Baldrage's reloading log

[1SOW]

I won't tell you why I use zip lock bags with individual labels for my test rounds.
When you get your Chrono,  you have to be sure to  label which load is from which  string of fire..

[baldrage]

D'oh! I meant to type 1.125 OAL, not 1.25.

Good suggestions on "this side up" label or using separate zip-loc bags for each load. For this batch, I just marked each 4.6 gr round with a sharpie so I could tell the difference if I accidentally dumped them all together again.

[Wobbly]

Rules For Staying Married

#1) Do not, under any circumstance, apply a "This Side Up" label to your wife's forehead.



This is a full-service forum.

[baldrage]

Never did get an answer to my question from last week -- if a round will "plunk" fine, but not spin freely, is it safe to shoot, or better to just play it safe and chuck it in the dud bin?

[IDescribe]

I measured and plunk-tested all 50 rounds using the barrel removed from my pistol.  All 50 rounds plunked and spun, except one round which plunked fine, but would not spin freely.  Upon closer inspection, there was a small burr/dent on the lip of the case which was sufficient to keep it from spinning in the barrel.  I set the round aside, based on the assumption it would be unsafe to shoot ? is that correct?

In my head a burr and a dent are dimensionally opposite.  The burr sticks out.  The dent caves in.  I'm not sure how a dent would cause this on a cartridge where the bullet was otherwise loaded short enough that it doesn't contact the lands, assuming it's also gone through the crimp die.  And if it's a burr on the case mouth, I would be curious as to why it's sticking out if it went through the crimp die.  Did you pull the first round that went through the seating die to measure OAL, then not get it back in rotation to go through the crimp die?

Anyway, you have two safety concerns in this case.  1) Is the cartridge too long where it's going to prevent the gun from going fully into battery?  No.  It sounds like it's seating all the way, or at least up to a thousandth short of all the way.   So, no.    Or 2) Pressure.  Is there something here that's going to dangerously spike pressure?  It sounds like it's not buried into the lands, so I don't think that's an issue either.  From the picture I have of the situation, I wouldn't worry about it, but maybe an actual picture of this dent/burr would make sure we have the right picture. 

[Wobbly]

I measured and plunk-tested all 50 rounds using the barrel removed from my pistol.  All 50 rounds plunked and spun, except one round which plunked fine, but would not spin freely.  Upon closer inspection, there was a small burr/dent on the lip of the case which was sufficient to keep it from spinning in the barrel.  I set the round aside, based on the assumption it would be unsafe to shoot ? is that correct?

This is a common occurrence. Maybe 1 out of every 3000 or so. Simply check the OAL and make sure a short-stroke isn't letting the bullet bury itself in the rifling.

If you find a case deformity that keeps the round from chambering, my view is it's safe to shoot, but not what you want to use to compete. So set it aside and pile it in with your next lot of plinking ammo. Despite our best efforts, these things happen.

 

[baldrage]

Thanks for the replies.  Burr is so small, it would be hard to get a picture without an extreme close-up -- I did not see it when examining cases both prior to and after loading, nor when I was measuring finished rounds.  Only noticed it when the round wouldn't spin in my barrel and I looked at under a magnifying glass.

Not sure how it got there in the first place.  Could be I dinged it during loading, or it could have been there when I picked up the brass and just didn't notice it.

[baldrage]

Was able to shoot off the 50 49 rounds I had loaded up using RMR 124 gr RN FMJ at nominal 1.125 COAL, using Winchester SPP -- 25 loaded at 4.5 gr HP-38 and 25 rounds at 4.6 gr. 

I shot 5 rounds at a time, alternating between 4.5 gr and 4.6 gr, at 5, 10, and 15 yards.  All shot freestyle, about 2 rounds/second. 

I don't have a chrono, and could not set one up at my indoor range even if I did have one, so I can't make any assessment on FPS and standard deviation.

Here are the results at 5 yards - 4.5 gr targets on the left, 4.6 gr targets on the right.  I definitely shot the 4.5 gr more accurately than the 4.6 gr.

11152016_RMR_TEST-5YARDS by baldrage, on Flickr

Results at 10 yards -- I was more accurate with the 4.6 gr (notice that I switched the order of the targets - 4.6 gr on the left, and 4.5 gr on the right).

11152016_RMR_TEST-10YARDS by baldrage, on Flickr

Lastly, finished up with 5 rounds of each load at 15 yards.  Wasn't really accurate with either, but that's probably just me, not the ammo.  Notice that two of the holes on the 4.5 gr looked like they tore the paper, rather than punching a clean hole.  Is that evidence of "key-holing"?

11152016_RMR_TEST-15YARDS by baldrage, on Flickr

So, the two loads seemed pretty close in terms of my ability to shoot either one accurately.  Given that, unless the cognoscenti here on the board advise me otherwise I am leaning toward going with 4.6 gr as my standard load for this bullet, to ensure I make PF and to provide a bit more FPS "oomph" for bowling pin matches.

Oh, and I should mention that with this batch, I passed the milestone of loading/shooting my first 100 handloads -- so all of you who are into the hundreds of thousands can go ahead and snicker.   

Next up, I will load up the remainder of my 124 gr RMR sample batch (about 150 bullets), then try the sample of 124 RN plated Extreme bullets.  Previous plunk testing with empty cartridge indicated I could load these at 1.125 OAL or longer and Extreme says to load these at "mid-level" jacketed levels, so I should be OK using the same 4.4 - 4.7 load window, correct?

[IDescribe]

Notice that two of the holes on the 4.5 gr looked like they tore the paper, rather than punching a clean hole.  Is that evidence of "key-holing"?

No, that's evidence that you slid that paper up and down on something rough, and that something snagged a couple "petals" of paper on the backside of the target and tore the paper.  You see how all the bullet holes in all the targets have those little RN charcoal flowers around them?  Those two holes you are wondering about have those little charcoal flowers, too.  That means the bullets went through nose first.

[Wobbly]

That ripped hole with lots of black is the result of RN bullets. FP or SWC styles will give you a much cleaner hole in paper.

[baldrage]

Moving on to my first test of Extreme 124 gr RN bullets...  These plunk tested at SAAMI max of 1.169 in my barrel, so I went with 1.15 OAL. 

I loaded up 5 rounds each at 3.9, 4.0, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4 gr of HP-38.  All of them cycled the gun and fired fine.  Couldn't really tell any difference in recoil or accuracy. 

I think I will load up 25 at 4.2 gr and 25 and 4.4 gr, then test them for accuracy against the 124 gr RMR RN bullets I have been loading at 4.6 gr HP-38 to see which is more accurate for me.

[Wobbly]

Moving on to my first test of Extreme 124 gr RN bullets...  These plunk tested at SAAMI max of 1.169 in my barrel, so I went with 1.15 OAL. 

Shorter is better-er. Try 1.125 up to 1.140" on those. You'll get more case engagement, which can be a good-er thing.

[baldrage]

Wobbly, Sir,

Shorter is better-er. Try 1.125 up to 1.140" on those. You'll get more case engagement, which can be a good-er thing.

Please to explain "case engagement" and why more is better-er?  To my novice mind, longer is better-er, assuming OAL is within SAAMI specs and the cartridge plunks/feeds well, as it reduces case pressure.  I can't picture why seating the bullet deeper would result in anything other than more pressure and more FPS, which I guess is not a bad thing if that is what you are looking for in order to maximize FPS per gr of powder.  Is there some other advantage?

Hodgdon load data for 124 gr Berry's HBRN TP, which is the closest bullet I can find to Extreme 124 gr RN plated, uses 1.15 OAL, with 3.9 gr starting load and 4.4 gr max load for HP-38.  If I were to shorten from 1.15 to 1.125, I would shift the load window down, correct?  Say, 3.7 gr starting load to 4.2 gr max load?

Thanks in advance, and Happy Thanksgiving!

[1SOW]

Unlike rifle loads,  loading  pistol ammo close to max length doesn't necessarily improve accuracy.
Seating the bullet deeper helps align the bullet straighter and can improve the case expansion seal in the chamber.
It's also a little more economical with the powder needed to reach your preferred bullet speed.

Wobbly started out loading that BRY bullet at around 1.140-ish,  and  I followed his lead.  We both came to find that loading shorter improved the results we got.
I've been getting good results at 1.128" lately.  That is just with my powder loads and shooting results in my pistols. YMMV.

[IDescribe]

Hodgdon load data for 124 gr Berry's HBRN TP, which is the closest bullet I can find to Extreme 124 gr RN plated, uses 1.15 OAL, with 3.9 gr starting load and 4.4 gr max load for HP-38.  If I were to shorten from 1.15 to 1.125, I would shift the load window down, correct?  Say, 3.7 gr starting load to 4.2 gr max load?

In general, I wouldn't personally reduce my load for an OAL reduction of .025 if everything else about my bullet and the load data matched up 124 plated RN to 124 plated RN.  Starting load covers you on that.  That's kind of the why we should use starting load.    What I would do is make note of the published data's maximum velocity and use that as my hard ceiling, though, in general.

In this case, however, we can do a little more.  The Hodgdon data is for the Berry's HBRN at OAL 1.15.  I happen to know that those bullets are about .619 in length.  That means that at OAL 1.15, that Berry's bullet's seating depth will be .219.  Now, when we switch our attention over to that XTreme 124gr RN, THAT bullet's length is about .583.  At an OAL of 1.15, the XTreme 124 RN's seating depth is .183.  If you shorten the OAL with the XTreme to 1.125,  the seating depth would be .208, which is still not as deep at the Berry's at OAL 1.15.

So at OAL 1.125 with that XTreme 124gr RN, you're likely to get a little LESS pressure that with the Berry's at 1.15, not more.  There's no reason to reduce the charge window at all with that OAL.