I recently made my first batch of 9mm Luger. I used the Modern Reloading 2nd Edition from Lee to obtain my data/recipes. I chose Unique powder as it seemed to be useful in a few of the different bullet weights that I wanted to try. I also chose to use 124 grain Hornady XTPs as my projectile. Using the Lee book, for 124 grain XTPs and Unique powder, I should have a starting powder charge of 5.1 grains and a DO NOT EXCEED of 5.8 grains. Today at while killing time a local sporting goods store, I decided to see what the Hornady book said for powders charges. I was shocked and a little bit scared to see that they said (again with 124 grain XTPs and Unique powder) that the starting charge was 4.0 grains and a DO NOT EXCEED of 5.0 grains. This made me more than a little nervous and immediately contemplated the purchase of a bullet puller! To me, thats a pretty big difference, in a small cartridge like the 9mm luger. So why the big difference in the charge weights? How does that effect my safety and the well being of favorite pistol?
Scary Differences in specs Lee Book Vs Hornady Book
- Thread starter TrickyD
- Start date
- Status
jcwit
member
Alliants web site lists a max of 5.8 grains for a 124 gr. bullet using Unique powder. Being as they are the manufacturer I would say you're OK.
The OP sayes he chose Unique. Begining of 3rd sentence.
The OP sayes he chose Unique. Begining of 3rd sentence.
1SOW
Member
What OAL did each list as the "minimum"??
My LEE manual doesn't list Unique under 124 gr jacketed bullets. It also doesn't list bullets by "Nose Shape" (JHP, FP, XTPetc.) it only lists by weight. If you have the recently updated LEE Manual, yours may be different. The oal listed can make a BIG difference between a JHP and an FMJ bullet.
My Alliant Manual lists the 124 Speer GDHP max as 5.8grs Unique @ 1.120" (or longer), .
My LEE manual doesn't list Unique under 124 gr jacketed bullets. It also doesn't list bullets by "Nose Shape" (JHP, FP, XTPetc.) it only lists by weight. If you have the recently updated LEE Manual, yours may be different. The oal listed can make a BIG difference between a JHP and an FMJ bullet.
My Alliant Manual lists the 124 Speer GDHP max as 5.8grs Unique @ 1.120" (or longer), .
TrickyD,
I just checked my Lee Modern Reloading Second Edition and there is no 124gr XTP on the 9mm tables and no Unique powder listed in any of the 124gr loads. Closest I can find to the numbers you quote out of Lee's book is a 115gr jacketed recipe using Unique at a 5.1gr start and a 5.5 NE. Mine is a 2003 copyright with the latest reprint listed as 2008. You could have a later reprint Second Edition with more updated load tables that includes the 124gr XTP I suppose. I just ordered Hornady's 8th Edition this weekend from Cabela's so I don't have it to check yet. Looking at the trends I see in the Lee load tables I would think that your present batch is a little hot. I would do some more research and even make contact with the folks at Lee, Alliant Powder, and/or Hornady to doublecheck that load before dropping a hammer on it. I checked Alliant's Reloader Guide and they don't list the 124gr XTP either.
I just checked my Lee Modern Reloading Second Edition and there is no 124gr XTP on the 9mm tables and no Unique powder listed in any of the 124gr loads. Closest I can find to the numbers you quote out of Lee's book is a 115gr jacketed recipe using Unique at a 5.1gr start and a 5.5 NE. Mine is a 2003 copyright with the latest reprint listed as 2008. You could have a later reprint Second Edition with more updated load tables that includes the 124gr XTP I suppose. I just ordered Hornady's 8th Edition this weekend from Cabela's so I don't have it to check yet. Looking at the trends I see in the Lee load tables I would think that your present batch is a little hot. I would do some more research and even make contact with the folks at Lee, Alliant Powder, and/or Hornady to doublecheck that load before dropping a hammer on it. I checked Alliant's Reloader Guide and they don't list the 124gr XTP either.
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
Nothing in the Lee manual was tested by Lee.
They don't have a ballistics lab.
It is all copied from powder & bullet manufactures data published at the copyright date of the Lee manual.
Back then Hercules made Unique powder.
Now Alliant makes Unique powder.
The data is different.
And like 1SOW said, Lee doesn't generally tell you what bullet make & model they are even talking about in the first place.
rc
They don't have a ballistics lab.
It is all copied from powder & bullet manufactures data published at the copyright date of the Lee manual.
Back then Hercules made Unique powder.
Now Alliant makes Unique powder.
The data is different.
And like 1SOW said, Lee doesn't generally tell you what bullet make & model they are even talking about in the first place.
rc
rikman
Member
I too purchased the Lee manual last year to add to my reloading library. I can't remember what cartridges, but I did notice a few differences with other books as well. I just use it as a reference on the "how to's of reloading" and not for loading data...
JRH6856
Member
Lee Modern Reloading Second Edition (c)2003, Revised 2011
124gn Hornady XTP Unique 5.1gn - 5.8gn no pressure data COL: 1.120
Lyman Reloading Handbook, 49th Edition
125gn JHP Unique 4.5gn @ 27,300 CUP - 5.0gn @ 30,700 CUP COL: 1.075
Hornady data from The Complete Reloading Manual for the 9mm Luger
124gn HPXTP Unique 4.0gn - 5.0gn no pressure data COL: 1.060
Alliant data from same source
124gn Speer GDJHP Unique 5.8gn COL: 1.120
Deeper seated bullets require reduced powder charges to avoid overpressure.
124gn Hornady XTP Unique 5.1gn - 5.8gn no pressure data COL: 1.120
Lyman Reloading Handbook, 49th Edition
125gn JHP Unique 4.5gn @ 27,300 CUP - 5.0gn @ 30,700 CUP COL: 1.075
Hornady data from The Complete Reloading Manual for the 9mm Luger
124gn HPXTP Unique 4.0gn - 5.0gn no pressure data COL: 1.060
Alliant data from same source
124gn Speer GDJHP Unique 5.8gn COL: 1.120
Deeper seated bullets require reduced powder charges to avoid overpressure.
.338-06
Member
I have A LOT of reloading manuals and one thing I've noticed is that the books put out by the bullet companies are far more conservative than those put out by the powder companies.
I load .458 Win and like the Barnes spitzers. For the 300gn Barnes has loads topping about 2400fps, Hodgon, on the other hand, has loads using the Barnes 300gn topping 2700fps.
YOU get to decide who to trust
I load .458 Win and like the Barnes spitzers. For the 300gn Barnes has loads topping about 2400fps, Hodgon, on the other hand, has loads using the Barnes 300gn topping 2700fps.
YOU get to decide who to trust
4895
Member
Part of reloading is kinda like woodworking. Measure once, cut twice; Measure twice, cut once. I think all load data warns us to "begin at start load data" as a warning to those whose glasses aren't as sharp or eyes as keen as they once were. Ever make cookies and use two different recipes on accident because the type is too small to focus real well? The cookies we make could cause serious harm to ourselves and those around us. Most people would agree with me that having a second source or third source will not only help you verify a good starting point, but also list different projectiles and even different powders. The internet is great as well, but my books never need batteries or an internet signal. They are impervious to drops from three to thirty feet and almost never turn off when unplugged.
Edarnold
Member
Obsolete Hornaday 9x19 data
The tipoff in the Hornaday manuals, oldest to the latest, is that they list the S & W Model 39 as their test gun. This gun was the first US 'wondernine', introduced in 1956, and was the result of the Army handgun trials in the mid-fifties. My guess is that the Model 39 was chambered specifically for the military round-nose FMJ cartridge, which means the leade would have been very short to match the bullet shape. As a result, bullets like the XTP series, with truncated cone ogive and longer bearing surface, would have to be seated deep in the case to clear the leade.
As a result, Hornaday shows the XTP's seated deep in the case, which is a sure way to run up the pressures and limit velocities. Look at the same bullets loaded by VV , and you will see the cartridge overall listed as 1.16", which is maximum for the cartridge. And the velocities are up where they should be.
In my gun, H&K P7, there is no interference with the XTP bullets loaded to 1.16", and I can use appropriate loads. I'm guessing that since JHP bullets are pretty much standard in the 9x19 these days, that modern guns are chambered accordingly to allow the correct COAL.
Interesting that the Speer loading manual specifically addresses the issue of loading bullets too deeply in the 9x19 and running pressures up.
It's long overdue for Hornaday to revisit this cartridge in modern guns, and correct their load data.
The tipoff in the Hornaday manuals, oldest to the latest, is that they list the S & W Model 39 as their test gun. This gun was the first US 'wondernine', introduced in 1956, and was the result of the Army handgun trials in the mid-fifties. My guess is that the Model 39 was chambered specifically for the military round-nose FMJ cartridge, which means the leade would have been very short to match the bullet shape. As a result, bullets like the XTP series, with truncated cone ogive and longer bearing surface, would have to be seated deep in the case to clear the leade.
As a result, Hornaday shows the XTP's seated deep in the case, which is a sure way to run up the pressures and limit velocities. Look at the same bullets loaded by VV , and you will see the cartridge overall listed as 1.16", which is maximum for the cartridge. And the velocities are up where they should be.
In my gun, H&K P7, there is no interference with the XTP bullets loaded to 1.16", and I can use appropriate loads. I'm guessing that since JHP bullets are pretty much standard in the 9x19 these days, that modern guns are chambered accordingly to allow the correct COAL.
Interesting that the Speer loading manual specifically addresses the issue of loading bullets too deeply in the 9x19 and running pressures up.
It's long overdue for Hornaday to revisit this cartridge in modern guns, and correct their load data.
Striker Fired
Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2011
- Messages
- 467
^^^That is probably one of the higest reasons for the difference in data.The test gun or test barrel and what oal it accepts that the mfg is using dictates what is safe for a given combo.The other thing is when some sources don't specify measured pressures,nobody knows what pressure they used as a cutoff point.Some testers stop testing after they reach 1000psi below saami,the next stop 3,000psi below.
beatledog7
Member
I have the Lee, but I use it mostly use it to verify or call into question load data I get from the Lyman or Hornady.
When there is discrepant data, I consult additional sources, such and powder and bullet manufacturer websites.
When there is discrepant data, I consult additional sources, such and powder and bullet manufacturer websites.
gamestalker
member
There are numerous variables surrounding data sources which is the primary reason why one of the first rules of reloading is to work up from the minimum starting charge.
Each powder and bullet manufacturer's data is compiled using different testing methods, and different testing instruments. An example of different methods is often observed in the older editions of reloading books. Those older pressure estimates will be in units termed as CUP, I think that translates to COPPER UNITS OF PRESSURE, while the more current and common calculation of pressure is indicated as PSI, or POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH. These two calculations of pressures are quite different and have resulted in many load specifications being revised. Some powders have even been entirely deleted for certain cartridges following re-testing that utilizes a far more accurate piece of equiptment known as a transducer, which provides pressure estimates in PSI. Since I don't hold a degree in physics or any other relevant field of study, I will stop here. But I think I may have provided you with a partial explanation for data variations effected.
As for other relevant reasons for conflicting data, all I can say is consider the source. If you are using a Hornady bullet then spare yourself the concern and confusion by using their data, other wise prepare for unexplained variations. Such an example would be Alliant indicates one charge in my book for Unique of 6.2 grs, while Hornady lists a charge range of 4.0 grs. - 5.0 grs. I'm rather picky about my data sources and rely primarily on those that actually pressure test their loads.
A reloader could very easily drive him or her self insane by trying to decifer load variations from one source to the other. In conclusion, if you are not exceeding SAAMI approved data and working up from the minimum published charge, you are using a firearm in good working condition, nothing bad will happen. And FYI, if you are using a published charge with the 9mm, the most likely cause of a pressure problem, should you encounter one, is going to be related to bullet seating depth. Don't seat them any deeper than is necessary to facilitate chamber and magazine fit, or deeper than is published as minimum.
Each powder and bullet manufacturer's data is compiled using different testing methods, and different testing instruments. An example of different methods is often observed in the older editions of reloading books. Those older pressure estimates will be in units termed as CUP, I think that translates to COPPER UNITS OF PRESSURE, while the more current and common calculation of pressure is indicated as PSI, or POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH. These two calculations of pressures are quite different and have resulted in many load specifications being revised. Some powders have even been entirely deleted for certain cartridges following re-testing that utilizes a far more accurate piece of equiptment known as a transducer, which provides pressure estimates in PSI. Since I don't hold a degree in physics or any other relevant field of study, I will stop here. But I think I may have provided you with a partial explanation for data variations effected.
As for other relevant reasons for conflicting data, all I can say is consider the source. If you are using a Hornady bullet then spare yourself the concern and confusion by using their data, other wise prepare for unexplained variations. Such an example would be Alliant indicates one charge in my book for Unique of 6.2 grs, while Hornady lists a charge range of 4.0 grs. - 5.0 grs. I'm rather picky about my data sources and rely primarily on those that actually pressure test their loads.
A reloader could very easily drive him or her self insane by trying to decifer load variations from one source to the other. In conclusion, if you are not exceeding SAAMI approved data and working up from the minimum published charge, you are using a firearm in good working condition, nothing bad will happen. And FYI, if you are using a published charge with the 9mm, the most likely cause of a pressure problem, should you encounter one, is going to be related to bullet seating depth. Don't seat them any deeper than is necessary to facilitate chamber and magazine fit, or deeper than is published as minimum.
ranger335v
Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2006
- Messages
- 3,797
Back then Hercules made Unique powder.
Now Alliant makes Unique powder.
The data is different.
I THINK the only difference now is the name on the sign in front of the plant.
Now Alliant makes Unique powder.
The data is different.
I THINK the only difference now is the name on the sign in front of the plant.
It is worth noting that the Lee manual, and I have one and use it, does not change their cover page when they change or add to any data published inside. You have to look at the inside page to see which revision you have. They have printed a number of revisions to what is still called Modern Reloading 2nd Edition. It's not like Lyman's 49th which next printing will be Lyman's 50th or a Hodgdon 2011 manual which next time could be their 2012.
manual version, OAL Lee vs COL Hornady
I just checked to see what version of the Lee manual I have and it was originally written in 2003 but "revised and reformatted" in 2011. So its about as current as I can get... Unfortunately Alliant doesnt list for anything other than a Speer bullet. Sounds like OAL is the single most important factor (other than the powder charge itself) with these bullets, due to the "unconventional" design. This brings up another question for me then. The Lee manual says "Min OAL of 1.120" while the Hornady manual says COL 1.060". COL an OAL the same thing? If so, their numbers are way different again. Would that explain the ability to put .7 grains more powder in, working with the Lee book, due to the reduced seating depth and therefore, reduced pressures?
I just checked to see what version of the Lee manual I have and it was originally written in 2003 but "revised and reformatted" in 2011. So its about as current as I can get... Unfortunately Alliant doesnt list for anything other than a Speer bullet. Sounds like OAL is the single most important factor (other than the powder charge itself) with these bullets, due to the "unconventional" design. This brings up another question for me then. The Lee manual says "Min OAL of 1.120" while the Hornady manual says COL 1.060". COL an OAL the same thing? If so, their numbers are way different again. Would that explain the ability to put .7 grains more powder in, working with the Lee book, due to the reduced seating depth and therefore, reduced pressures?
1SOW
Member
Yes.
The real issue with loading different bullets of the same weight is "seating depth". If you have a load that runs well with a given seating depth, another bullet of the same 'weight and type (FMJ/Plated/Lead)" will also run with the same seating depth.
Just knowing the oal doesn't tell the seating depth because it depends on the length of the bullets.
Hope this makes sense.
JRH6856
Member
Which depends on the length of the bullet which must be measured because it is rarely listed anywhere that I can find. Is there a database somewhere of bullet lengths that can be referenced?
Midway's LoadMap series 9MM uses Win sp primers and Remington cases with a universal receiver loading to an oal at 1.135" with the 124 XTP. With Unique powder they listed a charge weight at 5.4 as maximum and to not exceed and to be cautious from 5.2-5.4 grains. From 4.8 to 5.0-5.1 I think you'd be safe with any good case, sp primer, or seating depths from 1.125-1.135" oal. I think one of your sources is too high and Hornady's max load a little conservative. Just some more info to compare. Do work up safely though.
diananike
Member
I load the Alliant 5.8gr at 1.120 COAL
If it is a little overpressure and warming into +P levels I'm not worried for the amount of XTP ammo I'll be shooting.
The bulk that goes through my Glock is 124gr Plated Berry's ahead of 5.0gr of Unique.
If it is a little overpressure and warming into +P levels I'm not worried for the amount of XTP ammo I'll be shooting.
The bulk that goes through my Glock is 124gr Plated Berry's ahead of 5.0gr of Unique.
- Status
