Crimping 9mm Not Required?

[CQB45ACP]

And... understand... I'm not trying to bust your chops. I really do think you've found a magical combination of bullet/die/case that sure looks like it's working well for you. If you are able to remove one step of your process, particularly on a single-stage (been there, done that...) and still getting the results you want... more power to you.

Didn’t think you were. I appreciate the input and that’s why I’m on THR forum.

 

[CoalTrain49]

I do not "crimp" any semi-auto handload. I just use a "deflaring die" (aka; "taper crimp die") to remove flare and enable good plunking. I haven't measured any case mouths of my handloads in a very long time, but often (99% of the time) there is no real swaging of the case. Neck tension holds the bullets in place. I started reloading 45 ACP in about '86 and 9mm about '90 and 32 ACP, and 380 ACP later. None of my handloads have been crimped, just deflared. No feeding/recoil "pushbacks". Early on I double checked often (fired a round, removed and measured the next fed round). Many mistakes are made by newer reloaders crimping their semi-auto handloads (over crimping , swaging bullets and bulging cases, "loosening" neck tension are common).

Maybe re-loaders would be better served if the industry would stop calling these dies taper crimp dies as you suggest.

I think too many people assume these dies are designed to hold a bullet in place like a roll crimp die. They won't no matter how much you crush a bullet. If you have a revolver that shoots 45 APC ammo you will understand that posthaste. That's why bullet manufacturers make 45 APC bullets with a crimp groove for a roll crimp. Some revolvers will pull bullets without a roll crimp.

Most people flare their cases and need to deflare. Probably because they use different bullets occasionally and don't want to be continually adjusting their expander die. Personally, I don't like to adjust dies if I can avoid it. I have a die set for every cartridge I load.......if someone makes it. So far I haven't found a dedicated die set for 38 Short Colt. Must not have hit the CAS crowd yet.

 

[CQB45ACP]

Everything shot just fine today at the range. 90 rounds w/out taper crimp. So it’s now upwards of 300 total.

Still going to do the @Charlie98 test when I have time.

Since I’m a very small batch loader, using (or not) a crimp stage isn’t an issue one way or the other. The T-7 is always ready to go.

 

[murf]

If your reloads will feed and function in your gun 100 percent, I see no need to crimp (or "deflare").

As to "setback" worries, I run all my 9mm cases through a 380 acp sizing die (redding in my case) right after the normal 9mm sizing (size down to just past where the base of the bullet is going to wind up). This will create a "shelf" in the case for the bullet to sit on (even for those skinny r-p cases). This has solved my neck tension/setback issues.

luck,

murf

 

[CQB45ACP]

If your reloads will feed and function in your gun 100 percent, I see no need to crimp (or "deflare").

As to "setback" worries, I run all my 9mm cases through a 380 acp sizing die (redding in my case) right after the normal 9mm sizing (size down to just past where the base of the bullet is going to wind up). This will create a "shelf" in the case for the bullet to sit on (even for those skinny r-p cases). This has solved my neck tension/setback issues.

luck,

murf

I’ve never heard of that before. Have you started a food fight by revealing it here?

 

[Charlie98]

Didn’t think you were. I appreciate the input and that’s why I’m on THR forum.

Just wanted to make sure; sometimes it's hard to tell the tone from a post.

Actually... I may try that meself. I've noted the difference pulling rifle bullets, and roll-crimped handgun bullets... I don't know if I've ever pulled something like a .45 bullet crimped... er... with the taper removed, vs non-taper removed.

Lots of bullets out there compromised by “crimps” swaging them to different outside diameters and in the case of plating, it helps the plating detach fro the lead too.

If you have a revolver that shoots 45 APC ammo you will understand that posthaste. That's why bullet manufacturers make 45 APC bullets with a crimp groove for a roll crimp. Some revolvers will pull bullets without a roll crimp.

I learned about swaging down a bullet when I started loading cast in rifle... and what a fantastic thing the M-die (et al) is. .348WCF brass is thick... I know I was swaging my cast bullets down at first.

Autoloading cartridges in a revolver is sort of an oddity... maybe 'oddity' isn't the right word, how about 'not commonplace?' How you load a cartridge for one pistol (a semi-auto...) would be different than loading it for a revolver. I would not want to run roll crimped .45's in a auto. I understand .45ACP bullets moving under revolver recoil, I'm wondering about full-house 9mm in a revolver... is there enough of a recoil impulse to pull a bullet?

 

[murf]

I’ve never heard of that before. Have you started a food fight by revealing it here?

I enjoy stimulating the thought process. If this brings about an "animal house" reaction, so be it!

murf

 

[CoalTrain49]

Just wanted to make sure; sometimes it's hard to tell the tone from a post.

Actually... I may try that meself. I've noted the difference pulling rifle bullets, and roll-crimped handgun bullets... I don't know if I've ever pulled something like a .45 bullet crimped... er... with the taper removed, vs non-taper removed.






I learned about swaging down a bullet when I started loading cast in rifle... and what a fantastic thing the M-die (et al) is. .348WCF brass is thick... I know I was swaging my cast bullets down at first.

Autoloading cartridges in a revolver is sort of an oddity... maybe 'oddity' isn't the right word, how about 'not commonplace?' How you load a cartridge for one pistol (a semi-auto...) would be different than loading it for a revolver. I would not want to run roll crimped .45's in a auto. I understand .45ACP bullets moving under revolver recoil, I'm wondering about full-house 9mm in a revolver... is there enough of a recoil impulse to pull a bullet?

I'm wondering about full-house 9mm in a revolver... is there enough of a recoil impulse to pull a bullet?

IDK, I'll defer to those revolver shooters/loaders. I've never seen it or read anything that would indicate that it happens.

 

[Rule3]

Why should the industry change the name just because some folk on a forum what to batter about semantics
If a revolver round has a "crimp groove or a semi auto has a cannelure, then what?
Good grief, almost as bad as Restoration of Cartridge Brass ductility isn't annealing,

 

[Y-T71]

If your reloads will feed and function in your gun 100 percent, I see no need to crimp (or "deflare").

As to "setback" worries, I run all my 9mm cases through a 380 acp sizing die (redding in my case) right after the normal 9mm sizing (size down to just past where the base of the bullet is going to wind up). This will create a "shelf" in the case for the bullet to sit on (even for those skinny r-p cases). This has solved my neck tension/setback issues.

luck,

murf

Do they look like the pic of my XTP loads in post #25?

Over the years I've heard guys complain about Dillon dies doing that but I've always looked at it as a feature.

I'm curious about what I'm gonna run into with heavy 10mm loads out of my 610 revolver.

That cylinder is so long bullets could probably be pulled completely out of the case and still not tie up the cylinder.

 

[murf]

I'm wondering about full-house 9mm in a revolver... is there enough of a recoil impulse to pull a bullet?

IDK, I'll defer to those revolver shooters/loaders. I've never seen it or read anything that would indicate that it happens.

that used to be a problem with the lcr and reloads. Don't know if the problem has been solved.

murf

 

[mdi]

I had trouble communicating my "no crimp" method using a taper crimp die. So I just call my taper crimp dies "deflaring dies (aka taper crimp dies)" when explaining my preference. For a bunch of years I've I have deflared only, my semi-auto handloads and use my guns' barrels for a gauge...

 

[murf]

Do they look like the pic of my XTP loads in post #25?

Over the years I've heard guys complain about Dillon dies doing that but I've always looked at it as a feature.

I'm curious about what I'm gonna run into with heavy 10mm loads out of my 610 revolver.

That cylinder is so long bullets could probably be pulled completely out of the case and still not tie up the cylinder.

yes, that is exactly what the loaded rounds look like.

murf

 

[drband]

Everyday learn something new
No longer a taper crimp, it is a flair removal device

Grammar nazi says “it’s properly called a flare removal device.”

 

[higgite]

As to "setback" worries, I run all my 9mm cases through a 380 acp sizing die (redding in my case) right after the normal 9mm sizing (size down to just past where the base of the bullet is going to wind up). This will create a "shelf" in the case for the bullet to sit on (even for those skinny r-p cases). This has solved my neck tension/setback issues.

I’ve never heard of that before. Have you started a food fight by revealing it here?

Food fight! Food fight! You’re going to have to ‘splain that one to me. How do you get the lower part of the case smaller than the upper part by running it through a smaller sizing die? Seems like it would do just the opposite. What am I missing?

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

I enjoy stimulating the thought process. If this brings about an "animal house" reaction, so be it!

murf

Toga! Toga! Toga!

Like I said at the beginning, anybody who has ever loaded pistol or rifle rounds with a Lee Classic loader knows you don’t need to flare the case mouth to seat a bullet and you don’t need to use a crimp to get good neck tension. Sure, roll-crimps are a necessity for some situations and a taper crimp will surely smooth out the feeding on some guns. But if your guns and loads don’t need nor want such treatment, sally forth and lance yon windmill, Faere Knave!

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Everything shot just fine today at the range. 90 rounds w/out taper crimp. So it’s now upwards of 300 total.

Still going to do the @Charlie98 test when I have time.

Since I’m a very small batch loader, using (or not) a crimp stage isn’t an issue one way or the other. The T-7 is always ready to go.

Out of curiosity, how many 9mm pistols do you own and does the ammo work in all of them? I’m down to five, including my wife’s CZ’s, so I’m making ammo that works in all of them equally well. I have tried minimal neck treatments but the FEG and CZ’s choke on case mouths with the slightest ripple. The Star M43 and FIL’s S&W 659 pistols are the most accepting of case flaws. My old Star BM had such a generous chamber it would feed empties but the Star M30 was fussy. It just depends.

 

[murf]

Food fight! Food fight! You’re going to have to ‘splain that one to me. How do you get the lower part of the case smaller than the upper part by running it through a smaller sizing die? Seems like it would do just the opposite. What am I missing?

The i.d. of the case is sized smaller than the bullet diameter and, more important, smaller than the expander die diameter (which should always be smaller than the bullet diameter). Therefore, the bullet seating operation expands the upper part of the case to a greater diameter than the lower part, hence the strange look. It functions fine though, just funny lookin.

murf

 

[CQB45ACP]

Out of curiosity, how many 9mm pistols do you own and does the ammo work in all of them? I’m down to five, including my wife’s CZ’s, so I’m making ammo that works in all of them equally well. I have tried minimal neck treatments but the FEG and CZ’s choke on case mouths with the slightest ripple. The Star M43 and FIL’s S&W 659 pistols are the most accepting of case flaws. My old Star BM had such a generous chamber it would feed empties but the Star M30 was fussy. It just depends.

Seven, but have only shot one recently—a WC 1911. But this load and configuration is an old standby—115gr Extreme plated RN@ 1.135”
It’s just the new seater and close focus on crimping that’s different.

Have another 9mm 1911 I don’t shoot and five flavors of Beretta 92 only one of which I ever shoot and is my household defender. Beretta’s eat anything.

But for pandemic & VA’s newer background law I would’ve sold most all of em.

 

[lordpaxman]

I have a cutoff piece of 2x4 on my bench, measure the round, smack it as hard as I can 5 times leaving dents in the wood, measure again. I’ll accept up to three thou setback.
I do use a taper crimp die - that’s what’s printed on the box it came in. Since I load mostly range brass there’s varying degrees of crimp depending on how long the case is. Then they all go in the Shockbottle. If they pass, they get fired.
I mostly load 147 heavies, a mix of Blue bullets and RMRs.
If yours passes a case gauge, chambers and fires, without too much setback, have at it.

 

[CQB45ACP]

I have a cutoff piece of 2x4 on my bench, measure the round, smack it as hard as I can 5 times leaving dents in the wood, measure again. I’ll accept up to three thou setback.
I do use a taper crimp die - that’s what’s printed on the box it came in. Since I load mostly range brass there’s varying degrees of crimp depending on how long the case is. Then they all go in the Shockbottle. If they pass, they get fired.
I mostly load 147 heavies, a mix of Blue bullets and RMRs.
If yours passes a case gauge, chambers and fires, without too much setback, have at it.

“Smack as hard as you can” with what exactly? I can’t quite picture what you’re doing.

 

[Y-T71]

I'm gonna guess the piece of cutoff 2x4 mentioned in the 1st sentence.

 

[CQB45ACP]

Okay, this’ll add fuel to the fire.

Just did the @Charlie98 whack test with ten just assembled dummy rounds.

Five weren’t crimped while the other five had the least possible crimp (flare removal). The amount of crimp was how it “felt” not as a scientific measurement.

After seating alone, all rounds dropped freely in and out of my Wilson cartridge gauge so by that standard, none required said crimp or flare removal.

Using a Lyman kinetic hammer I attempted to use my typical moderate “whack” on a wood block. I kept everything as consistent as I could and seemed pretty successful. The results:

For the five NON-crimped rounds, four required just one whack to eject the bullet. One required two whacks.

For the five crimped rounds, two required just one whack to eject the bullet. Three required two whacks.

The picture shows the after test results with non-crimped on left and crimped on right.

Lack of damage to crimped bullets attests to the lightness of the crimp (flare removal). Ironically, I only see scratches on one non crimped bullet.

So make of this what you will. It’s not scientific nor certainly not of the @jmorris or @LiveLife caliber (pun intended).

If you feel so inclined you can snipe at this test but I don’t really care. It was what it was. Was kinda fun but did it change my mind? Who knows. I do know this—I was able to fine tune an FCD so it made contact without any visual damage to a plated bullet. Gotta give me props for that

 

[CQB45ACP]

I'm gonna guess the piece of cutoff 2x4 mentioned in the 1st sentence.

Sure big guy, but my confusion comes from I smack ON a piece of wood

 

[Charlie98]

Just did the @Charlie98 whack test with ten just assembled dummy rounds.

And this is my theory... regardless of what the instructions say: Any case mouth that that is turned into the bullet, but without deformation of the case wall, has to aid, mechanically, the force needed to dislodge the bullet either forward or backwards. You can get silly with it, like in jmorris' photo of the pulled bullets, and defeat the mechanical advantage of neck tension... and probably some of the potential accuracy... by overcrimping. I've destroyed .41MAG brass by smashing in the patented Charlie98 Death Grip Crimp... that was back in the Old Days before I understood neck tension. I also understand that a knetic hammer is not the same as firing a round out of a pistol... certainly there are dynamics in play there that are different.

In the 9mm, my main concern is bullet setback on feeding. The steep feedramp of my Kahr pistols really hammers the nose of the bullets, and at max or near max load, with something like TiteGroup, bullet setback could invite disaster. It's one of the reasons I segregate my 9mm brass by headstamp, because each headstamp, it seems, is different from the other in regards to neck tension and bullet seating. Just my observation, and my .02 worth.