Mini MPR & BE-86

Status
Not open for further replies.
It wan't so much a discussion, just you claiming we couldn't possibly know how the diameter of a bullet and then lowering your sights when it proved we did. I do find diameter of jacketed bullets to matter. I have loaded thousands of RMR-produced jacketed bullets of various types and regardless of OAL I reach max velocities with them with a few tenths less powder than with the actual 0.3550" bullets the load data uses. This factor is easily ignored when you are using really long OALs that depend on a healthy leade to chamber, as the loads tested in generating the published data are going to chamber without leade.

Comparing OAL isn't really telling you much. You have to take it to the seating depth before you are comparing anything functional. I agree seating depth matters, but so does diameter.

View attachment 845090

And no, you can't compare these OALs - one is a hollowpoint and one a RN. A thousandth in diameter makes a BIG difference, and I do not believe a half-thousandth can't be noticed in carefully controlled pressure testing. The tighter the fit, the less pressure it's going to leak, physics being somewhat inflexible. Have a different view? You are welcome to it.

What was proven? bds stated he has super accurate calipers and probably thousands of bullets measured. I think a high quality micrometer would be better .You did not indicate how your measurements were taken.

What does posting the Hodgdon reloading data have to do with anything? No, you can't compare the bullets so why post it?. Sierra is listed at .355 and Hornady at .356. Not down to 5/10,000. Sure, diameter will make a difference in pressure, but that all depends on the EXACT bore diameter and even if there is any fouling in the bore to make such a minuscule difference. Plus you have no way to measure the actual pressure.
I also said "seating depth" not just OAL Bullet companies give diameters to thousands of an inch not ten one thousandths

What velocities??
" I have loaded thousands of RMR-produced jacketed bullets of various types and regardless of OAL I reach max velocities with them with a few tenths less powder than with the actual 0.3550" bullets the load data uses"

Of course it will be different as you can not duplicate the test or any test done by someplace else.. Plus factor into the equation the powder(s) and primer(s) used and all the other different test parameters. Your velocity even though related to pressure means little as you can not compare it to Hodgdons test data.

So yes, I have a different view on dealing with insignificant factors.

So for the OP. yes, he is probably approaching +P pressure/velocity and should be careful with his powder charges and seating depth but there is +P data for 9mm but why bother with it? Better to keep the powder charge lower . But there again that is only the data from Alliant, if there are other verified test data in manuals it may be different as is most load data. But his velocity is going to be greater in a carbine than a 4" barrel.
 
What was proven? bds stated he has super accurate calipers and probably thousands of bullets measured. I think a high quality micrometer would be better .You did not indicate how your measurements were taken.
I built racing engines for 20 years, and have a full array of 'high quality' calipers, depth gauges, micrometers and dial bore gauges along with more experience using them than you'll ever glimpse. But It would be great if you would drop this agenda..
What does posting the Hodgdon reloading data have to do with anything? No, you can't compare the bullets so why post it?. Sierra is listed at .355 and Hornady at .356. Not down to 5/10,000. Sure, diameter will make a difference in pressure, but that all depends on the EXACT bore diameter and even if there is any fouling in the bore to make such a minuscule difference. Plus you have no way to measure the actual pressure.
The precise point is the bullets aren't comparable, and what effect that has on pressure. Whatever your bore diameter is you will have a tighter fit with a bigger bullet, leak less pressure, have greater friction and make more pressure.
I also said "seating depth" not just OAL Bullet companies give diameters to thousands of an inch not ten one thousandths
The OP didn't have seating depth, but we were supposed to so concerned because his OAL compared to that listed for a bullet with a completely different, and largely unknown profile.
Of course it will be different as you can not duplicate the test or any test done by someplace else.. Plus factor into the equation the powder(s) and primer(s) used and all the other different test parameters. Your velocity even though related to pressure means little as you can not compare it to Hodgdons test data.
I've used the RMR bullets with a variety of powders and primers in a variety of calibers. As you are probably aware it's generally difficult to achieve the max velocities given in published handgun data without exceeding their listed charge. But in all cases with the RMR bullets velocity has come easy even at long OALs, so easy it's only smart to stop at the max velocities given even though that's happening 0.2-0.4gr. under the max charge given. The bullets aren't comparable. I'd say judging pressure by velocity is better than not judging it.
So yes, I have a different view on dealing with insignificant factors.
It's not necessarily insignificant. Take Jake's Mini MPR load for example. He saw fit to stop at 6.1gr of BE86 at an OAL of 1.135". When you don't have any leade in the barrel, you have to go all the way to ~1.032" OAL with the MPR nose profile to clear the edge of the bore, due to the profile of the bullet. The Alliant data show max charges of 6.1-6.3 grains for generically categorized 115gr. jacketed bullets. But whatever they are, they are likely to clear in a no leade situation or at worst be much closer to it than 100 thou. Jake's seating his stuff a lot longer and even at that length 6.1gr. is a wise point to stop. I was recommending the OP stop at 6.0 for safety's sake based on my experience and what I make of it. That was my point in posting not in meeting your approval or explaining why I can measure...

Why does pressure and velocity come so easy? I'd say Jake's load shows there's pressure aplenty regardless of the OAL. I think these are terrific bullets, but they built to different priorities, with absolute performance being key. I think sizing a little larger helps accuracy and ignition consistency, even if were are only talking about 0.5-0.7 thousandths. And the blunt nose of the MPR makes for a long bearing surface at the same time as it makes 'normal' OALs heavily leade-dependent. Having loaded a lot of these using different calibers, powders, primers and OALs from no-leade to whatever the barrel will allow, I don't find it's smart to get closer than 0.2gr. to the max charge given in published load data for even remotely similar bullets. If I had run into just one case where pressure and velocity came hard rather than super easy I'd be more apt to believe diameter is not materially related. Believe what you will, just stop at 6 grains (or 6.1 if you really stretch the OAL ;))
 
Last edited:
Just a FYI and follow up without all the extraneous verbiage.

Hornady #8 page 912 under the 38 super load data lists the HAP and XTP, FMJ, FMJ FP with diameters of 0.355-0.357 with the exact same powder charge data (different COL) for all those bullets with NO provision for decreasing powder due to the slight difference in bullet diameter.

I do not have the most current Hornady manual isf someone does please check if this is still valid.

Hornady tests using actual guns. But what do they know?

The bullet is the same for 124 gr 9mm as 38 super.

There are many many posts using Google Fu on data for the HAP bullet.

A reply from a member who wrote to Hornady reads.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/is-the-hornady-hap-the-same-as-jhp.796464/

"I wrote ,

Metal God said:
Hi I'd like to know what load data to use when loading your 9mm 125gr HAP bullet . I have and use your manual 9th ed but it does not have the HAP load data . Can I use the 124gr XTP data in the manual
There total response was ,

Hornady said:

The 124gr XTP data will work fine for this."
 
Just a FYI and follow up without all the extraneous verbiage.
Wait, don't you want to talk more about physical measurement?
Hornady #8 page 912 under the 38 super load data lists the HAP and XTP, FMJ, FMJ FP with diameters of 0.355-0.357 with the exact same powder charge data (different COL) for all those bullets with NO provision for decreasing powder due to the slight difference in bullet diameter.
Gee, maybe what's going on here is they aren't increasing the charge for the smaller bullets. If it's safe at .357", it's going to be safe at 0.355". Or simply adjusted the OAL to normalize pressure..
There are many many posts using Google Fu on data for the HAP bullet.
There are also plenty of published load data on the HAP - how bout one uses that of they wish to load the HAP. And the real FYI is it shows the below advice to be dubious.
A reply from a member who wrote to Hornady reads.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/is-the-hornady-hap-the-same-as-jhp.796464/

"I wrote ,

Metal God said:
Hi I'd like to know what load data to use when loading your 9mm 125gr HAP bullet . I have and use your manual 9th ed but it does not have the HAP load data . Can I use the 124gr XTP data in the manual
There total response was ,

Hornady said:

The 124gr XTP data will work fine for this."
 
Hmm, click on what appears to be an interesting thread. Turns out it looks like 2 old guys fighting on the internet.........
 
He's not wrong about bullet diameter not playing much of a role in pressure. So long as the bullet fills the bore, it's getting squished down to whatever diameter the bore is and one to two thousandths has shown almost no noticeable difference in the limited amount of pressure testing we've been involved in. What makes the most difference is how much surface area contacts the bore/rifling. Our RMR bullets have longer bodies and shorter ogives. While this does tend to increase pressures, it also seems to make a big difference in accuracy potential. I think the key is just filling the bore and good positive contact with the rifling. I've shot thousands and thousands of .357 bullets through my 9mms at near max charges. I had a friend with pressure testing equipment test them and he said they were within book pressures. I like larger diameter bullets just because they seem to shoot better for me.
 
I'll bet those are moving along pretty well. Be careful.

From the Alliant PDF.

Different bullet, shorter OAL which can make a rally large difference in the small 9MM case. Able to chrono these?
So I got the chrono setup and shot these same loads, I loaded 5 each and got some errors so here are the results with good reads:

Shot from Ruger PCC 9mm 16" barrel

115 RMR MPR OAL 1.07
5.6 grains BE 86
1350 1360 1380 1350 Average =1360

5.8 grains of BE 86
1350 1390 1410 Average = 1383.33

6.0 grains of BE 86
1470 1460 1454 1464 Average = 1462

The strange thing is the jump of 80 fps from 5.8 to 6.0. As I mentioned in the earlier post the 6.0 is the most accurate load.
What do you make of these results? I really like 6.0 load and I want to use it to smoke some potguts on my family ranch.
 
What do you make of these results?
I have more experience with 124s in a 16" barrel, but that is moving right along at 6.0 Grs and 1462 average FPS. Alliant does show 6.1 & 6.3 max with two different 115 Gr jacketed bullets, so assuming you are not seated deeper you should be good. Just a little deeper really ups the pressure in 9MM.

I got a hair over 1400 FPS with a Hornady 115 Gr encapsulated bullet @ 1.130 to 1.135 OAL (bullet is .548 long) with 5.7 Grs (Max!) of WSF.

I was mostly in the high 1300s with 115s though.

BE-86 seems to be one where excellent velocities can be had, seems to be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top