HANDLOADING 25ACP

[RyanM]

I think Clark's data is pretty useful in determining what the real danger area is when reloading. We all hear all these horror stories about guns blowing up, and then the person that blew up the gun always claims that it must have been due to a small error. Then Clark goes and does something insane, like putting .357 magnum overcharge loads through a .38, and proves that a small error usually won't blow you up, despite the horror stories.

Looking at all the crazy overloads Clark and others have done, it looks like in many cases, not even a double charge is sufficient to blow a gun up. With lots of powders and calibers, it's physically impossible to jam enough powder into the case to cause a catastrophic failure.

The main reasons to stick to published load data is not to keep from blowing yourself up, which usually requires an insane overload, but to keep your gun from battering itself to death, keep the bore from getting prematurely eroded, and keep your hands from getting bruised. There are some exceptions, like Hodgdon Universal and Winchester Super Field, but you can usually find info about what powders genuinely are unpredictable.

If anything, Clark's data is useful because it establishes how safe or unsafe a powder is in a certain cartridge. You can look at Clark's antics and go "oh, Bullseye looks like a very safe powder to reload .25 ACP with, because it's physically impossible to blow up a quality, all-steel gun with it, even if I somehow accidentally put in such an insane amount of powder that it requires double compression to get it all in there, and resizing the case again after the bullet is seated to make it chamber in my gun" or "gee, the Colt 1908 Pocket Hammerless .380 is a pretty good gun to reload for. Even if I accidentally use a .357 magnum overload in it, it won't blow into pieces."

 

[jjk308]

I think Clark's data is pretty useful in determining what the real danger area is when reloading. We all hear all these horror stories about guns blowing up, and then the person that blew up the gun always claims that it must have been due to a small error. Then Clark goes and does something insane, like putting .357 magnum overcharge loads through a .38, and proves that a small error usually won't blow you up, despite the horror stories.

"

Clark isn't discovering anything new and exciting, he's just eating up the designed margin of safety, and has been very lucky so far. One of these days he's going to try it in a firearm that has something wrong with it and he'll discover the true meaning of factor of safety. I do however agree that most of those likely weren't "small errors", but big whopping ones like a double stroke with Bullseye or Unique. Somehow these blowups never happen with factory ammo, unless the barrel is obstructed.

http://www.mywiseowl.com/articles/Factor_of_safety

Factor of safety (FoS), also known as Safety Factor, is a multiplier applied to the calculated maximum load (force, torque, bending moment or a combination) to which a component or assembly will be subjected. Thus, by effectively "overengineering" the design by strengthening components or including redundant systems, a Factor of Safety accounts for imperfections in materials, flaws in assembly, material degradation, and uncertainty in load estimates. An alternative way to use the safety factor is to derate the strength of the material to get a "design" strength.

Sdesign = Syield / FoS
Sdesign = Sproof / FoS
An appropriate factor of safety is chosen based on several considerations. Prime considerations are the accuracy of load and wear estimates, the consequences of failure, and the cost of overengineering the component to achieve that factor of safety. For example, components whose failure could result in substantial financial loss, serious injury or death usually use a safety factor of four or higher (often ten)*. Non-critical components generally have a safety factor of two. An interesting exception is in the field of Aerospace engineering, where safety factors are kept low (about 1.15 - 1.25)** because the costs associated with structural weight are so high. This low safety factor is why aerospace parts and materials are subject to more stringent testing and quality control.

A Factor of safety of 1 implies no safety at all. Hence some engineers prefer to use a related term, Margin of Safety (MoS) to describe the design parameters. The relation between MoS and FoS is MoS = FoS - 1.

Example
In construction engineering the tensional stress ó is defined as ó = F / A where F is the force acting on the element and A is the cross sectional area. From laboratory testing it is known what the actual failure tensile stress ómax of materials is. To find the minimum safe cross section of an element, the force acting on the element is multiplied with the safety factor ã, (its magnitude depending on building codes and regulations). The minimum cross section is then found using Amin = F · ã / ómax

*A loaded locked firearm is a very simple mechanism, nearly foolproof and very durable, so a safety factor of no more than 3 is usually considered acceptable in spite of the risk of "serious injury or death".

**1.5 to yield load for aircraft, plus whatever the structural designer can cram in to avoid failure, after he fights off the weights engineer (me) who wants to lighten it.

 

[David4516]

Lets clear something up here: .25 ACP factory ammo is NOT CHEAP.

I just paid $18 for a box of 50gr FMJs. I think they were Remingtons.

Alot of .25 auto ammo only comes in boxes of 20, not the standard 50. But looking at the price tag you'd think you should get 50 rounds...

I handload for .25 ACP, sometimes. It is a difficult round to load for, so I don't do it often. As a result my Bereatta 950 "Jetfire" has put as many factory rounds downrange as it has my handloads.

Speaking of handloads, I'll share what I've learned about loading for the .25 First off, I have to agree with other posters that Bullseye is a good powder.

Secondly, it's better to load with 35 gr bullets (not the 50s) because you can use a larger powder charge. The smallest charge of Bullseye that my measure will meter correctly every time is 1.7gr, thats a good load for 35gr JHPs, but a little "hot" for 50gr FMJs (or at least thats what the loading manuals tell me). If I want to load those 50gr bullets, I have to whip out the powder trickler and scale and weigh each charge individually. If I load the 35gr bullets, I can "mass produce".

Thirdly, and I think somebody already mentioned this, but when you go to collect your brass it's hard to pick out the .25s from all the .22s laying on the ground. It's also hard find brass to buy for .25 ACP, all my brass comes from fired factory rounds. So if you're at the range and you see alot of .25's on the ground/floor, pick them up. Even you don't load for .25 ACP now, you might in the future, and if you do you'll be glad you kept all that brass. I used to throw away my .25 brass, and now I really regret it...