The Original CZ Forum
GENERAL => Ammunition, questions, and handloading techniques => Topic started by: MarilynMonbro on January 05, 2019, 02:11:26 PM
-
When loading my P09 the first round sometimes does not feed. I have no feeding problems when firing, this only happens when loading. Happens when using the slide lock and sling shotting the slide. It happens with a stock recoil spring and with a 15lb recoil spring. I have 6 mags and it happens randomly with each one.
I thought it was a dirty extractor so I cleaned it approximately 700 rounds ago. Still happens. This happens 1 or 2 out of 10 "load and make readys" if that makes sense. I attached a few pictures and a pic of the round. It goes in fine when I load the round back in the magazine and try again (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190105/cbac71cd56a66fd1064761343a38aa31.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190105/05ca8b063e0bebf76a6e8889ea8b1f60.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190105/5ec6d88963bdc264105e1435036c8ec0.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190105/6f7116a392228fc005bfc05b99723846.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190105/ecaa4e651e54a397f32d6ec37803afd6.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190105/12eff643ed0987bba895b5823dc0c93c.jpg)
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
And sometimes if I push the slide forward with both my thumbs it will load in. But sometimes it won't.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
Not sure if it is related but I had issues on occasion with the edge of the casing getting caught on the front of the feed ramp.
It seemed to be very ammo-specific and I only experienced it with practice ammo...
-
Maybe it?s the lighting, but it looks like you might need a little more taper crimp? Have you tried different shaped bullets?
[Mods corrected crimp style]
-
Not sure if it is related but I had issues on occasion with the edge of the casing getting caught on the front of the feed ramp.
It seemed to be very ammo-specific and I only experienced it with practice ammo...
Maybe it?s the lighting, but it looks like you might need a little more taper crimp? Have you tried different shaped bullets?
Another guess I had was related to my reloads too. I was thinking either the rim of the case was banged up and was getting caught in the extractor, or the edge of the crimp was getting caught on the ramp. But I'm just stumped because it never happens when firing, just when loading the first mag
I haven't used another shape bullet. I've gone through about 6,000 of these 135TC blue bullets.
-
Buy a box of quality factory loaded ammo and see how that functions. If no malfunctions look back to you reloads. Something may have gone amiss there.
-
I haven't tried that yet. I have a couple different boxes I can try
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
Having the issue when chambering actually does make some sense.
I'd say recoil cycles the gun more forcefully than most do by hand.
;-)
-
How many rounds in the magazine? 19? or less?
If it's a fully loaded magazine and it hangs at 19 rounds, have you tried loading one or two less and seeing if it hangs up like that? Not suggesting you load down on the magazine, just that a full magazine creates a lot more pressure/friction with that first/top round on the feed lips and the second round in the magazine.
If loading down on the magazine by a round or two "fixes" it you might look at disassembling a magazine and polishing the inside of the lips just a little right there at the top.
And cleaning the breechface real good. Some solvent, a brush and some patches and just scrub it till it's good and clean.
-
Maybe it?s the lighting, but it looks like you might need a little more taper crimp? Have you tried different shaped bullets?
I was thinking the same thing about the crimp in the second pic, it looks like you haven't quite ironed out the mouth bell, a little more crimp might be the answer. I was also wondering about OAL, hard to say just by looking, but they look kind of long. Good luck, and keep us posted. Later.
Dave
-
How many rounds in the magazine? 19? or less?
If it's a fully loaded magazine and it hangs at 19 rounds, have you tried loading one or two less and seeing if it hangs up like that? Not suggesting you load down on the magazine, just that a full magazine creates a lot more pressure/friction with that first/top round on the feed lips and the second round in the magazine.
If loading down on the magazine by a round or two "fixes" it you might look at disassembling a magazine and polishing the inside of the lips just a little right there at the top.
And cleaning the breechface real good. Some solvent, a brush and some patches and just scrub it till it's good and clean.
It happens at 11 and 18. I usually load my practice sessions to 18/19 but in matches I load to 11 and it happens then too
Maybe it?s the lighting, but it looks like you might need a little more roll crimp? Have you tried different shaped bullets?
I was thinking the same thing (well, almost, that should be taper, not roll crimp), in the second pic, it looks like you haven't quite ironed out the mouth bell, a little more crimp might be the answer. I was also wondering about OAL, hard to say just by looking, but they look kind of long. Good luck, and keep us posted. Later.
Dave
They're loaded to 1.105 -1.110
I'm about to try with factory ammo. Will report back in a jiffy
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
I tested 50 factory rounds and had no issues. I tested 30 reloads and 2 failed to go in. The crimp on those is 0.3785 and 0.3780
Dillon calculator says
Neck tension only_(.000)0.375
Very Light Crimp_(.001)0.374
Light Crimp_____(.002)0.373
Moderate Crimp__(.003)0.372
Heavy Crimp____(.004)0.371
And
Neck tension only_(.000)0.377
Very Light Crimp_(.001)0.376
Light Crimp_____(.002)0.375
Moderate Crimp__(.003)0.374
Heavy Crimp____(.004)0.373
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
I just sized a case and shoved a bullet in it. The "crimp" measures 0.3755
I've never done this test before. I saw it on the crimp thread.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
On all of my new 9mms, I always polish the breech face, the feed ramp and the inside top of the chamber.
I don't go crazy, I just use a little Imprez diamond polish mixed with a little oil, on the end of a bamboo skewer that is flattened and rounded over a little. This may be frowned upon by some but to me, it's just accelerating the wear you'd see by normal use.
After doing this, with factory loads, I can literally baby the slide home and it will feed a round. Of course, again, this is with factory loads.
I always polish by hand and polish in the line of draw with respect to the two moving parts. IF you do this, just make sure you don't get any polishing compound in the firing pin hole.
-
My guess is the high shoulder of that bullet.
Very nice pics. Thank you for that.
-
OP, how did you arrive at your chosen OAL?
-
OP, how did you arrive at your chosen OAL?
Plunk test It was set a little longer, maybe 1.120-1.125 but I shortened it to 1.110 when this issue crept up about 1,500 rounds ago thinking the oal was too long
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
What was the actual max - - the length at which it touched the rifling.
-
What was the actual max - - the length at which it touched the rifling.
That measurement is your exact chamber length for that bullet in that barrel. I use mixed brass so I grabbed 4 random cases for this test
1.1425
1.1465
1.1410
1.1490
subtract at least 0.015" from that number to obtain your Maximum Usable OAL.
1.1275
1.1315
1.125
1.134
Edit - I should have noted my OAL will probably go back to what it was before if I determine this is not a OAL issue. It's looking like a crimp issue
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
What was the actual max - - the length at which it touched the rifling.
That measurement is your exact chamber length for that bullet in that barrel. I use mixed brass so I grabbed 4 random cases for this test
1.1425
1.1465
1.1410
1.1490
subtract at least 0.015" from that number to obtain your Maximum Usable OAL.
A .015 cushion to allow for variation and ensure you stay out of the lands is a good rule of thumb for new reloaders, or old reloaders who are not accustomed to dealing with OAL.
Once you know how tight your gear and your arm will keep OAL, you can lower that a bit. I start with .010 by default, and I can cut that to .005 if I like, no worries.
Remember that OAL is from the base of the case to the nose, but the nose never touches anything directly. It's the point on the ogive just above the shoulder that makes first contact with the rifling that we are worried about. And that is far more consistent from bullet to bullet than the nose. Those numbers you provided above have an extreme spread of .008. I guarantee the spread wouldn't be that big if you could measure precisely to the point on the ogive that makes contact. The reality is that your bullets are going to be a hair different in length at the tippy tip. Takes only a small lump in the coating to add a thousandth or two.
I would recommend you measure bullets outside the case, and conduct that same test with bullets that measure exactly the same length.
Also, load one to 1.160 in a dummy round. Size the case, no primer no powder, flare, seat the bullet to 1.160, crimp to .378. Then see if that cartridge will plunk and spin freely in the chamber. If it does not, seat it two or three thousandths and try again, and again, and again until it spins freely while inserted all the way. And when it spins freely, take that measurement.
-
1.160 or 1.260? You mean 1.260 because the .015 cushion puts me about there?
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
1.160 or 1.260? You mean 1.260 because the .015 cushion puts me about there?
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
1.169 is maximum length for a 9mm cartridge.
He means 1.160.
-
1.160 or 1.260? You mean 1.260 because the .015 cushion puts me about there?
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
1.169 is maximum length for a 9mm cartridge.
He means 1.160.
Herp derp! You're right. I've been reading numbers too much today and read them wrong lol
1.160 didn't pass plunk test, going down to 1.135 seems to do it. This was with two bullets with the same length
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
1.160 didn't pass plunk test, going down to 1.135 seems to do it. This was with two bullets with the same length
What I'm saying is to load a dummy round at 1.160, then keep seating the same bullet a little deeper, a little deeper, .002-.003 at a time, until it finally plunks and spins freely fully seated in the chamber. That is another way to find max OAL for that bullet in that chamber. THEN you can make loads starting .010 shorter than that. Make 20 of them, then 20 .010 shorter still. And make twenty rounds a piece shortening in .010 increments -- 1.140, 1.130, 1.120, 1.110, etc. And make enough rounds at each increment that if that OAL is going to produce these failures, you've made enough rounds at that OAL that the failure will show up. If that means more than 20, then load more than 20. But this could help you find the OAL that flat our works.
Just guessing and trying this OAL one day and that other OAL the next time, THAT could lead to a long, frustrating process. Better to make a bunch at once and solve the mystery in one day. ;)
-
What was the actual max - - the length at which it touched the rifling.
That measurement is your exact chamber length for that bullet in that barrel. I use mixed brass so I grabbed 4 random cases for this test
1.1425
1.1465
1.1410
1.1490
Sorry, but I disagree. The instructions for the "Ammo Forum push test" state that it cannot be used as effectively with lead bullets. The reason for this is that lead bullets tend to be larger diameters, and those larger diameters will hang the bullet up on the barrel freebore.
It's right here...
There are several ways to do this, but here's my method.... Fit a new jacketed or plated bullet into a fired case. (No powder; fired primer.) If you try 2 or 3 bullet/case combinations you'll end up with 1 or 2 where the bullet is a snug "push fit". Fit the bullet inside the case, but leave the OAL out at an exaggerated length; any OAL longer than what you need.
Therefore, since you can't see inside the chamber, it's hard to distinguish what feature is doing the push-back.... the taper crimp, the bullet diameter, or bullet ogive contacting the lands.
As I said before, Lead is cheap, but Lead is not easy. When you go for the economics of Lead you automatically introduce 10 more "gotchas", which are NOT mentioned in the OAL article. I contend that if a lead bullet properly fits the CZ barrel, then it probably will not enter the CZ freebore easily. That's "easily" as in "the ability to get good, useable numbers using the Push Test".
The first step I would take is to reduce the diameter of your blue bullet in your test cartridge to a maximum of 0.355 to match the diameters of plated and jacketed bullets. When you get your test cartridge to a taper crimp of 0.376/0.377 (which you found yourself) and your test cartridge bullet to a diameter of 0.355, then I believe things will go much better for you.
Hope this helps. ;)
-
I tested 50 factory rounds and had no issues. I tested 30 reloads and 2 failed to go in. The crimp on those is 0.3785 and 0.3780
? And what was the taper crimp diameter on the factory rounds ?
? Any taper crimp measuring less than 0.380 should fall into the chamber and then back out. If that fails, then you may have additional issues...
? Your chamber may be under-sized, according to SAAMI standards
? Your caliper might need "zeroing" or replacing
? Your chamber may be fouled with lead or other obstructions
Dillon calculator says
Neck tension only_(.000)0.375
Very Light Crimp_(.001)0.374
Light Crimp_____(.002)0.373
Moderate Crimp__(.003)0.372
Heavy Crimp____(.004)0.371
And
Neck tension only_(.000)0.377
Very Light Crimp_(.001)0.376
Light Crimp_____(.002)0.375
Moderate Crimp__(.003)0.374
Heavy Crimp____(.004)0.373
What "Dillon calculator" is that ? I strongly disagree with those numbers when the ammo is used in a CZ pistol, for the reasons stated in my article on Taper Crimp.
I just sized a case and shoved a bullet in it. The "crimp" measures 0.3755
I've never done this test before. I saw it on the crimp thread.
This statement raises questions...
? What instrument did you use to measure taper crimp to 4 decimal places ?
? So have you changed your taper crimp setting yet to agree with the 0.356" ?
Inquiring minds want to know.
-
Here's a link to the calculator I referenced https://dillonprecision.net/crimp-calculator/
My blue bullets bullets are .355. I am using a Neiko branded digital caliper
I haven't changed the crimp setting yet. I'm running low so I'm waiting to order more before I start loading test bullets
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
Here's a link to the calculator I referenced https://dillonprecision.net/crimp-calculator/
Notice they don't recommend using any of those TC diameters. That's simply a calculator.
My blue bullets bullets are 0.355"
Is that their nominal diameter in the catalog, or have you been measuring them ? To work correctly in a CZ they better be at least 0.356", and hopefully closer to 0.357". Maybe even 0.358". That's some of the previously mentioned "10 more gotchas" when you load with lead.
I am using a Neiko branded digital caliper.
That's the same caliper you can buy at Harbor Freight for ~$10. Got one just like it and they work pretty good for reloading. However, don't fool yourself. The caliper may display 4 decimal places, but that's a long way from actually measuring 4 decimal places.
I haven't changed the crimp setting yet. I'm running low so I'm waiting to order more before I start loading test bullets.
So what's keeping you from running the incorrectly crimped bullets back through the TC die and correcting the issue ?
And again, what was the crimp diameter on the factory rounds ?
;)
-
So what's keeping you from running the incorrectly crimped bullets back through the TC die and correcting the issue ?
Nothing - I just have two different people recommending different things so I haven't done anything... Yet [emoji4]
And again, what was the crimp diameter on the factory rounds ?
I'll get that info when I get home tonight. I don't remember
[Mods fixed quotes]
-
Crimp on the factory rounds is .376 - .377
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
Nothing - I just have two different people recommending different things so I haven't done anything... Yet [emoji4]
Crimp on the factory rounds is .376 - .377
Then it looks like the factory agrees with yours truly.
;)
-
Thank you Wobbly. I read over your thread again last night. Very helpful !
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
I tested 50 factory rounds and had no issues. I tested 30 reloads and 2 failed to go in. The crimp on those is 0.3785 and 0.3780
Dillon calculator says
Neck tension only_(.000)0.375
Very Light Crimp_(.001)0.374
Light Crimp_____(.002)0.373
Moderate Crimp__(.003)0.372
Heavy Crimp____(.004)0.371
And
Neck tension only_(.000)0.377
Very Light Crimp_(.001)0.376
Light Crimp_____(.002)0.375
Moderate Crimp__(.003)0.374
Heavy Crimp____(.004)0.373
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Not sure how you are setting and measuring crimp but I always use an empty sized case for my 'light' crimp setups. Measure ID/OD with calipers, run thru crimp die, adjust die to get desired reduction. Not exact since case will bulge with seated bullet but easy way to get calibrated case mouth reduction.
Also carefully examine your feed ramp and the lip where it melds with chamber; look for any telltale signs of cases catching or hanging up.
-
Like Trump says:
"Make 9mm straight again" and that is all you need to do!
"CRIMP" is just an expression! O0
-
Not sure how you are setting and measuring crimp but I always use an empty sized case for my 'light' crimp setups. Measure ID/OD with calipers, run thru crimp die, adjust die to get desired reduction.
I don't think this method is advantageous. Due to the spring-back quality of brass, anytime you work the brass an "anvil" is needed to back up the the work of the "hammer". So when you swage the brass in a crimping action, it's best that a bullet be in place to "back up" the action of the die.
In other words, to get the most accurate results it's best to be building "test cartridges" with no powder and no primer. That's as close as you'll get to production settings.
;)
-
I have seen this kind of failure in CZs with Remington UMC, where the OAL is very short. Round nose bullets may help as well. A stronger recoil spring could also help.
-
377 for 355 bullets
378 for 356
379 for 357
I dont bother measuring brass because I dont sort by headstamp or length. If you aren't sorting by both of those, your precision crimp determination is wasted.
-
377 for 355 bullets
378 for 356
379 for 357
I dont bother measuring brass because I dont sort by headstamp or length. Of you aren't sorting by both those, your precision crimp determination is wasted.
Don't you just hate it when you run across those harder to crimp cases and you notice the head stamp? And then, a bit later you have another one you can tell is harder to crimp. And it's the same head stamp? An then you look through your primed brass in the loading tray and you see a couple more and you set them down next to some others of a different head stamp and you see some are longer than others?
I haven't really seen it with 9MM but I got into awhile back with .357 SIG. Sort of ruins a reloading session when you have to stop and take care of "stuff."
-
377 for 355 bullets
378 for 356
379 for 357
I dont bother measuring brass because I dont sort by headstamp or length. If you aren't sorting by both those, your precision crimp determination is wasted.
Don't you just hate it when you run across...
I don't notice it so much as I know it's there. The taper crimp die is obviously tapered, so if our cases aren't the same length, they're not getting crimped to the same degree anyway, and if we're using different headstamps, our case walls aren't the same thickness. With mixed headstamps, we can go more precise than what our gear can make use of. And if we're not shooting out to 50 yards or more, who cares? ;) I find the measurements I use to work well, and at the end of the day, if I leave the crimp die at .378 or .379 through a variety of diameters, I can't tell you I see any difference. Anything .380 or less should work in any 9mm pistol. Over-crimping is a problem, but under-crimping, so long as it's within spec for the caliber, doesn't seem to have any impact at action pistol distances.
And obviously, yes, some cases take some extra oomph through the sizing die, and when that happens, I wonder what that is doing to the other dies on the shellplate with the shellplate under more force on one side. Truth be told, I more often notice it go easier than expected -- "How did that .380 case get in there? Whoops! I let a split case get through." ;)
-
I believe I've fixed it.
I switched to a round nose bullet instead of truncated cone. I have to load them shorter than the TC but I haven't been able to replicate the issue in my OP
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
Don't you just hate it when you run across those harder to crimp cases and you notice the head stamp? And then, a bit later you have another one you can tell is harder to crimp. And it's the same head stamp? An then you look through your primed brass in the loading tray and you see a couple more and you set them down next to some others of a different head stamp and you see some are longer than others?
Some of those "harder to crimp" might be brass plated steel.
-
I believe I've fixed it. I switched to a round nose bullet instead of truncated cone. I have to load them shorter than the TC but I haven't been able to replicate the issue in my OP
Well, that's good news.
-
After reading through this thread, I did not notice anyone asking if using a single stage press vs a progressive stage press was being used. Assumed a progressive, but you know what happens when you ass-u-me. On my Dillon 550C progressive (manually turned) press I have found it very advantageous to make sure ALL die positions are being utilized when trying to set accurate measurements for any single die function...from sizing to seating depth to crimp (9mm wall straightening).
I does make a difference I assure you.
Any further thoughts?
-
I believe I've fixed it. I switched to a round nose bullet instead of truncated cone. I have to load them shorter than the TC but I haven't been able to replicate the issue in my OP.
You've simply swapped one type of chamber interference for another. See the cartoon below...
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/sJqEZoPxc3rhH4hHwpv1ZPtbeSWnF-QiacotHWePidX3ho2mo-ZyTuN-i7rHrC3EQ3lzoqM9ioE4VarBM3GzwFgBm76DbwlR0907okVaIumyrkaLzcFuIL-vqJ-9Ll5xgTiTfSWKnjy3ZHt42ms2bcbEFU7B10BY_xb7lf7pz9zToFZ25taRPrfvsm0RzzSaKY8bOFcMMoaozs4Drp2nPZo-72FVgRPZZhwMtvYgPonIZczIxzeNRSs2cjKy3ei0gmBgJ7DnCOzifEjAjOeyYaqiDynixBSH0Xd2ofMejI1ASdBsx9tiCpWUAzlAg1nlorYomDYPtg-UtAgVxMK9BJI8tbnLtAPmWmdkfk_wDA0xbr_HySCHV5I7OsDU_Z_0HdUXz9GFaLv8uNt90nEjTxIUYzpzz8JlgHwzLlyZOXSpLhqYVJmZo-y_rJvRXPM1tEXnCb-k-e5mw9NozHzIYL7ztsyq_trpLI9KV3egsPOgdnc_2EvREHRA-kP0nz37MpNr_vxxMn0Z4KuIY-hdME8SRoOfHMRq1QBqcQ8A2Zw6Jd1luOYIGY_eCOpRSfsgeYl6NxIgvFTiPGD4vlMVi3W2UQa4lXQi-kOElNwTbP1575rwjBxTEvqFCBabVdnPTCJ1oz3_I331GrY86C7jkocepqr9Kpw=w960-h720-no)
? The former conical ogive bullet fouled the chamber at the end of the freebore/ beginning of the lands, as in the example on the far left.
? Your new RN ogive bullet fouls the lands in the middle of the ogive, similar to the example on the far right.
It's never absolutely clear where a bullet will encounter the chamber. That's why you need to do the Max Oal test on every bullet that's new to your chamber. You simply cannot tell by simple observation.
Look at the 2 bullets below...
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/TADP6vR5nIY9rXnd9eAntbF9r7fw0VQ8I5wwd3gcdTOyGgHgzfhAcMB47XUsbGfc4urocO9WHpgOeT3jxic19HuypeHzT29PR-tJXTeUwwISNkJltmN2sqGNYA8qAa6jvXuFUi-6Ye-B3bTuxbWSFzkXv1IbHuC6JTuXbfzXjCjFHtExLzimVcUs2hSn-aXReGBlON3NFEIJBcCehPVn4hW2_INOsqaxBBj1VXDtqqwxq_N5q2wylA31KY76E1C5mgwX5UG5_FcRn2R4Mo1Vr-t7LyG0Ay6eVpPTcfjd5gELumxMCb42MWDs5Ge-oBd86hMB15jOtYdt2D7RemlBEZcd3ddFAEJAiMN-Xx8vyoEBxrHLCkOKnbTOSigktelF2ZFNzo6Rkj0oqRGb7CvjWQkNkMfE_JXA2eIxAke_JJ2b2dQ1PAZExQccKNYUdEhZcmz3vnrdylfeQSluI-ZaG7RzKhN4Z9RKVWLEW4_wgAgzbpPDZGvGxt6b4tRvWuVOLtTKmrzXN3rlytacZqmQU7rxJtX3nRzTTuPr2ZmPz2cdNu0yo3rnUlVAiDJXI2LuZ9s1QtXf1_ZJ9bOG0HTkzYos-6jvKPohQCM2ZNTL_5kdPkYGvswWMoUkhPh8gs-8tnqiXG01cZ93olM4eHrlX16sTImbMqI=w810-h605-no)
The Zero has a Max OAL of 0.993 (less than 1.000"), while the Berry has a Max OAL in excess of 1.200". That's a total OAL difference of over 0.200" simply based on ogive shape !!
;)