Load Testing - Accurate No5

[Wobbly]

It was a wonderfully clear day. The hot weather finally promised to brake and it was only going to be 94°F or so. A friend had given me several pounds of AA No5 so I decided a test was in order. I love AA No7 in 38 Super, and I use a lot of AA No2 with 38Spcl wadcutters, so I was familiar with the product line and very interested to get shooting.






Background Info
Caliber:  9x19 Luger
Bullets:  Precision Delta 124gr JHP
Brass:    Win
Powder:  Accurate (Ramshot) No5
Max Velocity:  1027fps (per Western Powder booklet V7.0)
Primer:  CCI
OAL:     1.110"
Pistol:   SP-01 Tac with 16# recoil spring
Qty:      8 rounds each, slow fired
Weather:  90°F, humid and clear
Chrono:    ProChrono DLX
Powder Measure: Dillon (modified)

Load      Avg Vel           ES        SD
4.6gr          777              60        20
4.8             816              61        17
5.0             872              82        25
5.2             911              82        26
5.4             943              82        27
5.6             979              51        16
5.8            1012             45        15

NOTES
• Metered very well due to small grain size. These may be the best metering powders on the market.
• Fine grains of this powder will funnel right through a missing primer, making a mess of your press in the process
• Burned remarkably clean, even at 4.6gr  (See photo below.)
• Attribute the strange SD numbers to the powder and not my reloading technique. With the way this stuff meters, I was expecting much lower numbers.
• I wonder if the hotter Federal #100 SPP would ignite the ball powder better, and thereby lower the SD numbers ?
• Will not achieve PF for competition, recommend 5.6-5.8gr for general plinking
• There were numerous "stove pipes" at 4.6gr
• Consistent slide 'lock back' achieved at 5.0gr
• Loads up to 5.0gr could be double loaded. Above that there would be noticeable spillage.
• This is a true, fine grained 'ball powder'. Any spillage is an issue due to the extremely fine grain of this powder. This stuff will really make a mess in no time flat because it's small enough to get into cracks and joints.
• I believe No7 is too slow for 9mm competition, so I was hoping that No5 would slip right in there and do a good job of filling the gap. It failed at this task. I'm really wanting to like this powder, so I'll try No5 in 38Spcl and see what the results look like. Maybe it will do better at lower pressures.
• I would NOT buy or use this powder for 9mm

[Wobbly]

All gone...


Look how clean these cases are...




 

[M1A4ME]

I used a good bit of AA#5 for .357 SIG, .45 acp and .40 S&W.  I was not impressed with accuracy, but maybe it was the pistols I was shooting the ammo in, not the powder.  I used it for jacketed, plated and cast lead.

I have bought some AA#7 to try in 9MM.

[Dan_69GTX]

As the song says: "I can see clearly now, the rain is gone pics are there"

[Wobbly]

Back at it again this morning. Yesterday's test left me with more questions than real answers. So I remade the 5.6gr and 5.8gr loads again, and the only thing I changed was the primer. These are as much like yesterday's loads as I can possibly make.



Same gun
Same range
Same bullets & powder
Same OAL
Same chrono
Same weather, light conditions and time of day
Federal #100 SPP


Load      Avg Vel           ES        SD
5.6gr          953              20        07
5.8           1006              21        07


NOTES
• So the extreme spread of the loads was cut in half using Fed #100, which in turn lowered the SD numbers to an area I would expect for such a highly controlled test sample set.

• However, the powder did all this without changing the chamber pressure (the powder burn characteristics), because bullet velocities did not change. So the improved SD numbers are purely from more consistent primers.

• I don't think we can draw any negative conclusions about CCI primers. It could just be this sample's age, storage history, or lot number. More testing is definitely needed.

• However, we can draw some positive conclusions about Federal primers. This test makes me want to go compare the standard Federal 100 against the Federal GM100 Match primers. Would the SD's drop even more ??

[Dan_69GTX]

FYI - Your last pic isn't showing

WOW - What a difference.

I've been meaning to do more testing with primer differences.  The only test I've done so far was for  federal small pistol magnum vs S&B small pistol.  Don't think I kept track of the SD, just average speeds  (fed mag was slower).

https://czfirearms.us/index.php?topic=94945.msg728514#msg728514

Now you have wet my appetite.

[M1A4ME]

Are the federal primers "hotter" or "colder" than the CCI primers?  Or did you say so and I missed it.

I know, in rifles (and pistols for magnum loads) they recommend magnum primers for ball powders but I seldom use them.  Heck sometimes use magnum primers for compressed loads of slow burning powders.  I've not seen a difference in groups and have no idea about velocity or standard deviation.

But I'm still curious whether the "good" primers in your test are hotter or colder than the "bad" primers (or not so good primers.)

[armoredman]

You are having fun, I see. I used very little Number 5 for 9mm, was always Number 7 or 2. Thanks for the detailed info!

[FALer]

Love these threads.

They slowly help me gain sophistication.

Nate

[Wobbly]

Love these threads.
They slowly help me gain sophistication.

Huh ?

Is it the cane or the top hat ??

[skin]

 I also have found that using warmer primers for ball powder and slow burning  powders have helped accuracy and consistency. I've been testing Enforcer powder by ramshot for  22 hornet and 45 acp. Extremely fine ball powder. Ramshot  recommend using magnum primers.

[Kosh]

First, I apologize for replying to an "old post", if that's considered not a good thing, here. I'm new to this place, so ALL posts are new to me.
I wanted to PM WOBBLY about his choice of charge weights when working up AA#5 in 9x19mm, but apparently, I am so new as to not have this privilege, yet. I also want to emphasize that I'm not here to foment an argument of any kind, but solely to gather information. If my parlance at ANY point sounds argumentative, let me apologize in advance and re-emphasize that this is not my mission.

I also wish to say that THAT is one VERY FINE LOOKING CZ pistol in WOBBLY'S photographs, and I will be unabashedly jealous of him, until MY CZ 75 pistol arrives!

I noticed that WOBBLY halted testing with a max load of 5.8/AA#5/124 gr. JHP. I don't have access to the 7.0 version of manufacturer's loading data, but the 8.0 version shows the max load he used to be in the middle of the range for many of JHPs listed. Conspicuous exceptions are the Sierra 125 gr. JHP, 124 gr. Hornady XTP, and the Berry 124 gr. HBFP. Other similarly shaped and weighted bullets show max charges in the 6.0 -6.5 gr. range.
I wanted to ask Mr. WOBBLY if there was something about the PD projectiles redolent of the "exception" bullets I listed, which made him decide it was prudent to stop work-up at 5.8/AA#5. If this was NOT the case, did he witness signs of high(ish) pressure, in loads above where he stopped reporting?
I am a reasonably experienced reloader, with both the 9x19mm cartridge and AA#5 propellant in 9x19. It has been my observation that AA#5 performs best in charge weights closer to (but not necessarily at) maximum charge weights with 115 gr. and 124 gr. projectiles.
I am not where I can consult my reload notebook, but best performance with AA#5 using 124/125 cast or PC'd bullets occurred FOR ME, at 6.0 gr. and above. The numbers that stick in my mind for MY reloads were 1059 for 5.9 gr., 1077 for 6.0 gr., 1098 for 6.1 gr. and 1117 for 6.2 gr. I trickled the charges into Winchester cases, with Win. SPPs and seated to 1.12". The chronographed results speak for themselves, but I also experienced no indications of pressure from primer flattening, nor markedly higher slide velocity, as indicated by "modal" case ejection distances. 6.0/AA#5 shot notably tighter groups than all lighter charge weights. 6.1/AA#5 shot yet tighter groups, and 6.2/AA#5 shot as well as 6.1/AA#5, but no better.
Since MY mission was to find a load that shot "accurately enough" but stayed uniformly in the 1070-1100 f/s range, I've stuck with 6.1/AA#5/125 gr. TC-PC at 1.12" O.A.L. It has never failed me. The load is not at all picky about what cases I use, but it DOES like hotter primers for some reason. If the minimum PF was raised overnight for some reason, and I had to obtain higher velocities, I would feel safe enough to try a few rounds at 6.3 - 6.5/AA#5/125, with particular attention paid to pressure signs. A priori, I am doubtful that any would come to the fore.

CLEARLY, there are more differences than similarities in MY work-up vs. WOBBLY's. My pistol is not the same as his, our projectiles are different, as are primers and C.O.A.L. I nonetheless wonder if trying 5.9-6.1/AA#5 with WOBBLY's work-up might have yielded more satisfactory numbers. I'm afraid I'm not clear on why he did not try the next increment in his "ladder" for evaluation. I think his results would have pleased him.
Just saying...

[painter]

Not Wobbly, but I'm thinking the reason he stopped his testing is that he reached the max velocity, or close enough to it, published in the data at 5.8 gr.
Since we can't easily measure pressure, velocity is the only measurable variable.

[Wobbly]

Welcome Aboard !

Not Wobbly, but I'm thinking the reason he stopped his testing is that he reached the max velocity, or close enough to it, published in the data at 5.8 gr.

Since we can't easily measure pressure, velocity is the only measurable variable.

And that's exactly it. I couldn't have said it better.

If you load by powder weight only, AND you are altering your OALs, then you could possibly get into trouble. The danger here is Chamber Pressure and not powder weight. The only significant clue we have as to Chamber Pressure is Velocity. That's the entire reason to own a chrono.

Hope this helps.

 

PS. As far as the "old thread" you did the right thing. We most definitely want all the data pertaining to AA #5 in this one, single thread. That way you the shooter don't have to read 97 threads to get a single answer. That's what makes this forum different... it's built for the shooter, not the forum owner.   

[armoredman]

Welcome and bring any zombie thread to life that you want for information - we don't mind one bit! I still haven't done any more work with #5 as all Accurate powders took a powder around here, as it were, but I remember having a lot of fun with #2 and #7. STILL jealous of anyone with a nice 38 Super, highly underrated round in my book.