers.

Powder case fill - This may explain why I got smaller groups with fluffy Promo than denser HP-38. For auto pistols, when the rounds are chambered, all the powder charge is slammed forward towards the bullet away from the primer. I will do some calculations with max case fill vs bullet seating depth and see if bullets loaded to max case fill improves SD/ES.

While I did not post this info, did some preliminary chrono/accuracy testing with different OAL from 1.130" to 1.160" with 115/124 gr bullets. While I anticipated greater accuracy from longer OAL (thinking less gas leak for PSA barrel with long leade), results were mixed. I think longer OAL with denser powders would worsen the effect of powder forward where primer is going off with no powder granules nearby.

Barrel harmonics - Just Right carbine has free-floating barrel so I can better test for barrel harmonics/timing.

I wonder if doing the Ladder Test and/or Optimal Charge Weight testing for carbine loads may be beneficial? I am working with several powders so perhaps I can do ladder/OCW testing with one or two powders.

 

[RecoilRob]

I think your assumptions on sonic/trans-sonic are right on the money. My Ruger PC9 doesn't shoot the light bullets well at 100yds at all. But, load it with a cast Lyman 154 RNBT and it groups really well and certainly much better. This load with 3.8 231 doesn't exceed 1050 at the muzzle so it's sub the whole way, and the boat-tail helps the bullet fly with less drag vs the flat bases.

If you're going supersonic, you GOT to keep it over the Mach to the target! Have seen this with long range 50 BMG shooting where the max range you can hit accurately is just before whatever bullet you're using drops below the Mach. Really dramatic to see what happens with just another 100yds too far.

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

Very good points.

So for carbine loads, we may need to factor in variables we normally don't worry about for pistol loads:

Bullet drop - Smaller variations in velocities will reduce group size. Will try more powder/charge combinations to determine which loads produce smaller SD/ES numbers.

Powder case fill - This may explain why I got smaller groups with fluffy Promo than denser HP-38. For auto pistols, when the rounds are chambered, all the powder charge is slammed forward towards the bullet away from the primer. I will do some calculations with max case fill vs bullet seating depth and see if bullets loaded to max case fill improves SD/ES.

While I did not post this info, did some preliminary chrono/accuracy testing with different OAL from 1.130" to 1.160" with 115/124 gr bullets. While I anticipated greater accuracy from longer OAL (thinking less gas leak for PSA barrel with long leade), results were mixed. I think longer OAL with denser powders would worsen the effect of powder forward where primer is going off with no powder granules nearby.

Barrel harmonics - Just Right carbine has free-floating barrel so I can better test for barrel harmonics/timing.

I wonder if doing the Ladder Test and/or Optimal Charge Weight testing for carbine loads may be beneficial? I am working with several powders so perhaps I can do ladder/OCW testing with one or two powders.

I wonder too about ladder testing. My concerns were that SD in a pistol load requires more like .03-.05gr accuracy in charge weights to keep sd numbers tight. At that point does picking out a few cases with the same head stamp add a little more precision achieving the load desired?

It seems do to the smaller chamber size that any discrepancy will be magnified compared to an accurate rifle round and that may be the very problem we face. If that's the case then tuning powder weight, use same brass, using bullets with smaller weight deviation, and tuning oal to withing .001-.002" deviation just might be the key to good accuracy. But to do that on a regular basis is a little beyond my goals. For testing cases...yeah maybe. For regular loads...no way.

My thought was to stick with load first and tighten it up and be happy with that. But if curiosity gets the best of me i may chase the rabbit just to see where it lives.

 

[LiveLife]

But if curiosity gets the best of me i may chase the rabbit just to see where it lives.

When I approached carbine load testing with plated bullets, I did not anticipate jacketed bullet level of accuracy but so far, results are promising and I too am curious, especially with 100 gr bullets pushed to 1400-1450 fps which should stay supersonic to 50-100 yards.

I am planning to test slower burning powders but if 100 gr bullet can produce accurate loads with Red Dot/Promo, I will be happy.

Looking forward to the next range session in about 2 weeks.

 

[LiveLife]

Got time off from work for Easter weekend for another range test. For this range trip, as Walkalong suggested, lighter 100 gr bullet load was compared to reference 115 gr load and these two supersonic loads were tested in 17" Just Right carbine with 9mm barrel/Glock magazines.

- 100 gr RMR HM RN @ 1.050" with 5.2 gr HP-38
- 115 gr RMR HM RN @ 1.130" with 4.8 gr HP-38


Notes:

- Mixed range brass reloaded several times by me were used (mostly WIN/.FC. etc.)
- For .356" sized RMR HM RN, .378" taper crimp was used instead of .377" taper crimp used on previous tests to lessen reduction of bullet diameter
- 115 gr bullet was seated deeper (1.130" instead of 1.135" used on previous tests) for more consistent chamber pressures/muzzle velocities
- 100 gr bullet was seated to 1.050" which was seating as much of bullet base inside the case neck
- Groups were shot with bipod using 4-16x40 AO IR CenterPoint scope
- Caldwell chrono was used at 15 feet, ambient temperature mid 50's F


Range Report:

100 gr RMR HM RN 5.2 gr HP-38: 1459-1424-1423-1465-1413 fps
115 gr RMR HM RN 4.8 gr HP-38: 1275-1263-1253-1290-1248 fps

Kudos to Walkalong as I hadn't planned on using lighter than 115 gr bullet for carbine load testing as lighter bullets would approach and exceed 1500 fps rating of thicker plated bullets (with anticipated reduction of accuracy). To keep 100 gr RMR HM RN muzzle velocities around 1400-1450 fps, I guesstimated 5.2 gr of HP-38 (Hodgdon data 5.1-5.5 gr start/max for .355" FMJ @ 1.050") and chrono data ranged 1413-1465 fps (It's nice when things work out).

Higher muzzle velocities also flattened bullet trajectory. Once the scope was zeroed at 50 yards, 100 yard groups showed less bullet drop. POA was 2" below top of 8.5"x11" paper and 100 gr load hit top 2/3 of paper while 115 gr load hit center of paper.

50 yard 10 shot groups showed 1" horizontal spread with vertical stringing (not sure about that flyer with 100 gr load but I AM using mixed range brass ). Once the CenterPoint scope was zeroed, the JR carbine became a tack driver and definitely achieved "minute of soda can" I was looking for. I can't go any shorter with 100 gr bullet but can try shorter 1.125" with 115 gr bullet to see if I can get more consistent muzzle velocities to reduce vertical stringing.

While 100 gr load at 100 yards became a pattern, I was happy to see 115 gr load starting to group with plausible vertical stringing (see blue line). On next range trip, will test 115 gr at shorter 1.125" to see if vertical stringing decreases. Will also consider upping the powder charge to 4.9/5.0 gr for higher velocities.


Impressions:
On the next range trip, will test PSA carbine with the same loads to see if the tighter 50 yard groups was due to the "arrow vs bow" (100 yard testing definitely requires more practice from this "indian" ). Since PSA carbine was tested with Bushnell Sportsman scope, I will use the CenterPoint scope with PSA carbine on the next range trip.

So far, I am happy with the progress being made with mixed range brass and plated bullets. My mixed 9mm brass are mostly once-fired Winchester/Federal etc. brass shot multiple times in KKM/Lone Wolf 40-9 conversion barrels and as indicated on post #27, can produce tighter groups than once-fired .FC. headstamp cases with occasional flyers - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=10213018#post10213018

So how can mixed range brass produce tighter groups (with occasional flyers) than once-fired same headstamp brass? Most of my 9mm plinking loads are loaded with 124/125 gr bullets and 4.0 gr charge of Red Dot/Promo which is not a light load on par with max jacketed load data. Answer to the question may require another myth busting but my guess is that brass is reaching same level of work hardening to produce consistent enough chamber pressures.

As to plated bullets, I am growing more impressed with RMR Hardcore Match thick plated bullets. For 9mm carbine loads, main objective was identifying cheaper loads to replace 22LR plinking loads (essentially similar cost to reload) and while I was looking at 115 gr bullet for lowest cost reloads, 100 gr bullet approaching 1500 fps limit may be an option with even less bullet drop. Next range trip will test 100/115 gr bullets with Red Dot/Promo in the JR carbine.

Once the most accurate 100/115 gr loads are identified, I will next focus on 124/147 gr loads.

 

[LiveLife]

While PSA carbine has 1:10 barrel twist rate, the JR carbine has 1:16 twist rate (common to most aftermarket match pistol barrels) and Guns & Ammo article reported 1.2" 50 yard 5 shot group with 115 gr ammo, 2.3" with 124 gr ammo and 1.15" with 147 gr ammo - http://www.gunsandammo.com/reviews/jr-american-flag-carbine-review/

Wilson Combat recently changed the barrel twist rate from 1:10 to 1:16. But S&W changed the barrel twist rate of 9mm M&P from 1:18.75 to 1:10. Personally, I prefer slower twist rate for 9mm as 1:20 KKM barrel outshoots 1:16 Lone Wolf and 1:10 Glock barrels with 115/124 gr bullet weights - http://www.schuemann.com/Portals/0/Documentation/Webfile_Barrel Twist Rate.pdf

I wonder if the 1:10 vs 1:16 barrel twist rate between PSA and JR carbines is another variable that needs to be factored for lighter 100/115 gr loads?

 

[Walkalong]

I would assume so, it's a big difference.

My RRA is 1 in 10 if it is the same as what they advertise on the website today. I really do need to do some formal 100 yard testing with a scope, but I do know my 124 Gr load will pop clay pigeons all day long at that distance with the red dot that completely covers them. I haven't shot the 88 or 90 Gr loads at distance yet. Just barely starting with them. They are fun to shoot from a pistol.

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

It was my understanding that too much twist rate does not lead to inaccuracy and that this was debunked?

Also that not enough twist with a heavy bullet and accuracy is affected. If this is the case a 1 in 10 would be the better choice for accuracy?

 

[longdayjake]

This is an awesome thread. Thanks for doing the BDS. Have you tried pushing the velocity limits yet?

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

This is an awesome thread. Thanks for doing the BDS. Have you tried pushing the velocity limits yet?

I've got some fast ones loaded to near max using Power pistol that averaged over 1500 fps with some over 1550 but accuracy has been our nemesis. BDS seems like he's made much more headway than me in that area.

I guess that is the main concern is with loads. Its apparent that normal everyday pistol caliber loads in a carbine are not very accurate. Seeing no reason to be concerned with velocity if it doesn't translate to better groups at this point for me because its been done.


Besides whats a fast bullet that hits nothing? Lol

Anyway welcome aboard and i agree with the goals of the op and its something that i would love to see answered as best it can be within reason. After all having a 9mm rifle is less desirable without a little more accuracy than what i have accomplished thus far.

 

[Walkalong]

I have pushed the Remington 88 Gr JHP to nearly 1700 FPS from the RRA AR. I haven't chronoed the 90 in the AR yet. I am getting nearly 1500 FPS from a 5" 1911.

They get to the target in a hurry.

 

[LiveLife]

While PSA carbine has 1:10 barrel twist rate, the JR carbine has 1:16 twist rate ... I wonder if the 1:10 vs 1:16 barrel twist rate ... is another variable that needs to be factored for lighter 100/115 gr loads?

I would assume so, it's a big difference.

My RRA is 1 in 10 ... 100 yard ... I do know my 124 Gr load will pop clay pigeons all day long at that distance with the red dot that completely covers them.

I will be happy with minute of clay pigeons at 100 yards. My loads are currently at minute of paper plates and would love to reduce them down to minute of 2 liter bottles/clay pigeons.

It was my understanding that too much twist rate does not lead to inaccuracy and that this was debunked?

Also that not enough twist with a heavy bullet and accuracy is affected. If this is the case a 1 in 10 would be the better choice for accuracy?

On the next range trip, I will be verifying accuracy of 1:10 PSA barrel with same 100/115 gr loads. With the groups I got at 50/100 yards, the slower 1:16 JR barrel seems to sufficiently stabilizing the lighter bullets with short bases.

Have you tried pushing the velocity limits yet?

I am planning to push the 100 gr bullets up to 1500 fps and slightly above with HP-38 to see how the bullets and accuracy do.

With 115 gr bullets, I am planning to retest higher velocity loads and keep them supersonic out to 100 yards (to avoid any transonic effects).

 

[Walkalong]

3N37........

Silhouette....... (+P)

Try some if you have it.

 

[LiveLife]

I do not have Silhouette/3N37 but have CFE Pistol/AutoComp which are comparable in burn rate.

For 100/115 gr loads, in addition to W231/HP-38 and Red Dot/Promo, I was planning to continue my testing with BE-86 along with Herco but will consider testing CFE Pistol/AutoComp.

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

Thought this would be interesting video. Seems someone tested some 9mm match ammo and the results were good from a carbine.
https://www.full30.com/video/1e0135153e67419496c94c1be9e50d86

May not be related directly to the cause because the ammo is specifically factory built for it but it definitely shows accuracy is possible.

 

[LiveLife]

Since the premise for my 9mm carbine plinking loads is to replace 22LR ammo at comparable cost, use of factory 9mm match ammo is out of the question and so is new brass. To maintain lower cost of reloads, mixed range brass must be used with lower cost plated bullets. I am going to get more flyers with mixed brass but getting smaller core groups with mixed brass compared to once-fired .FC. brass is good enough for me to keep using mixed brass with flyers.

I was hoping for minute of soda can at 50 yards and minute of 2 liter bottle/paper plate at 100 yards (due to bullet drop/vertical stringing) and quite happy with last range trip results at 50 yards as results were promising (Walkalong, I will continue to hope for minute of clay pigeons at 100 yards ).

Instead of 16" PSA carbine with 3-9x40 Bushnell Sportsman scope used on previous 50/100 yard tests, 17" Just Right carbine with 4-16x40 AO IR CenterPoint scope was used on this range test.

10 shot group on the left shows 50 yard initial testing with 100 gr RMR HM RN and 5.2 gr of HP-38 loaded to 1.050" at 1413-1465 fps. Hodgdon lists 5.5 gr max at 1.050" so I will be increasing powder charge in .1 gr increment to see if I can get more consistent muzzle velocities to reduce vertical stringing (I can get .1 gr increment from Pro Auto Disk using this mod - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=741988 )

10 shot group on the right shows continued testing with 115 gr RMR HM RN and 4.8 gr of HP-38. For this range trip, I decreased the OAL to 1.130" down from 1.160"/1.135" and got more consistent 1248-1290 fps. Since decreasing OAL produced more consistent muzzle velocities, I am going to test 1.125" on next range trip. For small case volume 9mm, slight reduction in OAL can have significant effect on chamber pressures.

To rule out difference in scope, I will use CenterPoint scope (I have two) with PSA carbine on the next range test. I will also test Promo loads on the next range test and thinking about using both Red Dot and Promo to see any difference in accuracy.

I was originally planning to test down to 115 gr bullet weight for 9mm carbine loads but thanks to Walkalong's suggestion of testing lighter bullets, I am happy to see small initial shot group with 100 gr RMR HM RN and look forward to further testing.