Disappointing Chronograph Results - Any Ideas?

[soonerboomer]

I went to the range today and shot various loads with my Shooting Chrony F1 Chronograph. Here were the results:

From Glock 26 (3.5" barrel):
9mm Blazer 115gr FMJ - 5 Shot Avg: 1061 fps
9mm Federal HST 147gr+P - 5 Shot Avg: 1045 fps

From Ruger SP101 (2.25" barrel):
.38Spl Reloads 158gr SWC - 5 Shot Avg: 732 fps
.38Spl+P Speer 158gr+P FMJ - 5 Shot Avg: 733 fps
.357 Reloads 158gr SWC - 5 Shot Avg: 1029 fps
.357 Fiocchi 125gr JHP - 5 Shot Avg: 1241 fps
.357 Remington 125gr JHP - 5 Shot Avg: 857 fps

I was impressed with the 9mm+P Federal HST loads. Very consistent and light recoiling. Perfect for my G26.
I also felt good about the .357 Fiocchi. Pretty decent velocity from a 2.25" barrel.
As for the .357 Remington Load? :banghead:
Disappointed to say the least! How could this be? The load felt fairly hot, but the numbers indicate a load more like .38Spl.
This is from a box of Remington UMC .357 Mag 125gr marked L357M1B. It's a 100 round pack that was purchased at WalMart.

Your ideas and thoughts are welcome.

After this, and a problematic new 870 Shotgun, I think I'm about done with Remington!

 

[pendennis]

I've always found Remington ammunition performing below their advertised ballistics. I tried it out in the 1970's, found it lacking, stopped buying it, and went to handloading. Their rifle brass seems sub-par, especially compared to Winchester. I've had two case head cracks using "normal" .308 loads, and a couple of stripped rims, so no more Remington brass. I've also had some Gun Club loads that failed to fire. Remington replaced them with no questions asked, and even replied to me the reason for the FTF.

Their firearms, however, are as good as I've ever owned. I own three Model 870's, and have never had a problem with them. I put over 50k rounds through a Model 1100 Skeet gun, and never had to replace a part. I own a Model XR100, chambered in .308. It shoots 1" @ 200 yards with handloads. I also own several Model 700's, and they are excellent shooters.

 

[NG VI]

The velocity on the 147+P HST is only five feet per second off it's listed velocity! No wonder Winchester recommends 147/180 grain bullets for shorter barreled guns. I don't put a huge stock in velocity/energy numbers, but I do think you should use loads that are up to the potential of the round.

Really just reinforces my fondness for the 147/147+P HST.

 

[OregonJohnny]

Ahhhh, the eye-opening experience of using a chronograph! I bought an F1 Chrony about a year ago when I realized that my reloads would never improve without putting them over a chronograph.

I would say my biggest surprise, out of all the guns and factory ammo and reloads I've tested, is the difference in velocity between a medium-length .357 (4"), and the short SP-101 (2.25") when using the same ammo.

Reloads with Winchester 296 (a notoriously slow-burning powder) that were doing 1,100 f/s from my 4" GP100 were doing 300-500 f/s from the 2.25" SP-101! All that unburned powder was coming out the end of the snub barrel as a big fireball.

As far as factory ammo, the most "honest" manufacturer ratings I've come across are from Buffalo Bore. If they say their round will do 900 f/s from a 5" barrel, it will do at least 900, probably more like 950. Their 180-grain .357 Magnum HCLFN round was still doing 1,250 f/s from my SP-101! I've tested 4 different BB loads from 6 different guns, and they've all exceeded BB's advertised velocities.

For very short barrels in revolvers, I'd look for factory ammo advertised as "short-barrel". These will burn much more efficiently in snubbies. I particularly like Speer's 124-grain 9mm+P Short Barrel in my Kahr CW9. I tested it at 1,100 f/s. That exactly matched the velocity of Remington Golden Saber 124-grain from my Beretta 92FS.

Keep in mind that when a manufacturer puts a velocity rating on the side of a box of .357 ammo, it's usually from an 8" test barrel. Same thing with .44 magnum ammo.

Edited to retract unnecessary Double Tap statement.

 

[Frank V]

I have also gotten velocities below what I expected from the Rem. 125gr semi jacketed HP .357. On 1-12-12 I got an avdrage of 1334.5fps from a 3" bbl & an ES. of 72fps. This ammo is probably over 15 years old though.

Were you chronographing about noon with the Sun directly overhead? I use a Chrony too & have noticed that when I'm chronographing near noon I often get funny readings. I think it's the Sun bearing directly down on the sky screens.
Frank

 

[Loosedhorse]

Although I've never personally tested it, I've heard Double Tap...

Well, there it is again. We have a thread saying that Remington is loading its .357 ammo--what?--at least 400 fps lower than a standard .357 load, and 600 fps (!) lower than the 1450 it's advertised at.

And yet the unethical ammo company is...Double Tap. Because "I've heard."

Well, I have bought from DT for years, and they are great. (So is Buffalo Bore, BTW.) And if anyone has an instance of DT's ammo performing 600fps less than advertised, please let me know!

BTW, I wouldn't be surprised at a "1450fps" .357 doing around 1200 (give or take a lot) out of a 2.5 inch barrel; but 850 is something else.

 

[HadEmAll]

Chronographs are great tools.

".357 Remington 125gr JHP - 5 Shot Avg: 857 fps"

I've shot that load out of a 4" GP100, a 3" SP101, and a sub-2" LCR. The average velocities for 5 shots out of each on a 55 deg F day were 1384 fps, 1334 fps, and 1255 fps. There is just no way it could have performed that much below spec.

I've shot the .38 Special +P equivalent UMC load out of my LCR, and it still rang up 910 fps out of the sub 2" barrel.

1. Do you still have the info for the 5 shots of that string in your chrony? Or did you record them? I'd first suspect that one or more of the shots registered a bogus number and that skewed the total before the divide by 5 happened. Sometimes a load with a high blast factor can cause the chronograph to get a bad read if the muzzle is too close.

My thoughts are you should repeat the test, making sure each shot registers a "believable" number. Might make sure you are at least 10 feet back.

 

[HadEmAll]

Going on to add that that UMC stuff, at least in the lots I've bought, is on a par velocity-wise with the Remington Express load that uses the same 125 grain SJHP bullet.

The UMC is in a brass case, the Remington nickled. The UMC has a dirty burning powder, the Remington much cleaner burning. I use the UMC for full bore magnum practice at the range, and carry the Remington in all my .357's.

Both of these loads were about 100 fps faster than the Fiocchi 125 grain SJHP load that I bought two 500 round lots of. One lot came in a brass case, the other a nickled case. I've had two dead primers out of the 400 that I've fired, and I reserve it for range ammo based on that. Pretty dirty also.

 

[HadEmAll]

"I have also gotten velocities below what I expected from the Rem. 125gr semi jacketed HP .357. On 1-12-12 I got an avdrage of 1334.5fps from a 3" bbl & an ES. of 72fps. This ammo is probably over 15 years old though."



Frank,

I'm guessing that January in Montana, if your experience was there. is pretty chilly.

The reason I say that is that when I first tried and chronographed Remington Express 125 grain SJHP .357 ammo, I got 1451 fps from my 4" GP100, and 1375 fps from my 3" SP101. This was on a 90 deg F day.

Later when I rechronographed it on a 55 deg F day, I was getting only 1375 fps from the 4" GP100 and 1322 from the 3" SP101. I was surprised to find that ambient temperature of the ammunition mattered that much.

 

[BCRider]

When you shot the Remington ammo did it feel more like the .38Spl which it matched in performance? That would tell you if the chrono went wonky or not. If it felt more like the .38 stuff then it shows that the chrono readings are OK.

As for temperature I can say with enthusiasm that some powder is greatly affected by temperature.

I bought out a bunch of reloading stuff from somebody's estate. With this load I got a bucket load of Bullseye so I tried to use it for EVERYTHING! ! ! ! But I found out the hard way after loading up about 2000 rounds of 9mm with 124gn jacketed bullets and bullseye that it gets really "soft" in the cold. I got tons of jams and stovepipes due to the soft recoil in the cold and wet. Yet take the same ammo indoors and let it warm up a little and it shot fine and cycled the gun with authourity. The loads were chrono'd indoors to give me a nice solid IPSC power factor of 130 to 132. Yet out in the cold I doubt they were getting up to even 100.

I ended up buying some factory ammo to get through the rest of the cold weather and then used the reload that summer when they were fine.

I'll be keeping the Bullseye for revolver rounds from now on...

 

[soonerboomer]

Thanks everyone for the input. With all that's been said, I think I'm experiencing some Chrono errors. I'm going to re-test the Remington load sometime soon when the weather gives me a break. Hopefully, I'll get some accurate results.

HadEmAll writes:
Do you still have the info for the 5 shots of that string in your chrony?...
Sometimes a load with a high blast factor can cause the chronograph to get a bad read if the muzzle is too close... Might make sure you are at least 10 feet back.

My 5 shots from this load came it at: 709, 933, 899, 874, 870.
Also, what you said about muzzle blast might be the issue. My snub Ruger shoots fireballs, and the Chrono was only about 5 feet from the muzzle. I'll try again at your recommended 10 feet.

BCRider writes:
When you shot the Remington ammo did it feel more like the .38Spl which it matched in performance? That would tell you if the chrono went wonky or not. If it felt more like the .38 stuff then it shows that the chrono readings are OK.

The Remington .357 Mag loads felt pretty much like .357 Mag loads. The recoil did not match the low velocity readings.

 

[HadEmAll]

I'm willing to bet a whole nickel the 10 feet muzzle to screens clears up your disappointment.

They don't put any flash retardant in the powder of that UMC ammo at all, and that, coupled with the short barrel and very hot load, could easily have your fireball 5 or more feet long. Chronographs work on an optical principle, and so do fireballs. LOL

Also make sure your chronograph is on a sturdy surface that doesn't rock around with the blast. Mine is a tabletop model, and I pack a couple of cartridge boxes on either side to steady it up.

Unless you got a batch that really slipped past any inspection at all, I'd be extremely surprised if the UMC doesn't exceed the Fiocchi in velocity as my tests resulted in.

 

[Frank V]

HadEmAll
It was cool, but not below zero. I'll test them again in the Spring. That ammo was some old issue ammo & probably at least 15 years old, though it's been stored under good conditions.
I did use a 3" bbl too, I'm not really disapointed in it. I think the 1" ( or more) shorter bbl than the test gun Remingon uses & the temperature might make the difference. I shot a Porcupine two weeks ago with it & one shot stiffened him right out. It's what I'm carrying in that gun.
Frank

 

[DBR]

A black Sharpie marker is your friend if you are chronographing bullets. Color the bullet completely black and readings will be more consistent.

 

[DoubleTapDrew]

Thanks everyone for the input. With all that's been said, I think I'm experiencing some Chrono errors. I'm going to re-test the Remington load sometime soon when the weather gives me a break. Hopefully, I'll get some accurate results.

You may want to try replacing the battery in the chrony. I had some erratic low fps readings in mine (even though the "low batt" indicator was not showing) and it solved the issue.

 

[Frank V]

I'll have to try the sharpie trick.
Frank

 

[RalphS]

I had the same problem with my Shooting Chrony being too close. I had some really low readings from a 38 snub nose but got normal readings from some other guns. My theory is that, with some guns and some loads, the muzzle blast reaches the chrony before the bullet does and the chrony gets fooled by the pressure wave. Moved my chrony out to 15 feet and the problem disappeared.

Some other things I've learned about chronographing loads - I get much better results when the chrony is mounted on a heavy, stable tripod. Flimsy tripods give lousy results. Also, unless the sun is shining directly onto the sensors and overloading them, I get better results without the sunscreens.

Lastly - get rid of the metal rods and make up some wood rods using dowels from Home Depot. When you hit the wood rod with a bullet, they just snap in two without damaging the chrony.

 

[Manco]

The velocity on the 147+P HST is only five feet per second off it's listed velocity! No wonder Winchester recommends 147/180 grain bullets for shorter barreled guns.

That's what I always recommend as well because a lighter bullet generally implies that more gas is generated, which in turn implies a greater reliance on barrel length to achieve the potential of the load. Conversely, heavier bullets are less reliant on barrel length, which makes them better suited, generally speaking at least, for short-barreled guns, provided that the velocity is still sufficient to make bullet expansion reliable (shouldn't be a problem with HST).

I don't put a huge stock in velocity/energy numbers, but I do think you should use loads that are up to the potential of the round.

Same here--defensive loads these days tend to have similar potential, by design, so living up to their potential then becomes the real issue with short-barreled guns.

 

[NG VI]

Manco! I haven't seen you on here in a hot minute, how've you been?

 

[chris in va]

The FBI uses a piece of plywood with a slit to cut down on muzzle blast errors.