Author Topic: new reloader question- Max COAL  (Read 994 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tdogg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2401
Re: new reloader question- Max COAL
« Reply #15 on: March 14, 2023, 11:59:18 AM »
So your seating depth is:  0.750 (case) + 0.717 (bullet) - 1.095 (OAL)  = ~0.372 inches

This in my opinion is too deep for most cases.  This might be an acceptable seating depth if the bullet has a large chamfer at the base (think boat tail on rifle bullet).  If you are using the same bullet that is pictured on the Blue Bullets website, then it does appear to have a rather large chamfer at the base.  You need to measure the dimension of the chamfer, how high the chamfer starts from the base.  You can subtract that measurement from your seating depth to determine if there is going to be interference with the thicker case webbing.

Regardless these bullets are going to be seated deep and your using a fast powder.  This is a generally not a good combination from a safety standpoint.  Your acceptable load range is going to be very small (all titegroup loads are very small windows).  I've never used titegroup, how well does it meter?  Do you have a good grasp on your reloading process and how variable your charges are using your equipment and components?  If you know your process has a powder charge variability that is  +/- 0.1 gr from the target and the acceptable load window is only 0.3 grains then you may want to reconsider using that powder.

Referencing Hodgdon's reloading data for the 147 Xtp with a seating depth of ~0.3 inches, your seating depth reduces the starting volume by about 15% (subtracting the estimated seating depth volume difference from the total case volume).  This means you would reduce your starting load by about 15%.  This is only acceptable to try if you have a chrono to confirm you are staying under the maximum listed bullet velocity.

All this can be pursued and you may find an acceptable load.  Only you can decide if it is worth the time and component investment vs the risk from a safety standpoint.  You ultimately are responsible for your safety and the safety of others around you.

The 135gr Acme bullet sounds like a good decision but we won't know until you start the process again to know all the variables.  This is what reloading takes, attention to detail and data driven decision making.

Good luck!

Cheers,
Toby
This forum rocks!

Offline nkresho

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 39
Re: new reloader question- Max COAL
« Reply #16 on: March 14, 2023, 01:01:11 PM »
Hah I appreciate it! A lot to unpack here. I've done a lot of forum searching to see what most people are loading. I'll dig into some of these replies a little more in the next couple days when I have more free time. One quick question I have- I'm checking out that Redding die. Do you not crimp 9mm? Right now I'm using the Hornady seater/crimp die.

The crimp in 9mm is to remove the flare from the powder drop.  You need a taper crimp for 9, which differs quite a bit from a roll crimp that other cartridges have.   
You want to return the mouth of the case to spec (0.378" or so) and no more.  Overcripmping will deform the bullet and possibly cause weak neck tension (among other issues).

Here's a great post about the the taper crimp (thanks Wobbly):  https://czfirearms.us/index.php?topic=78873.msg572103

The redding seater ensures the bullet is perfectly centered as it's pressed into the case.  With the hornady seater, i was having instances where the bullet was slightly tilted as it was pushed into the case, causing a single sided bulge that failed the hundo.  The Redding eliminated that for me (even with the horrible Aguila and CBC brass).

I run the following die order in my press:

station 1: hornady decapping and sizing die
Station 2: Hornady mechanical powder drop with flaring insert (just enough flare to let the bullet drop right in and not topple out when the press indexes)
Station 3: mr Bulletfeeder bullet drop
Station 4: Redding comp seating die
Station 5: Hornady taper crimp

Some folks add a powder check die (i prefer that to be my visual check) and need to combine seating and crimping (like with a lee combination die) when using the LNL or other 5 station press.  It's a matter of preference.

Offline ColoradoNick

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: new reloader question- Max COAL
« Reply #17 on: March 14, 2023, 02:53:27 PM »
Thanks, the reason I asked about the crimp was I was talking to a guy behind the counter at the shop last week who said he doesn't crimp 9mm. I think I'm going to change my setup around to-
1. sizer/decapper
2. powder and PTX
3. powder cop
4. Redding comp seating die
5. Redding comp taper crimp

As I get more comfortable I may buy the mini Mr bullet to replace the powder cop and just get a good light but for now I kind of like it. The Hornady combo seater/crimp die appeared to be working well but I like the idea of separating that process and will hopefully get a more consistent bullet depth. Doing more forum searching I think I'll end up using the blue bullets 135 TC's. Lots of people online seem to be using them with TG and loading them fairly long in CZ's. The only other change I might try is replacing the TG with Sport Pistol when I run out. I should have some worked up by this weekend to verify through a chrono after my steel challenge match Saturday.

Offline Wobbly

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11738
  • Loves the smell of VihtaVuori in the morning !
Re: new reloader question- Max COAL
« Reply #18 on: March 14, 2023, 04:21:15 PM »
Thanks, the reason I asked about the crimp was I was talking to a guy behind the counter at the shop last week who said he doesn't crimp 9mm.

The only way you can skip crimping is to skip the flair (aka "belling").
Or, maybe he's seating Berry Mfg bullets, which have such a generous radius around the base that they are able to enter a case with no flair. Works great on 2 or 3 cartridges.
In God we trust; On 'Starting Load' we rely.

Offline ColoradoNick

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: new reloader question- Max COAL
« Reply #19 on: March 16, 2023, 03:34:55 PM »
Blue 135 TC's in .355 and .356 just showed up. Max COAL in one of my shadows was 1.10 and the other was 1.09. I measured them using blazer brass only, 5 rounds each and subtracted .015 off the shortest. Most measured around 1.12 but there was one outlier that was shorter in each group. I'm headed to a match this evening and I'm going to talk to the gun smith about reaming the throat. If anyone has a recommendation for a smith that has done this with CZ's that's located in the Denver area please let me know!

I have some Acme 135 RN's showing up later today that I will also test and I might try some Berry's from the shop, but at this point I'm not very hopeful. Really weird because both shadows feed factory ammo and reloads that I've been purchasing just fine and they're all measuring 1.14

Offline Wobbly

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11738
  • Loves the smell of VihtaVuori in the morning !
Re: new reloader question- Max COAL
« Reply #20 on: March 17, 2023, 11:00:12 AM »
Blue 135gr TC's in .355 and .356 just showed up. Max COAL in one of my shadows was 1.10 and the other was 1.09. I measured them using Blazer brass only, 5 rounds each and subtracted .015 off the shortest. Most measured around 1.12 but there was one outlier that was shorter in each group.
And did you reduce the bullet diameter before making this test ? Lead bullets are 0.001/0.002" larger dia and count on the slide seating (pounding) the nose of the bullet into the freebore by force. When you take these measurements on the bench, hopefully you aren't pounding anything. Therefore you need to manually reduce the bullet's dia down to 0.355" BEFORE doing the OAL test. This is explained in the measurement instructions.

I'm headed to a match this evening and I'm going to talk to the gun smith about reaming the throat.
I'm not sure why you want to take this rash action that is full of risk when multiple work-around options have been discussed. You seemed to be leaning toward reaming ever since your first post. Makes me wonder why you asked the other questions.

Just remember, you can seat your bullet to 1.090 or 1.080", and then go back to 1.100". You can less powder, and then go back. But once you remove metal from the barrel it can NEVER be put back. It's like suicide: A permanent solution to a temporary issue. AND, if reaming makes you loose all shot placement accuracy or other problem, that can never be put back either.

I have some Acme 135 RN's showing up later today that I will also test and I might try some Berry's from the shop, but at this point I'm not very hopeful.
• Did you try the 135gr from MBC that's in the Stickies ? HERE  It can be loaded out to 1.130" without obstructing the chamber.

• Berry 147gr RN are known to "Push Test" out to 1.170" and longer.

• So how did the calculations for a load at 1.090" turn out ? And the chronometer work, how'd that turn out ?

• Did you consider using jacketed bullets?

Really weird because both shadows feed factory ammo and reloads that I've been purchasing just fine and they're all measuring 1.140".
There's nothing "weird" about it. It's simply proof-positive that different shape bullets react with (fit into) any gun's chamber in different ways. "Different bullet/ different OAL" was the first lesson in the reloading instructions provided above.

It simply doesn't make sense that the 147gr (which is about 0.060/0.070" longer) tests to the same OAL lengths as the 135gr. I highly suspect that your present 135gr bullets will work just fine at 1.100" OAL or longer... IF you'll do all the required preparation for a proper static barrel measurement.

All the best, my friend
In God we trust; On 'Starting Load' we rely.

Offline ColoradoNick

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: new reloader question- Max COAL
« Reply #21 on: March 17, 2023, 02:12:16 PM »
Test fired both the 147gr blues with 3.0gr of TG at 1.07 OAL and the Acme 135's with 3.3gr of TG at 1.13 today and they were both extremely soft. I much prefer the 147's though. Significantly softer than the sub 147's I've been buying that have a PF of 139. Both cycled just fine and and shot sub 1" groups at 10 yards. I didn't have access to a chrono today so I didn't work up from there. More importantly at the match yesterday I talked to a few different guys shooting CZ's. Everyone that did their own reloads had their barrel reamed. I found a place that will do it for $60 each with a 24 hour turn around. I shipped both of them today. I don't have time to be into the tinkering aspect of reloading, so if I can follow published load data to get a soft shooting 147gr bullet that makes power factor at a decent OAL then the $120 was well worth the piece of mind to me. Based on the people I've talked to in person and consensus on reaming over at BE I'm not concerned.

Offline sevt_chevelle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 217
Re: new reloader question- Max COAL
« Reply #22 on: March 18, 2023, 04:39:42 PM »
I sent out a trans model 75 for reaming about 8 yes ago.  It still shoots like a laser.  I also just bought a reamer from Dave Monoson reamers for around 60 bucks.  Did 5 compact barrels that would require a 1.040, whereas my S2 with the same bullets can be at 1.1ish.

Since you're on Enos, look up Memphis mechanic, he owns a custom carbide reamer.  He has reamed a TON of barrels, and despite what some experts say, not one has experienced issues.

I see you sent them out already, hopefully your guy has a carbide reamer as those nitirded S2 barrels will laugh at and than destroy a hss reamer.

« Last Edit: March 18, 2023, 05:06:31 PM by sevt_chevelle »

Offline Wobbly

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11738
  • Loves the smell of VihtaVuori in the morning !
Re: new reloader question- Max COAL
« Reply #23 on: March 19, 2023, 10:04:28 AM »
He has reamed a TON of barrels, and despite what some experts say, not one has experienced issues.

I respectfully disagree.

I never said it was the end of the world, or that it would turn out badly. I merely pointed out it's a move that has unknown risks. I would rather mitigate those risks by getting a different bullet or seating the existing bullet deeper, both choices which can be modified or changed at a later date. Changing the barrel is a permanent, one-way move. I wish the OP all the luck in the world, but following the lemming herd is not always the best plan of action... especially when you've not tried any other options.

And what about the users who did end up with a screwed up barrel ? Do you really think they come on a web site and announce, "Hey guys, I just screwed up. Besides the cost of the $200 reamer, now I have to buy a new $500 barrel !" So quoting the number of winners without quoting the number of losers is not evidence.

As brokers are fond of saying: Past performance is no indicator of future results.
In God we trust; On 'Starting Load' we rely.

 

anything