Loading over SAAMI max COAL for 9mm

[MustGoFaster]

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The High Road, nor the staff of THR assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

The flowing post and specs listed are specific to MY Sig Sauer P225 9mm Luger pistol. This information should not be used with any other firearm! Potentially dangerous situations may occur if this information is used out of context.

That said, other than feeding issues and fitting in magazines are there any issues with loading 9mm Luger ammo over the SAAMI listed max COAL?

In my reading and research I've found that a number of rifle re-loaders say accuracy is improved my reducing the distance between the bullet's original position and the lands in the barrel of the firearm. The information I've found indicates 0.00" to .020" away from the lands is what a number of rifles like.

So following this bit of information, I decided to see how far the bullet had to jump in MY pistol. I found that a fired 9mm case had a reasonably snug fit onto a new, unfired Montana Gold 124gr CMJ projectile.

Starting the projectile into the case, and then pushing the case into the chamber of my barrel, I found that COAL of 1.210" would put the bullet on the rifling of my barrel. SAAMI max COAL is 1.169"

A round loaded at 1.210" will not fit into my factory magazines. 1.190" is the longest I can get to strip out of the magazine only by hand, and manually cycling the pistol, reliably.

So following the rifle reloading bit of wisdom, loading at 1.190 might produce better accuracy out of my pistol.

Other than lower pressures, feeding issues, and ammo loaded to the above COAL being potentially dangerous in other firearms, are there ANY dangers I'm missing? Possible "detonation" since the case volume is increased crossed my mind but with W231 powder I'm using, the case is always filled over the flash hole using anything within any of the factory load data I've found.

 

[Rule3]

Loading an handgun cartridge is not related to rifle cartridges. There is no advantage that I know of loading handguns just off the lands,

I would think that it would serve no purpose, is dangerous and probably not feed or chamber correctly.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Never have I heard of anyone loading semi-auto handgun ammo like a rifle with the bullet just off the lands. That doesn't mean it hasn't happened, I just have never heard of it. IMO if that would improve accuracy everyone would know about it.

Other than lower pressures, feeding issues, and ammo loaded to the above COAL being potentially dangerous in other firearms, are there ANY dangers I'm missing? Possible "detonation" since the case volume is increased crossed my mind but with W231 powder I'm using, the case is always filled over the flash hole using anything within any of the factory load data I've found.

To get to your questions, the low pressure can be easily addressed so that's not a issue. Feeding issues will probably be many but I doubt detonation will be a problem. I think W231 is a good powder choice.

My concern would be, the 9mm case is very short and under normal circumstances neck tension isn't a problem but with such a small amount of the bullet seated in the case I'm almost sure neck tension will be a problem. No amount of crimp will cure that. Without good neck tension you may not get a good burn on the powder and the bullet will probably leave the case before proper pressures are attained. Even worse would be bullet setback which can easily happen with inadequate neck tension. If the bullet does setback and it seats deep enough you can and will spike pressures. I think that will be your biggest problem, again IMO...

 

[rcmodel]

What he said.

There is nothing to be gained, and a lot to lose from seating that long.
Case neck tension to resist bullet set-back during feeding being one.

And enough 'rattle room' in the mag to prevent cartridge binding during rapid fire being another.

With a 9mm handgun, you are not at all interested in 100, or 500 yard accuracy.

You are, or should be most interested in a round that 4-F's in your gun.
(Feeds, Fires, & Functions Freely), in your gun.

That will seldom if ever be one loaded so long that will just barely fit in the magazine.
Nor will it be the shortest you can load it either.

rc

 

[MustGoFaster]

Great feedback guys! Those that mentioned bullet setback as an issue where certainly spot on. I made 8 dummy (one full magazine) rounds at 1.189-1.192.

Using my typical amount of crimp, 1.190 to 1.184 is what I got after cycling the rounds through manually twice. I haven't been able to measure any in any of my past tests/checks.

I find it interesting that the rifle info doesn't seem to apply to pistol loading. The components seem very similar, but perhaps the dynamics are not.

 

[rcmodel]

No, the dynamics are the same.

It's just the expected results that are completely different.

Like I said before, a 9mm combat grade handgun is not accurate enough to judge how accurate it is at long (rifle) range.

So go for close range 100% function over long range 'Gosh, I wish I could shoot a handgun well enough to tell the difference' accuracy.

Whatever difference seating to the lands in a combat grade 9mm is not noticeable to an average, or even a very very good pistol shooter at 50 yards or less.

rc

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Great feedback guys! Those that mentioned bullet setback as an issue where certainly spot on. I made 8 dummy (one full magazine) rounds at 1.189-1.192.

Using my typical amount of crimp, 1.190 to 1.184 is what I got after cycling the rounds through manually twice. I haven't been able to measure any in any of my past tests/checks.

I find it interesting that the rifle info doesn't seem to apply to pistol loading. The components seem very similar, but perhaps the dynamics are not.

It's an interesting idea but IMO not worth the trouble. Load to the SAAMI limits, check the rounds with the PLUNK test and then fire a bunch to insure 100% reliability.

BTW, give that 124gr bullet a try with 4.6gr to 4.8gr W231 and see how you like them with a COAL of 1.090" but I never load them that short. I load as long as the handgun will allow within the SAAMI specs.

 

[rfwobbly]

No, the dynamics are not the same.

One reason the dynamics (and thereby results) are not the same is this.... The people who load rifle rounds like this are taking 2 minutes to caress and kiss each rifle round, then lovingly and carefully slide the round into the bolt-action chamber before they slowly close the rifle's bolt.

Whereas the auto pistol round is being hammered out of a magazine, being slammed into a feed ramp, then bounced off the top of the chamber, then finally crammed home. All this within the matter of 200 milliseconds. The impact with the feed ramp alone is enough to knock the bullet off the cartridge axis. This means that when the cartridge finally seats into the chamber that the bullet is no longer on the axis of the bore. That can create a situation where the bullet leaves the barrel rotating about an axis that is not the axis of the bullet. That creates a wobbling motion in flight that is counter to everything that was the original intent.

IMHO, just the opposite tact must be taken with the auto pistol cartridge. You really want the bullet seated deeply into the case, so that the body of the bullet is more fully supported when it hits the feed ramp. In the instance of 9x19 Luger cartridges, OALs of 1.100 to 1.140 show much greater accuracy for me.

 

[rfwobbly]

No, the dynamics are the same.

It's just the expected results that are completely different.

One reason the dynamics (and thereby results) are not the same is this.... The people who load rifle rounds like this are taking 2 minutes to caress and kiss each rifle round, then lovingly and carefully slide the round into the bolt-action chamber before they slowly close the rifle's bolt.

Whereas the auto pistol round is being hammered out of a magazine, being slammed into a feed ramp, then bounced off the top of the chamber, then finally crammed home. All this within the matter of 200 milliseconds. The impact with the feed ramp alone is enough to knock the bullet off the cartridge axis. This means that when the cartridge finally seats into the chamber that the bullet is no longer on the axis of the bore. That can create a situation where the bullet leaves the barrel rotating about an axis that is not the axis of the bullet. That creates a wobbling motion in flight that is counter to everything that was the original intent.

IMHO, just the opposite tact must be taken with the auto pistol cartridge. You really want the bullet seated deeply into the case, so that the body of the bullet is more fully supported when it hits the feed ramp. In the instance of 9x19 Luger cartridges, OALs of 1.100 to 1.140 show much greater accuracy for me.

 

[Walkalong]

I was shooting steel at 100 yards with my favorite light 9MM load yesterday and the bullet needs a bus ticket to get to the lands.

Neck tension and still being straight in the case when the round is fired is important IMO.

Kissing the lands is not, again, IMHO, because I certainly cannot shoot well enough to prove it, or take advantage of it if it does.

The concerns voiced by previous posters are all valid IMO.

 

[Potatohead]

Interesting. +1 for thinking outside the box MustGoFaster. (safely)
I like the thinking behind it.


Now if I can get some investors to help with a prototype of my curved-a-hair-to-the-right trigger idea....I think it will duplicate how steady my front sight stays when I use my birdie finger to pull the trigger, while allowing me to use my pointer.
Walkalong, RC, how bout some of you guys' retirement account for a start-up??




No, I dont use my birdie to pull the trigger, but I have experimented-try it (dry fire). Sorry for off topic.

 

[sauer1911]

To load and shoot they way you describe, would be nice, but I am so far beyond the ability of my youth when I could take an iron sight .22 and just nick a dandelion stem to make it fall like a tree!

Now my shots need to be accurate at 5-10yds for home/personal defense, and they are.

I wish I could still shoot like I think I use to.

No need for me to push the envelope of reloading. I already had a backwards primer go pfffft. in a IDPA match. AND that was after checking and rechecking my ammo as I made it and loaded it.:banghead:

be safe, stay in the manufacturers recommended specs.

 

[MustGoFaster]

So, since I had the dies set from the dummy rounds I made 16 rounds up in the 1.190" range, MG 124gr CMJ, 4.6gr W231. They cycled fine, but no notable difference in accuracy was noticed.

I also shot 200 of my other more typical loads, with 1.167" and 1.105" lengths, all cycled fine, and I actually got fairly close to ripping the center out of the target with 24 rounds (3 mags) at ~25 feet. Even at 4.6gr the Magtec factory loads I had with me seemed a little hotter that what I loaded.

I also scored a bunch of brass from the shooters next to me, they asked for the broom to clean up and I said "if you don't keep your brass I'll take it". A decent mix of 9, .40, .223 / 5.56 and 38 special. First time I've asked any one for brass, big score, my back pack weighed more leaving than when I showed up. I need to buy dies for .38/357mag next I think.

 

[Nick93]

To me loading handgun ammo its plain simple, i just load to factory specs and shoot a variety of pistols.
In my experience the most accuracy and clean burn is at max of the loading chart, if I want a light factor load I use fast burning powders at max if I want hard hitting ammo just use slow burners at max, this way I always get maxium accuracy.

Reduced charges never produced as tight groups as full house charges for me. Extremely long OAL produced less accuracy because of low neck tension also, that is why most of the time a load maybe 0.010" longer than MIN OAL if not min, also you need more powder for the same speed and no impovement of accuracy doesent appeal to me.

just me 2 cents

 

[Clark]

Some 9mm pistols have short magazines and will not feed longer than the SAAMI 1.169" ammo:
Glock 19
Star M43
Kel-Tek P11
Kel-Tek PF9
Beretta 92
Star BM
S&W 659

Then there are 9mm pistols with long magazines I could convert to 9x23 and run 1.3" ammo:
CZ52
Tokarev
Star Super B


It is just like most 45acp magazines limit me to 1.275", but I can get 1.4" in an S&W 25-2.

 

[LeftyTSGC]

MGF, FWIW

I load 9mm for a STAR 30M. My primary load is 124gr MG FMJ 4.4gr W231 at OAL 1.150. Shoots accurate and gets me avg 1050fps velocity.

Here are some results i had in another thread.

Pistol: STAR 30M Semi Auto 9mm, Barrel 3.86in

Load Data: 124gr Montana Gold FMJ WSP, Win Brass 4.3gr W231,
OAL 1.150
50rds, AVG velocity 1023.95, STDEV 16.33, FT-Lbs Avg 288.
Hi-1042, Low 997, ES-52, PF Avg 133.0

Load Data: 124gr Montana Gold FMJ
WSP, Win Brass
4.4gr W231, OAL 1.150
50rds, AVG velocity 1057.8, STDEV 8.8, Ft-Lbs Avg 304
Hi-1081, Low 1042, ES-19, PF Avg 139.41

I have tested W231 from 4.3 to 4.6. I also started at SAAMI max 1.169. When i did the Plunk test my COAL is 1.178. Of course that did not feed well and would not allow a bullet to sit secure in the shell. So i tried 1.60 OAL it cycled well but after shooting I noticed that the accuracy whas not there compared to using 1.150. My reloading manuals state that a bullet to short may cause highpressure issues. Instead of all the posted OAL, i used the basic plunk test as described on numerous THR threads and found a OAL that works for me. Many of the newer semi autos have very short COAL that can be used compared to older or other handguns. I tried an ammo load of 124gr FMJ W231 at 4.5 and 4.6 using OAL of 1.090 as described in many reloading manuals, Was way to hot for my handgun , flattend primers and other signs of over pressure were evident. Not really sure of the effects of OAL going to long would produce besides cycling issues and accuracy. FWIW

 

[MustGoFaster]

Clark, thanks for the feedback on the guns taking longer than SAAMI ammo.

I thought it was a little odd that my pistol would take ammo that far over the spec. My roomate's Walther PPS wouldn't take my 1.190" loads, wouldn't fit in the mag and the bullet was on the rifling by about .010". Guess it's not that uncommon.

In general I didn't find it advantageous to load over SAAMI max COAL, even though my pistol cycled the rounds reliably, given the small sample.

 

[gamestalker]

With AL-ing handguns, I seat at the longest oal that will fit the magazine, clear the lands, and feed reliably, and provide adequate neck tension. Beyond that, there is no advantage in getting up close to the lands with an AL handgun bullet. The one SAAMI spec I do pay attention to with AL handguns, is minimum oal, as that is when pressures will play havoc with you.

Bottle neck rifle cartridges can be a different story though. I like to start at zero and work back in small increments, until I find the most accurate oal.

GS

 

[1SOW]

The one thing loading long is used successfully for, is 9mm Major Power Factor loads.

The bullets are sometimes loaded longer than SAAMI max to be able to get enough , often compressed, powder loads into the case to reach speeds of 1700 ft+/second to get enough "gas" to make the comp. work. Silhouette powder is used by a friend doing the same. Some other powders will get the speed and not enough gas. It depends on the individual compensator.
These are fired out of somewhat longer bbls that are sometimes reamed to have longer chambers in sturdy pistols, and can be very accurate.

The cases are standard 9mm luger and the seat and crimp run just fine.

 

[Clark]

In experimenting to find out how much power I could squeeze out of a Kel-Tec P11, I used Power Pistol, 158 gr XTP bullets, 1.169" OAL, double compressed powder, and resized the loaded ammo to overcome the compressed powder bulge.

To get that shape bullet to chamber at 1.169" without interference, I had to throat the barrel.
The cartridge must be free to fall in or fall out of a chamber or there will be a pressure spike.
The "T" sized drill at .3580" will not do it. I needed to use the 23/64" = .3594" drill to overcome the bullet squish from compressing powder.
Even if I pre compress the powder, the bullet still takes a beating.

This was all just academic, as the recoil is horrific.

 

[Walkalong]

As would be the pressure I imagine.

The OP asked about loading long to try to get better accuracy with the bullet at or near the lands, not about how to go over max velocity or pressure.

 

[MustGoFaster]

True, my original question was about accuracy, which was a thought process that may have had a decent foundation, but has shown to be non-fruitful.

But I find information related to the data I gathered informative. My gun can take loads well over max length. I'm not sure I'd want to push my gun to "major power factors" but I do find data that I might not have gone searching for interesting to say the least.

I think if I want something with more power, I will move to something intended to be that way. My father has a .357mag revolver with a 6" barrel that shoots much better at 25 yards. But my P225 is a bit more practical when it comes to other things. I would have never even dreamed of some of the things Clark mentioned , but it's interesting to see some possibility's.