Berry's 124 HBFN OAL?

[1SOW]

I recently purchased 1K of the 124HBFN bullets to give them a try.  I have good results with the 124 HB"RN" over 4.1 grs n320 at 1.135"--129+PF.

I tried a load at 1.120" with 4.0grs  n320 with the flat nose and it ran, but only developed about 1000'/sec.  I would have bet on faster speeds based on the HBRN results.  I was pleasantly surprised the conical flat nose let it load fairly long in my 75B, but it's a shorter bullet and I like a little seating depth in the case.   

I've shortened it up some more--1.115" and want to load a couple more load versions, before I chrono again Tues.  Looking for 1040'-50'/sec

I'm just curious what oals other reloaders of this particular bullet are using.

Thanks in advance,
DJ 

[FireMoose]

1.115 looks familiar I'll post. My oals later tonight though

[1SOW]

Thanks FireMoose.  [see PM sent earlier.]
I've shortened the remaining 10 of the first 4.0gr loads to 1.115",   loaded  a few more with 4.1 grs at:   1.110, 1.115 and 1.120.  I'll chrono tomorrow.
These should point at a good load. (hopefully 1.117520" won't be needed )   

[Wobbly]

Sorry, I can't help. Berry changed the ogive shape since my last order.

[FireMoose]

Yup, I use 4.7 or 5.5 grains power pistol at 1.115

[1SOW]

Still too slow at 1.110 and 4.1 grs of n320. (1013 avg)  I even retested my chrono with a proven load.  It was good.
Well, my judgement sucks.   

I have 16 left loaded with 4.1 grs that I can shorten to 1.10 an 1.090 for testing next week.   I'll sneak up on it eventually.

Thanks for the info Firemoose.  At least I know that oal will run with a good load.

[tt5]

I'm using 1.068" I my sp01.
I just finished my box though, so have to push test a few in the new thousand.

[1SOW]

tt5, these FPs I just recieved, push-tested out to RN lengths.
"It's the powder load that is NOT in harmony with the bullet grasshopper".   

[tt5]

ok, i'll add another sentence....
I'll push test the new batch.  If the result is different (and it sounds like it will be) I'll work up the load again. 

[Wobbly]

Go for it.  I'd like to know too.

[tt5]

I grabbed 30 bullets from the top of the new box and 30 cases from the bucket and started pushing.  The first 15 resulted in pretty noisy data, then it settled down to a range of 1.079-1.081" for the second half of the run.

Barrel- SP01 with about 1800 rounds through it.

Bullets- Berry 124g HBFP from an order purchased directly from Berry's and received about a week ago.

Cases- FC fired 3 times- The 30 cases measured 0.739 to 0.747" with a mean of 0.742". No apparent correlation between case length and OAL in this small data set.

The previous batch of 124g HBFP from June also measured out to about 1.08".

So if there are new bullets out there with a different ogive shape, I must have gotten an older batch.

[FireMoose]

After reading yer post again 1sow, I had to go back and look at my data again. I was wrong it says 1.15 for am hsm RN.

I gotta get my notebook less cluttered...

[1SOW]

tt5:

So if there are new bullets out there with a different ogive shape, I must have gotten an older batch.

 
I was surprised when the conical nose 124 HBFPs push tested out past 1.125.   75B, bbl with almost 60K.  They fell in with a clink and would rotate easily.  I tried 20  thinking something was wrong. The tests confirmed it was okay to load out a little longer. 
I've had some Berry's sample bullets including the 124HBFN.  The only difference I can see is in bullet length consistancy.  The dozen "samples" varied a lot--from .552" to .561.5".  10 of this new batch measured .555" +/- .0005". 

 My problem has been  failing to account for that "hollow base" with a much shorter bullet.  The HBFP is .064" shorter than the RN. DUUH.
I finally realized that to get the same seating depth and pressure as my 124HB"RN", I'd need .071" oals.  I don't want that short, so I'm upping the charge a little more trying to use 1.10"..  We'll "see how they run".
 

[tt5]

I'm thinking that 1.068 might be a little short, but that's what fits my barrel. Too short seems to give me misfeeds.

- With 124FP's i needed 1.055 OAL.  very short.  I frequently would catch the nose of the bullet on the barrel hood, but only from one of my 2 mags.
- I switched to 124 HBFP's and was able to extend to 1.065 (that's 1.08 from the push test-0.015) that reduced the frequency of hangups, but didn't solve it.
- I pushed out to 1.068, and again reduced the frequency of misfeeds, but didn't solve it.
- Tried various round noses at longer lengths. That solved the misfeed but i prefer the hole in the paper from FP's
- finally broke down and bought a couple more magazines. Now I have 3 mags with no misfeed issues, and one that I don't use with flat points.

[1SOW]

Your feed problem with that short OAL is not all that unusual.  With a moderately dirty gun/mag it might be even worse.
Less than 1.10" OALs are not on my preferred-to-shoot list.  That also starts to give a lot of room in the mags for movement.  (I know good springs help).
Two of my favorite bullets will just load to 1.10".  They feed 100% (many thousands) and shoot really well, so that's my comparison criteria for a minimum reliable OAL--right or wrong.

My poor load choices above show "wrong" is  a possibilty.