RMR 9mm 147gr Copper plated RNFP jams

Status
Not open for further replies.
Crazy Horse

Crazy Horse

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
750
Location
San Antonio, TX
Good afternoon.

I just received an order from RMR. I thought I had ordered 147gr RN plated bullets, but I actually ordered plated 147gr RNFP bullets. I couldn't find comparable load data for the type of bullet using the Hornady reloading manual so I loaded them according th Speer's manual which calls for 4.1gr of CFE pistol and a COAL of 1.130.

I loaded 45 cartridges and too them to the range. The Canik ate them up. However in my M&P Compact and Taurus G3 then would jam when I charged the slide. I would have to put the slide on a hard surface and push down on the firearm to dislodge the round.

Has anyone else encountered issues with 147gr RNFP plated bullets.

The issue I keep having is Out of battery. The problem is that the guns jam and I have to place the slide on a hard surface and push the handgun down. The force clears the round. I created some dummy rounds and even reduced the COAL to 1.100, but the out of battery malfunction has persisted.

I have about 200 remaining bullets and would like to get them to work on all my firearms reliably.

TIA
 
Crazy Horse said:
RMR ... 147gr RNFP bullets

... even reduced the COAL to 1.100, but the out of battery malfunction has persisted
Click to expand...
Keep reducing the OAL until the dummy round falls into the chamber freely and spin without touching the rifling. Then feed from the magazine to ensure proper function test at the "working OAL" - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...g-oal-col-for-reference.848462/#post-11077568

And if you think you may be compressing the powder charge, calculate max case fill using the working OAL - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/unique-advice.855365/#post-11215079

Depending on the leade length of the barrel, same bullet could require different max/working OAL:
  • KKM Glock 40-9 conversion - RMR 147 gr FP MW: 1.135"
  • S&W M&P Shield 9mm - RMR 147 gr FP MW: 1.130"
  • Tactical Kinetics Glock 40-9 conversion - RMR 147 gr FP MW: 1.075"
  • Lone Wolf Glock 40-9 conversion - RMR 147 gr FP MW: 1.065"
 
I found out the RNFP requires a much shorter OAL to function in many pistols. The angle of presentation and truncated ogive and a not-so-obvious to the observer longer base to ogive measurement resulted in a COAL that "looked" OK but was too long to feed. @LiveLife gave you a good recommendation!

I ended up shortening a 9mm COAL to 1.08 with 124gr RMR RNFP to get it to feed in my P938. That's quite a bit shorter than any other of my 9mm pistols required. Most of them fed well at 1.12+ with the same bullet.
 
Crazy Horse said:
The issue I keep having is Out of battery. The problem is that the guns jam and I have to place the slide on a hard surface and push the handgun down.
Click to expand...
Any different bullet, regardless of if it’s the same weight, needs to be check for max and working COL in EACH gun you have! If you haven’t already I’d recommend you take notes on the bullet, measuring it’s dimensions and for each barrel it’ll live in, record it’s max and working COL. Then you’ll have to decide for that given bullet if you want to use it in all your guns, if you want to settle on a single load or multiple COL loads. If you need to load shorter COLs than what you’ve already worked up the usual warnings of pressure increase apply so start low and work up.
You may have been fortunate that you were out of battery and didn’t get a chance to fire these as that may have created an over pressure situation with a lack of a bullet jump to lands.
All my guns find the RNFP have a shorter Max COL than an equivalent weight RN. But the FP does print a nicer hole! Good luck!
 
PWGUNNY said:
I checked my notes. I load for M&P full size 9mm 147gr. RNFP at 1.10 OAL. If that helps for comparison.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the recommendation. My RN bullets all function well at 1.150, I figured the COAL for the RNFP at 1.130 would be good.

I tried using the 1.125, but it still wouldn't cycle easily.
A 1.10 OAL is above the minimum of 1.095 but below 1.125. I look at giving that a try.
 
Crazy Horse said:
My RN bullets all function well at 1.150, I figured the COAL for the RNFP at 1.130 would be good.

I tried using the 1.125, but it still wouldn't cycle easily. A 1.10 OAL is above the minimum of 1.095 but below 1.125. I look at giving that a try.
Click to expand...
RNFP is RN with tip cut off, so you will need to subtract the missing tip length from your RNFP OAL. ;)

index.php


LiveLife said:
Keep reducing the OAL until the dummy round falls into the chamber freely and spin without touching the rifling. Then feed from the magazine to ensure proper function test at the "working OAL
Click to expand...
And you can calculate max case fill to see if you will compress powder charge using your "working" OAL - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/unique-advice.855365/#post-11215079

Tell me the working OAL and bullet length and I can calculate the max case fill for that working OAL with CFE Pistol.
 
Last edited:

So?

What's missing is context. Why does case fill matter? i.e. will the gun blow up?
 
9mm case, with particularly small internal volume, when using significantly shorter than published lengths due to barrel's shorter leade length can result in compressed powder charge for certain powder/bullet/OAL combination.

So when using shorter working OAL with a particular powder, I often calculate what the max case fill is for that bullet to see if max load data would result in a compressed charge.

This is done by calculating where the bottom of the bullet would seat by subtracting the bullet length from the working OAL, marking the inside of case and filling the powder to the mark and weighing the charge. If the published max charge is greater, then you will end up with a compressed charge.
 
Last edited:
LiveLife said:
9mm case, with particularly small internal volume, when using significantly shorter than published lengths due to barrel's leade length can result in compressed powder charge for certain powder/bullet/OAL combination.

So when using shorter working OAL with a particular powder, I often calculate what the max case fill is for that bullet to see if max load data would result in a compressed charge.
Click to expand...

Okay, but other than satisfying your curiosity, why else would it matter? You suggest it as something to do, but there appears to be no other reason for doing so.

Nosler's data with a 147 grain bullet at 1.120" and 4.0 gr CFE-P shows a case fill of 56%, suggesting there is a lot of room available before one gets to a 100% or more case fill.

https://load-data.nosler.com/load-data/9mm-luger-parabellum/

Also, different brand cases have different capacities, so one would have to know the EXACT brand to get a reasonable estimate of case fill.
 
fxvr5 said:
Okay, but other than satisfying your curiosity, why else would it matter? You suggest it as something to do, but there appears to be no other reason for doing so.

Also, different brand cases have different capacities, so one would have to know the EXACT brand to get a reasonable estimate of case fill.
Click to expand...
Most of us end up using different bullet than what's listed in the published load data (which may have different bullet length) and we often use different headstamp mixed range brass with unknown number of reload history and condition of brass (BTW, published load data use brand new brass).

So by using the actual case we reload with using the actual bullet length with actual working OAL for our pistols, we can exactly calculate what the max case powder fill would be for the working OAL and whether load data's max charge would be compressed or not.

And I usually recommend measuring bullet setback of dummy rounds (no powder, no primer) fed from the magazine without riding the slide as it is not the "finished OAL" that matters rather "chambered OAL".

All done for safety.
 
LiveLife said:
Most of us end up using different bullet than what's listed in the published load data (which may have different bullet length) and we often use different headstamp mixed range brass with unknown number of reload history and condition of brass (BTW, published load data use brand new brass).

So by using the actual case we reload with using the actual bullet length with actual working OAL for our pistols, we can exactly calculate what the max case powder fill would be for the working OAL and whether load data's max charge would be compressed or not.

And I usually recommend measuring bullet setback of dummy rounds (no powder, no primer) fed from the magazine without riding the slide as it is not the "finished OAL" that matters rather "chambered OAL".

All done for safety.
Click to expand...

That's nice, but you still haven't said WHY we should care about case fill. If there's no reason to do it other than to satisfy one's curiosity, why bother?
 
fxvr5 said:
That's nice, but you still haven't said WHY we should care about case fill. If there's no reason to do it other than to satisfy one's curiosity, why bother?
Click to expand...
Because I don't like compressing powder charges.

Permitted compressed charges are often indicated on published load data as "Compressed Charge" loads.

If you don't mind using unpublished compressed charges, that's your choice.
 
LiveLife said:
Because I don't like compressing powder charges.

Permitted compressed charges are often indicated on published load data as "Compressed Charge" loads.

If you don't mind using unpublished compressed charges, that's your choice.
Click to expand...

You don't like compressed loads. Why not? What are you afraid of?
 
fxvr5 said:
You don't like compressed loads. Why not? What are you afraid of?
Click to expand...
I have seen too many guns blow up shooting USPSA for years (BTW, none of them were Glocks and seasoned match shooters told me guns blowing up happened before Glocks existed).

And we now have USPSA match shooters shooting 9mm Major that really overly stress/expand/thin case walls and leave these brass on the floor/ground for unsuspecting reloaders to pick up. Ever wonder why some 9mm brass are so hard to resize?

And we had too many "Funny thing happened at the range today" threads where members insisted they did not exceed published max load data where they did not factor in bullet setback.

If you like compressed loads, go right ahead.

Not for me.
 
LiveLife said:
I have seen too many guns blow up shooting USPSA for years (BTW, none of them were Glocks and seasoned match shooters told me guns blowing up happened before Glocks existed).

And we now have USPSA match shooters shooting 9mm Major that really overly stress/expand/thin case walls and leave these brass on the floor/ground for unsuspecting reloaders to pick up.

And we had too many "Funny thing happened at the range today" threads where members insisted they did not exceed published max load data where they did not factor in bullet setback.

If you like compressed loads, go right ahead.

Not for me.
Click to expand...

You not have said that any of these problems were caused by compressed powder charges.

In how many instances were the 'blown' guns were caused by compressed powder charges? How many of the blown guns were caused by excess powder charge, bad brass?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

jell-dog
  • Locked
9mm 147gr plated bullet data
2
Replies
31
Views
13K
AnselHazen
A
J
  • Locked
Considerations loading 9mm with 147gr bullets
Replies
19
Views
4K
LoonWulf
LoonWulf
C
  • Locked
147gr. 9mm OAL
Replies
10
Views
5K
REB
R
CrankyCraig
  • Locked
RMR 180gr FMJ RNFP
Replies
9
Views
1K
Lennyjoe
Lennyjoe
Big-bore-bob
Rmr smiley 147gr .357 magnum
2
Replies
31
Views
989
Big-bore-bob
Big-bore-bob
Back
Top