Then what’s the issue?this load is VERY accurate.
Then what’s the issue?this load is VERY accurate.
Bullet = Hornady 115g HAP (excellent quality, and the pure narrowing cone ogive makes bullet seating more accurate)
I want 1300 fps or more muzzle velocity, and I don't want to have to use a "maximum load" to get it. VV 3N38 gives me that velocity halfway up the load table.
I have no other powders yet, and I don't think there is another powder that will give me the above velocity at mid-table number of grains of powder AND burn very clean (I get NO muzzle flash at all), AND run at comparatively low peak pressure (3N38 burns very slow, so the high velocity is a result of longer burn at lower peak pressure).
Jim G
It’s been long ago discontinued but I prefer HS-7 to 3N38. N350 might be worth a try too. I would have expected better out of 3N38 though, seems like an awful large ES using that powder.
I guess, at 8.0 grains, you are over their published maximum for 3N38 with any jacketed 115gn bullet they list.
https://www.vihtavuori.com/reloading-data/handgun-reloading/?cartridge=89
Isn't 3N38 typically used to make major power factor and such a high charge it results in a compressed load? Don't know - don't use that or try to make PF. Sounds like you're chasing velocity for some reason, but it seems you're also trying to do it staying short of major PF. Almost like you're copying what they (competitive shooter, 9mm major PF with a 115gr), but then scaling it back. I'd ask around the competitive guys who are using VV3N38 - the compressed load might be key with that combination?
I'm curious to your load data. VV3N38 doesn't trail that far behind HS-6 on burn rate chart (and I know there can big gaps just a few places apart), but 1300+ fps would be a very stout HS6 load so seems strange "midway up the load table" is pushing it that fast yet you'd have to darn near fill the case for 1400 fps. Or is your "data" some guy's major PF load (which would be +P+ at least) and you scaled back a few tenths? Maybe my brain isn't engaged today, but something doesn't add up or sound right - it sounds way too hot for a standard pressure load. A novice reloader is going to take a Hornady HAP + W231 and make exceptionally accurate rounds very quickly and stay at "typical" 115gr 9mm velocities. It's just not that difficult or complex a task.
Check out the Berry's 115g loads in the VV load tables on the website. I am midrange on powder in that load.
Bullet = Hornady 115g HAP (excellent quality, and the pure narrowing cone ogive makes bullet seating more accurate)
I want 1300 fps or more muzzle velocity, and I don't want to have to use a "maximum load" to get it. VV 3N38 gives me that velocity halfway up the load table.
I have no other powders yet, and I don't think there is another powder that will give me the above velocity at mid-table number of grains of powder AND burn very clean (I get NO muzzle flash at all), AND run at comparatively low peak pressure (3N38 burns very slow, so the high velocity is a result of longer burn at lower peak pressure).
Jim G
Berry’s are plated bullets, not jacketed. Are you using electroplated bullets?
That Berry's bullet also has a hollow bottom cavity where the XTP is flat. Interesting you are picking the one example of their 115gr 3N38 data that is the most dissimilar to the projectile you are using but discounting the other 2 115gr pill examples they publish that would be over max, but you think you are midrange.....
Anyway - the 'almost compressed' might be an issue. Totally different animal and stick powder, but 308WIN I had issues with 'almost compressed' - either not at all or crunch, but right there at what you might call slightly compressed gave me lots of unwanted variation. If your neck tension isn't real good, you can also have compressed loads kind of spring back and push the bullet out just a little.
Might not be a bad idea to re-check the variables you are inputting that calculate 25k PSI because that's around starting load for most anything else. Your gun, your fingers & eyes, do whatever you're comfortable with.....just sounds "off"
No I am using the Hornady HAP jacketed hollowpoint bullet, but the load has been vetted by Brad Miller.
Jim G
Have a link?
If it’s this one.
https://www.shootingtimes.com/editorial/fast-9mm-loads/388612
He is using hollow base plated bullets, not JHP.
View attachment 990324
Interesting he thinks two different bullets one has a hollow point, the other a hollow base, seated to the same depth and have exposed surfaces of two different materials comply with one another pressure wise.
In any case, if you are following his advice, you might try the 5.7 grains of 3N37 load. much closer to the same bullet you are using and far more accurate, in his tests, than anything else...and you’ll get another 353 rounds out of a pound of powder vs your 8.0 grain charge.
Fixed it, the only one he had under an inch at 25. The XTP and HAP are much closer to an apples to apples comparison than either to any plated bullet. If you don’t believe me just buy a box of them and let us know what you think after you shoot them.
View attachment 990340
1. It takes the MAXIMUM load in the VV table to achieve the 1300 fps, which means it is at or near SAAMI limit for pressure at 1300 fps.
3. In too many of my groups, 4 out of 5 shots are in the same 0.6X" range as Brad's 3N37 accuracy results, suggesting strongly to me that the 5th shot is MY problem, not the load's problem, especially since the 5th shot is NEVER part of a symmetrical pattern. Michael Ransom told me that if the pattern fired on a Ransom rest...
I didn't read that as a suggestion to change your bullet, but to use load data for an XTP which is so extremely close in construction to the HAP that you can call them same thing. I did same above not even thinking about it as i make no distinction in my loads for a HAP or XTP. VV used a wide array of bullets for their website 9mm load guide. The only XTP load that VV lists, so they incldued only one load for the XTP. That low requires maximum powder charge to reach 1300 fps. That was counter to my insistence on NOT using a maximum load.
One could also easily make the leap your intent is to interchange them at some point or you wouldn't be trying for so much muzzle velocity outside of PF consideration. Assumption, but many problems here are diagnosed by super smart and greatly experienced people (like J Morris) diving into the 'why' someone is doing it beyond the technical of 'what' they are doing. I think above is an excellent illustration of that - he gave you an alternative based on the 'why'. My "why" is easy but not understandable by most shooters and especially not by shooters who are competitive: I don't like to "game" the rules by shooting powderpuff loads that barely meet the rules of a shooting game. I like to shoot loads that more honestly simulate what a shooter wanting honest stopping power in the real world would use. Part of the reason for that attitude I suppose is that I worked at a law enforcement agency for a while and heard the stories from street officers. I came to understand the wisdom of handgun loads like the 9mm 115g 1300+fps and the 357 SIG 125g 1400 fps. The 9m 115g HAP at 1300+ fps is the easiest, and most cost effective way, to get those kind of ballistics, and the VV 3N38 is the only powder I've found that can deliver those 9mm ballistics at safe pressures, and with superior accuracy from my SIG P210A Target pistol.
I didn't realize you were using a Ransom rest. See my Post 47 above. What is the ultimate goal for the load? See text above. What type of shooting? IPSC. Reason I ask, is what is recoil impulse like with your load? Recoil impulse is VERY MILD. I don't even notice it. It's a pussycat compared to other loads I have fired, and that attests to its low pressure. I don't have a P210 37 oz. but some similar size and weight like Shadow2 & X5 Legion. In a heavy, accurate, fast pistol like that, not only do I want an extremely accurate load, I want something that takes full advantage of all that weight and has lower perceived recoil. I want to run it as fast as a .22 and just transition targets as if I were using a nerf gun Otherwise, I don't particularly want to be holding something that heavy for long periods. I don't find 37 oz to feel heavy at all.
A bit ironic noting the cost difference between an XTP and a HAP when you're using powder that costs 1.5x as much and then using almost 2x as much charge. But regardless, yes stick with the HAP. Hey, powder cost even with the VV 3N38 premium price is still only $.059 Canadian out of $.401 Canadian TOTAL cost per round! The difference in cost for the XTP bullet would raise the total cost per round to $.52 Canadian! I pay attention to where the REAL costs are!
Another note/question - have you tried 124gr or 147gr projectiles? No, not yet at least. But if I am getting great accuracy, 400 to 450 ft lb of muzzle energy, modest recoil, and relatively low cost per round, why would I go looking for a heavier load which would automatically cost more and provide less kinetic energy versus what I have? (Having read and heard the officer street reports about stopping power, I am a firm believer in KE stopping power versus "larger holes" stopping power) I have a lot of Sigs. Anything larger than P365/P938 of mine prefer 124gr over 115gr for group size. It's not uncommon for me to go thru a 30 cal can of 9mm in a month so I use 115gr mostly for the economy of it, but i don't buy HAP or XTP projectiles in 115gr because for me it defeats the purpose of an accuracy load. They work fine, I just get better results with a 124 or 147gr projectile in any pistol I'd try to group as tightly as possible.
How smooth is your 750 cycling? i have a 650 and even playing with different thrust bearings, phenolic balls, roller bearings, etc. it just 'snaps' from station-to-station a bit too much that it will spill specs of powder from a 9mm case - and I'm filling them a lot less than you are. Just curious how much better they did with the 750 The XL750 is a LOT smoother and of course operator technique is a big part of getting smoothness. You can see from my cartridge measurements in posting 1 that I do have a pretty good consistency in my loading which is only possible with good technique.
JMorris: In the Ransom rets fired target you show in Posting 46, the group illustrates the very issue I have been talking about: The group is so oddly shaped that it clearly does NOT represent the limitations of either the firearm or the ammunition.
There is both a horizontal stringing AND 2 "flyers" that are clearly separated from the rest of the group.
There's likely something wrong with the setup of the ransom rest. It could be: