Reloads

[JustaShooter]

If you can't reload handgun ammo to at least the standards of factory ammo your doing something wrong. Its the same components, the only difference is your doing it on a much smaller scale..

Agreed, wholeheartedly.

It's been mentioned here about the use of a chronograph in development of hand loads for handguns. Get a good loading manual, its already worked out for you.

This on the other hand I'll have to disagree with. Published data is produced using a universal receiver and pressure test barrels of a particular length for a particular caliber. The chances of my handgun matching that configuration are as close to zero as makes no difference.

On top of that there is lot to lot variation for the powder and primers, and actual case capacity of the particular brass I happen to be using. Not to mention, the stated velocities for published data are almost universally, well, "optimistic" (probably has a lot to do with the universal receiver and pressure test barrels).

Ultimately, with out a chronograph I really have no idea how fast my particular loads happen to be going, and for determinig terminal performance actual velocity is only the beginning. Any handloader who thinks he knows how fast his loads are going and what the terminal performance looks like without extensive testing is deluding himself.

[jmr600]

Not so, you need to get yourself a Lyman Reloading Manual, and just for instance look up 9mm and see what firearm was used in testing..... It says S&W Model 39. Most every load in that manual lists the particular firearm used in testing. Jim

[jmr600]

Sierra's manual also list the type of gun used in testing.

[JustaShooter]

Not so, you need to get yourself a Lyman Reloading Manual, and just for instance look up 9mm and see what firearm was used in testing..... It says S&W Model 39. Most every load in that manual lists the particular firearm used in testing. Jim

And if I don't have a S&W Model 39 and the same lot # of powder, primers & cases?

I stand by my assertion: Any handloader who thinks he knows how fast his loads are going and what the terminal performance looks like without extensive testing is deluding himself.

[jmr600]

My point was if you missed it is there are reloading manuals out there that use real guns in there testing. Jim

[Chuck]

Not so, you need to get yourself a Lyman Reloading Manual, and just for instance look up 9mm and see what firearm was used in testing..... It says S&W Model 39. Most every load in that manual lists the particular firearm used in testing. Jim

Hey!
I have one of those!
Use it for my EDC, most days,

That's cool it's in the manual,,,,

[jmr600]

Also some manuals give you the factory duplication load. Jim

[WestonDon]

Yeah, but, who sets the control limits? QA or the bean counters? Does top shelf Federal buck-a-round ammo have the same control limits as Federal American Eagle? How are the suppliers (powder, metals ) controlled? If there are "control limits" to the process, doesn't that insure that the first part will absolutely be different than the millionth part and absolutely different from the billionth part? How is the process verified? And again, what about that powder we're dumping into this process?

The idea of inspecting quality into a product is old school and obsolete in modern manufacturing. [/b] Only from a cost standpoint. Honestly, I long for the days of "burn the toast and scrape it".



This is true for component machines and assembly machines.

It is if you have good suppliers.[/quote]

Well it is true that one way to improve process capability is to simply open up the tolerances. Unfortunately this happens way to frequently in all industries. The bean counters have taken over and sadly bean counters hate engineers.

What I am hearing from this thread is that ammunition manufacturers are not holding tolerances anywhere near what is reasonably obtainable. A sad situation that will surly come back to haunt them. A bitter lesson the automotive industry learned back in the 70's.

A good quality audit program of suppliers is part of the quality equation. Competent suppliers are not that hard to find. Again you get what you pay for.

As far as consistency goes there has to be upper and lower limits. In the real world there is no such thing as perfect.

[SMMAssociates]

Just IMHO, if you're not using a bulky powder and trying to stuff the very last bit of it into a small case, variations in case capacity (at least for pistol shooters) shouldn't matter. Bullet sizing and weight ought to be more important. Along with setback and OAL....

About the only exception is that some powders' pressure levels increase (sometimes dramatically) when the volume of the case decreases, but, again, unless you're stuffing a lot of powder into the case, it shouldn't matter. There may be more variation in primers than that, as well as how the powder lays in the case during ignition.

Short answer: "Lord knows what'll happen".... Test barrel (or even in a specific gun) give you good relative numbers, though, and if you toss in a grain of salt (maybe +/- 10%), should give you an idea of what to expect on the range. Going with a load that doesn't show pressure signs ought to be good enough. Even a chrono can't help if there are variations in other components you can't control....

(Yeah, too cheap to buy one .)

After kicking the idea around, and a false start about 40 years ago, I've only been reloading since last October. But I read a lot .... What works for me is sort of "what's in the book" plus a few percent. The only problems I've had have been mechanical - missing or inverted primers - and once in a while, a squib. I can inspect for the primers, and haven't bought Dillon's tester for the powder. Not 100%, but it does improve the odds. Since these are SD practice loads for the range, all kinds of failures are acceptable.

Nudging the original topic again: Factory loads might reduce the legal hassle. Cheap insurance. And, maybe, somebody to sue if the round fails....

Regards,

[Sevens]

Ultimately, with out a chronograph I really have no idea how fast my particular loads happen to be going, and for determinig terminal performance actual velocity is only the beginning. Any handloader who thinks he knows how fast his loads are going and what the terminal performance looks like without extensive testing is deluding himself.

I would agree with these statements, especially the last sentence.

I will, however, emphatically disagree with -anyone- who pushes an agenda that includes any idea that all handloaders should have one, that it's a necessary tool for successful handloading and that folks should run out and get one.

No way, no how. And not even close. For me, it's been an interesting tool and it has definitely added a whole new "angle" to the hobby. (to put it bluntly, it has created "goals" that simply weren't goals before) But it's also an annoyance, a hassle, and it has pushed me to chase velocities in certain cases where there existed no genuine need for it previously.

The other thing that chrono guys will simply have to admit up front is that their own best "chrono friendly" loads can spit out differing results depending on a lot of factors, and most chrono guys will simply flip out the "best" numbers they've recorded when trying to prove a point. Some would be hard-pressed to guarantee they could repeat the feat on demand.

The chrono is a useful toy.

[Werz]

The other thing that chrono guys will simply have to admit up front is that their own best "chrono friendly" loads can spit out differing results depending on a lot of factors, and most chrono guys will simply flip out the "best" numbers they've recorded when trying to prove a point. Some would be hard-pressed to guarantee they could repeat the feat on demand.

The chrono is a useful toy.

I have one on order, and if it gets here early enough on Saturday, it might make it out to the range.

As far as I'm concerned, my "best" numbers will be the ones closest to the others. At this point, I am frequently sampling the weight of the charges thrown and the OAL of the cartridges. I want the best consistency possible, and I'm less concerned about maximum velocity than I am about minimum standard deviation.

To each his own.

[Sevens]

...and you may find that the best SD loads don't necessarily give the best results all of the time. And what may induce a bit of insanity is trying to figure out WHAT part of the equation is promoting the low SD's and controlling it. It's been my experience that the ONE big thing so many folks think is the biggest variable simply isn't. (the powder charge) I have a hunch that it's much, much more about uniform bullet pull, and the construction and consistency of the bullet itself.

Enjoy your new chrono, and some of the "fun" questions it seems to generate when you may have instead been hoping for answers.

Along with this, I'll do my part in the grand tradition of chrono'ers: my "best" results were 10 rounds on two different loads that returns extreme spreads of 1.96 and 2.58 feet per second. Apparently, the Chrony Beta Master interpreted those two strings as having SD's of ZERO and ONE respectively.

The loads in question were .357 Magnum with a 180 grain cast lead truncated cone bullet from Penn Bullets, launched from a 5" Coonan Classic. I could mention that 1,219 FPS results on the 10 rounds fired were an "average velocity" but only because it never fell below 1,218 nor peaked beyond 1,220 FPS. (that's nearly 600 foot-pounds of bite to go along with the bark)

And where is my most ultimate frustration at this point?!
Well, it's the stinkin' Chrony Beta Master, that simply won't let me run a string of more than 10 shots to REALLY put some hair on the test. Naturally, if 10 shots gives such a jaw-dropping result, who wouldn't want to test 25 or 50 of them in a row?

I couldn't even understand Trig and pre-calc. I get lost in the math in short order. I'm miffed that the Chrony won't let me do the deeper testing those loads deserve.

But if you can beat a chrony spitting out "0" for an SD on a 10-shot string, I'd like to hear about the load that you did it with.

[Werz]

...and you may find that the best SD loads don't necessarily give the best results all of the time. And what may induce a bit of insanity is trying to figure out WHAT part of the equation is promoting the low SD's and controlling it. It's been my experience that the ONE big thing so many folks think is the biggest variable simply isn't. (the powder charge) I have a hunch that it's much, much more about uniform bullet pull, and the construction and consistency of the bullet itself.

Enjoy your new chrono, and some of the "fun" questions it seems to generate when you may have instead been hoping for answers.

Oh, I don't mind exploring confounding factors. In fact, to bring things full circle, I'm only looking to answer the original question in this thread:

Can I craft handgun ammunition with reasonable care and quality components which will be as reliable and effective as premium factory-made self-defense ammunition?

Frankly, I think people's personal opinions on this issue are too driven by their own personalities, so I need to learn the answer on my own. Whatever the answer, I will be sure that I can support and document my conclusions.

[SMMAssociates]

Can I craft handgun ammunition with reasonable care and quality components which will be as reliable and effective as premium factory-made self-defense ammunition?

Werz:

Just IMHO, but I would think that most handloaders who are willing to do their part (and use quality components) can....

Just IMHO, though, doing so still puts you at the mercy of a Prosecutor (probably unlikely if the shoot is any good), and Civil lawyers out to make a lottery win out of the situation. Being able to point to a manufacturer's box may be useful.

Which is why I don't....

(I'm not sure I'm ready to load stuff that's not only for the range anyway, but that's another story ....)

Using factory loads just takes one variable out of the equation....

The factory stuff isn't cheap, but you can duplicate those rounds for the range if necessary. I don't think you'd notice the difference between the factory loads and about any old range load that's not too soft anyway, as long as POI and POA are fairly close.

Not to mention saving a few bucks on the practice loads ....

Regards,

[jmr600]

With the handgun I wouldn't worry too much about SD numbers. My goal would be to match the velocity of the factory stuff I was using. If I were using a cast bullet for paper punching and just general practice those velocity numbers can help prevent leading. With proper bullet fit, especially in a rifle you would be surprised how fast they can be driven without any leading, very close to jacketed velocity. With that said I have never shot a handgun across the chronograph. Being that my shooting is usually within 25yds or less and published data is more then sufficient for general practice.

But if you are determined to duplicate a factory round you are carrying then that tool is what you need. Jim