Load testing: Hodgdon CFE Pistol powder

[IDescribe]

• • For CFE Pistol in 45ACP look here: https://czfirearms.us/index.php?topic=95931.0 • •

Just two bullets for now: the Hornady 115gr HAP and the Montana Gold 115gr JHP.  As I load more with this powder, I will add to this thread.  I recommended to another forum user that they go ahead and use Hodgdon's load data for CFE Pistol and the Speer GDHP, which was 5.3 -- 5.9.  He was concerned that he should start lower because of the shorter OAL, so I went ahead and extended the ladder down to a starting load of 5.1 so that we could see the difference between 5.1 and Hodgdon's starting load of 5.3.

CFE Pistol.  What the manufacturer says:  This spherical pistol propellant utilizes our CFE formula, Copper Fouling Eraser, virtually eliminating copper fouling, plus providing top velocities with clean burning and minimal muzzle flash. For competitive shooters and hand loaders seeking the perfect powder for target or self-defense loads, CFE Pistol provides optimum performance in cartridges like the 9mm Luger, 38 Super, 40 S&W, the venerable 45 ACP and many more.

It metered well.  It was a little dirty, especially at lower charges.  Recoil was definitely stouter when compared to faster powders, but that's expected.  Some people are using this to make major power factor for USPSA Open division, so it's going to be fairly forgiving in normal load ranges. 

Caliber:       9x19 Luger
Bullet:        Hornady 115gr HAP
Powder:      CFE Pistol
Primers:      Federal SPP
Brass:         Starline -- used
OAL:           1.080"
 
I know most don't use 115gr bullets for action shooting, but I went ahead and included power factor for context.  I am also going to add the additional velocity gained per tenth grain of powder at the end of each string.

5.1gr      Avg fps - 1083  fps |  PF-125  | SD-15  | ES-40
5.3gr      Avg fps - 1108  fps |  PF-127  | SD-10  | ES-35  | +12.5
5.5gr      Avg fps - 1160  fps |  PF-133  | SD-9    | ES-30  | +26.0
5.7gr      Avg fps - 1188  fps |  PF-137  | SD-7    | ES-24  | +19.0
5.8gr      Avg fps - 1206  fps |  PF-139  | SD-12  | ES-44  | +18.0
5.9gr      Avg fps - 1225  fps |  PF-141  | SD-11  | ES-31  | +19.0


With that modest velocity bump of 12.5 feet per second per tenth grain going from 5.1 to 5.3, as well as the fact that these were especially dirty, I'd say the powder at these charge weights is not producing enough pressure to burn efficiently -- to be expected for light loads.  Those nice even incremental velocity bumps for the highest 3 charge increases are fairly comforting.  Between that and the low flash characteristics, I'd say this powder has some potential for HD loads.  Hodgdon's load data for the Speer GDHP shows 5.3gr -5.9gr getting 1059 - 1185 feet/sec, so it would seem we're getting a little more pressure and velocity for our powder with the deeper seated bullet.   

______________________________________________

Caliber:       9x19 Luger
Bullet:        Montana Gold 115gr JHP
Powder:      N320
Primers:      Federal SPP
Brass:         Starline -- used
OAL:           1.075
 
5.3gr      Avg fps - 1113  fps  |  PF-128  | SD-14  | ES-48
5.5gr      Avg fps - 1138  fps  |  PF-131  | SD-13  | ES-32  | +12.5
5.7gr      Avg fps - 1193  fps  |  PF-137  | SD-11  | ES-45  | +27.5

So not too far off from the Hornady HAPs.


[Mods changed the thread title]

[snapshot762]

Interesting post! I just started to try out some loads with CFE Pistol this week. I used Hodgdon's data and am using RMR 124gr RN bullets. No chronograph so I can't comment on velocity. I loaded them at a COAL of 1.140" and have gotten good results with a charge of 5.3gr of powder, and I did notice that the recoil is a bit snappier than with the faster burning powders that I have been using.

[jameslovesjammie]

I've only had a chance to test it with a Ballisticast 931 (125 grain lead round nose).


Bullet: Ballisticast 931
Lube: Carnauba Red
Diameter: 0.358"
Alloy: Water Quenched Wheel Weights

Powder: CFE Pistol
Primer: CCI 500
Brass: Federal Nickel (once fired)
OAL: 1.125"

Load        Avg
4.4gr          1006fps
4.5             1042
4.6             1066
4.7             1081
4.8             1093
4.9             1111
5.0             1156




SD's ranged from 8-13, and all rounds were trickle charged to weight.

Hodgdon's load data showed (with a 125 grain Lead Conical Nose bullet) at 1.125", a starting load of 4.4 grains at 1,041 fps and max of 5.0 grains at 1,156 fps.  While my 5.0 grain load matched Hodgdon's data to the T, judging by the spike in velocity I would call this overpressure for this bullet.  Especially since the velocities for the other powder charges were so much lower than Hodgdon's data.  I would call 4.9 grains max with this bullet.  4.5-4.9 grains gave the most predictable increases in velocity, and would be the more usable window.

Accuracy node was at 4.8 grains.  (5 shots 20 yards)

[copemech]

Awesome job ID, sorry about putting that BUZZ in your head, ha!

Even though it appears I need to go slightly shorter at 1.07 my my P09, it does appear the 5.3gr may be a good starter. The velos are good! All this should run well I would think, now lets talk a bit about accuracy!

Any prefs based upon your experience? Some of my reading suggests the PF range of upper 130's to lower 140's  is the way to twist up a 9mm reguardless of 115vs 124/5.

I know some of that is subjective and may vary.

Thoughts appreciated.

I do want to toutch upon the other question I have about felt recoil with a slower powder, but that is secondary for now.

Cheers,
Mark

[IDescribe]

Some of my reading suggests the PF range of upper 130's to lower 140's  is the way to twist up a 9mm reguardless of 115vs 124/5.

Mark, I am pretty sure power factor itself, which is just a measure of momentum, isn't that important.  Because action pistol shooters measure velocity so that they can achieve a certain power factor, they often use the term power factor for both, even if velocity is the more appropriate term.  When you read about people making certain accuracy gains at certain power factors, that's probably what's going on. 

If you see me, for example, saying that I like 147 grain bullets at a power factor of 136/137 because lower than that makes the pistol feel sluggish to me, then I add a comment about how I have also observed groups at 25 yards tighten up for me at that power factor, what I'm really talking about that's affecting accuracy is velocity, but because I started off talking about power factor, I continue to use that term.

At the end of the day, given a bullet, powder, and pistol, you need to play around with OAL and charge weight to find the accuracy sweet spot.  You don't have much room to play with OAL with this pistol and bullet, so it's probably going to be mostly charge weight for you.

[oldfrank]

Good Data.

I have only used this powder with Xtreme 124 RN and my chrono results were:

5.3 grns 1.135 OAL SP-01  Average 1148
5.5 grns 1.135 OAL SP-01 Average 1177
4.6 grns 1.135 OAL Glock 17 Average 1027
4.0 grns 1.135 OAL CZ P-02 Average  1006

[copemech]

Some of my reading suggests the PF range of upper 130's to lower 140's  is the way to twist up a 9mm reguardless of 115vs 124/5.

Mark, I am pretty sure power factor itself, which is just a measure of momentum, isn't that important.  Because action pistol shooters measure velocity so that they can achieve a certain power factor, they often use the term power factor for both, even if velocity is the more appropriate term.  When you read about people making certain accuracy gains at certain power factors, that's probably what's going on. 

If you see me, for example, saying that I like 147 grain bullets at a power factor of 136/137 because lower than that makes the pistol feel sluggish to me, then I add a comment about how I have also observed groups at 25 yards tighten up for me at that power factor, what I'm really talking about that's affecting accuracy is velocity, but because I started off talking about power factor, I continue to use that term.

At the end of the day, given a bullet, powder, and pistol, you need to play around with OAL and charge weight to find the accuracy sweet spot.  You don't have much room to play with OAL with this pistol and bullet, so it's probably going to be mostly charge weight for you.

Yep, I agree.  To me it just seems to be about the velocity and just how fast to twist these things up to stabilize them as best possible. Other margins are slim here.

My testing with a P09 and red dot will still be up to the shooter at best, which is subjective and may require many comparative rounds to see a true pattern. This is not easy!, then take it out to 50 or 100! Nuts but fun!

[copemech]

Good Data.

I have only used this powder with Xtreme 124 RN and my chrono results were:

5.3 grns 1.135 OAL SP-01  Average 1148
5.5 grns 1.135 OAL SP-01 Average 1177
4.6 grns 1.135 OAL Glock 17 Average 1027
4.0 grns 1.135 OAL CZ P-02 Average  1006

More good info here, as I still have some of them bullets I think! Good for comparison to the HAP!

[copemech]

Ok ID,

Den splains dis to me!

I do want to touch upon the other question I have about felt recoil with a slower powder, but that is secondary for now.

I am thinking something along the lines of the slower burn and longer duration may translate into a greater perceived recoil due to the period as compared to the work done?

[jameslovesjammie]

There are many reasons.

Here is a great discussion on the topic:  http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?253596-Why-do-some-powders-have-more-recoil

My favorite analogy from that thread:

think about accelerating in your muscle car.
half throttle = eh but you'll get to 60.
hammer down on that pedal and it pushes you back into the seat like crazy and you get to 60 much sooner.

pushing a 230gr boolit to 850 fps produces recoil quite similar in force [rearward motion] no matter how you get there.
you feel the slam differently than you feel the gentle acceleration.
bullseye= slam.
unique= acceleration.
both= equal 60 mph.

[biglou13]

Thanks for data..... CFE..it's available local so I'm also about to test...

Anyone have data for heavier bullets.... Lead...?

Also note Jamies' data is for .358 Dia bullet.....

Most  load data is based on .355.     I too will be testing .358   (Poly coated)   

Does the .003 make a big difference?  Feel, accuracy, pressure, spread, sd.....

(I'm aware.... Start low work up....). (Ps.. I'm just returning to reloading after a few year lay off )

[jameslovesjammie]

Also note Jamies' data is for .358 Dia bullet.....

Most  load data is based on .355.     I too will be testing .358   (Poly coated)   

Does the .003 make a big difference?  Feel, accuracy, pressure, spread, sd.....

There's an old saying with cast bullets: Fit is King. 

Bullet to barrel fit is more important than alloy, hardness, lube choice, or rifling.  A cast bullet needs to seal your barrel, hence it needs to be a larger diameter than the groove diameter of the barrel.  If a cast bullet is of smaller diameter than the barrel and too hard, it won't properly obdurate (seal the bore).  This leads to gas blow by that damages the bullet and causes leading, tumbling, velocity loss, and inaccuracy.

A larger bullet, on the other hand, will swage itself down in the transition through the leade while maintaining a gas seal.  Lead alloys are quite malleable and conform easily to the barrel.  A bullet that is too small can skid across the rifling, depositing lead.  The harder the alloy, the more pronounced the problem is.

Do larger diameter bullets feel differently?  No.  Are they more accurate than smaller bullets?  They tend to be, especially the higher the round count gets because you don't get the leading deposits associated with an undersized bullet.  Are the resulting pressures higher because of the larger bullet?  Theoretically most likely.  How much more?  Not very much.  Are the higher pressures associated with the extra force required to swage the bullet down?  Or is it because you aren't losing pressure due to escaped gas?  ES and SD shouldn't be affected.

[IDescribe]

Are the resulting pressures higher because of the larger bullet?  Theoretically most likely.  How much more?  Not very much.  Are the higher pressures associated with the extra force required to swage the bullet down?  Or is it because you aren't losing pressure due to escaped gas? 

James, I don't know this to be true, but I suspect the higher pressure is due to the better containment of gas.  I can't imagine that it takes more force to push a lead a lead/moly bullet at .356 into a 9mm barrel than it does to push the much harder jacketed bullet into the barrel, even at .355, especially with the harder, higher zinc content jackets of the Montana Gold. 

So a real world example -- my .356 Blue Bullet 125gr RN with a seating depth of .219 avg 1000 feet/sec with 3.8gr of N320 whereas the 124gr Montana Gold JHP with a significantly deeper seating depth of .251 only avg 965 with 3.8gr of N320 and need 4.0gr to break 1000.  I would think that's the result of better obturation by the lead bullet.  It seems the 124gr MG JHP would have just about every velocity advantage there except obturation, so... obturation wins??   I know some people will say that the extra friction of the jacket keeps the bullet from getting to as high a velocity as the coated lead, but that's the opposite of what happens.  I know from researching various low friction coatings like moly or hexa-Boron Nitride used by the benchrest guys that the low friction coatings actually reduce velocity, and people that have a load developed with a copper jacketed bullet who add moly or hBN to the bullets they already use, they have to increase charge weight to get back to the original velocity.  The reason is that the reduced resistance of the coated bullets at the beginning of the burn allows faster initial acceleration, which expands the combustion chamber more rapidly, and results in lower overall pressure.  Basically, the gain you get in acceleration from less resistance is out-weighed by the pressure loss of the faster expanding combustion chamber.

So, James, I'd guess better obturation and less escaped gas.  Your best guess?

[nicky]

ID
     Correct me if I'm not following you about the benchrest guys coating thier plated bullets.
     The coating is getting the bullet to move quicker out of the chamber but is lacking the obduration at the base of the bullet to seal the gases. So they need to up thier charge weight to get to what they got without the coating.
     FWIW I think your guess makes a lot of sense.
   

[biglou13]

great info .... now to wrap my head around it........