Making Progress with my Dillon SDB. Need more knowledge, though.

[HossMan]

I've been loading for my CZ P-01 with the Acme 124gr coated bullets. I have found that my max COL is about 1.1". My first batch of 50 I loaded up with 3.3 grains of Hodgdon Universal Clays, which is basically the powder charge that Hodgdon recommends for 147gr bullets. They all shot super soft, but all cycled and locked the slide back.

Issue #1: About 1 out of 10 rounds fail the plunk test at 1.095". And the reason I think they're failing is crooked seating. They catch inside the chamber when I rotate the cartridge. Atleast they all pass the plunk test in my Glock 43. How can I fix crooked seating if I am already using the RN seater that came installed on the Dillon press?

Goal #1: I am regularly competing in my local IDPA match. So far, I have only been using Walmart ammo, but I want to start loading my own. My buddy is going to let me borrow his chronograph. My next question is; How should I safely load up my cartridges until I start to make power factor? I was thinking about loading half dozen sets of 9mm in increments of tenth of a grain of powder charge (eg 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, and so on) What do you think? Also, Is shooting slightly crooked rounds dangerous? It is my understanding that headspace is more critical, in terms of safety, than a bullet slightly contacting a chamber wall or slightly touching the rifling. Thanks so much for all the resources on this forum!

[IDescribe]

Your bullets aren't crooked.  It's just that the surface of the bullet isn't perfect, and the rifling lands rise gradually, so you're at a place where "lumps" in the coating that aren't necessarily visible to you are dragging and releasing on the beginnings of the lands.  Basically, you're loading too long.  There is a sticky at the top of this subforum about determining proper OAL.  I load that bullet at 1.06.  It completely clears the lands and plunks and spins freely at 1.07 - 1.075.  That doesn't mean you'll get the same number, but clearly from what you're describing, you're loading too long. 

My first batch of 50 I loaded up with 3.3 grains of Hodgdon Universal Clays, which is basically the powder charge that Hodgdon recommends for 147gr bullets. They all shot super soft, but all cycled and locked the slide back.

One thing to get straight right at the beginning of reloading -- Load Data is NOT a recommendation.  It's not a recipe.  It's not advice.  It is a report of what happened when ballisticians ran tests with certain bullets and certain powders.  It is NOT what you are supposed to do.  It is to give you a reference so that YOU can determine what you should do. 

Another thing to learn right at the beginning of reloading -- there is much more than weight that determines charge windows.  Bullet weight is the most important factor when matching your bullet to bullets in data, but if you think data for a bullet of a particular weight is good for data of any other bullet at the same weight, you can get yourself into trouble.

As to your 124gr ACME coated lead RN, the closest data Hodgdon provides is the 125gr LCN, which stands for Lead Cone/Conical Nose.  Normally, I would say with as big a difference as what you're getting in OAL between the load data and your bullet, which I'm confident you are going to need to shorten to an OAL of at least 1.075, if not shorter -- with that big a difference, I would normally suggest a reduction in powder charge, but this particular ACME profile is an odd bird, and the seating depths it produces relative to OAL are actually quite shallow.  So I would say go ahead and use the Hogdon data for the 125gr LCN directly, maybe knock off a tenth or two?  The Hodgdon data for Universal with the 125gr LCN is 3.8 - 4.3, so maybe run a ladder from 3.6 - 4.1, and see where that gets you?   Maybe go 3.6, 3.8, 4.0, 4.1?  A lot of people will jump two or even three tenths at a time when developing ladders.  I prefer to go .2gr at the bottom but drop to .1gr increments at the top of the ladder.

[HossMan]

As to your 124gr ACME coated lead RN, the closest data Hodgdon provides is the 125gr LCN, which stands for Lead Cone/Conical Nose.  Normally, I would say with as big a difference as what you're getting in OAL between the load data and your bullet, which I'm confident you are going to need to shorten to an OAL of at least 1.075, if not shorter -- with that big a difference, I would normally suggest a reduction in powder charge, but this particular ACME profile is an odd bird, and the seating depths it produces relative to OAL are actually quite shallow.  So I would say go ahead and use the Hogdon data for the 125gr LCN directly, maybe knock off a tenth or two?  The Hodgdon data for Universal with the 125gr LCN is 3.8 - 4.3, so maybe run a ladder from 3.6 - 4.1, and see where that gets you?   Maybe go 3.6, 3.8, 4.0, 4.1?  A lot of people will jump two or even three tenths at a time when developing ladders.  I prefer to go .2gr at the bottom but drop to .1gr increments at the top of the ladder.

Thanks for your help!

[Wobbly]

Well, I could have said it better, but it would get into 10 chapters with an index and appendix, and a lot of sleepy readers !! 

Issue #1
? I agree. Your Glock 43 is not a good comparison for what goes on in the CZ. Fords and Chevys type comparison.
? It's the reloader's job to make sure the bullet fits the seating anvil. There are many, many different RN shapes. How would Dillon know which one you chose ? Additional shaping by removing metal, or adding epoxy may be called for.

Goal #1
? Roll your cartridge on a table top. If you see the bullet wobble, then your bullet is not seating on axis, and will most probably leave the barrel not spinning on axis. This is a major contributor to lack of accuracy.
? Start with the closest data you can find which contains the same powder, same weight bullet and same construction bullet. With the data as a starting point, modify the numbers to fit your situation.
? Pistol incremental loads (aka "load ladders") is usually the load window divided into 5 loads. For some the increment will be 0.1gr, for others 0.2gr. If your load is 0.2gr and your velocity makes a huge jump, then you can always go back and fill in the gaps that matter with 0.1gr increments. But first you gotta go with the coarse increments to see where you are.

Hope this helps. 

[HossMan]

I did a ladder load last night and shot them this morning. Turns out Caldwell chronos don't work that great at indoor ranges. Haha, shoulda figured that. Anyways, loaded a half a dozen of 3.5, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, and 4.0 at 1.075" OAL.

They all shot significantly softer than 124gr blazer ammo and they all cycled fine. And it turns out that Universal is dirty and stinky. I plan on loading up 100 rounds w/ a 4.0gr charge and shooting them tomorrow at a casual IDPA match. Thanks for all the help guys. I learn a little bit everyday. I also had some Dawson sights installed on my P-01. Life is good.

[Wobbly]

I did a ladder load last night and shot them this morning. Turns out Caldwell chronos don't work that great at indoor ranges.

The florescent lighting of an indoor range will trip up any chrono. Those type lamps are flickering at 60 Hertz. You can't see it, but the chrono does. You have to provide incandescent lighting or sun light.

[HossMan]

 Here are my findings after loading and shooting 70 rounds in IDPA last night:

The load was 1.075" OAL with the 124gr Acme NLG sitting on top of 3.95gr of Universal Clays. They all fed and shot fine. I marked some of the brass, so I could inspect them later. What I found is that the brass didn't expand at all. Most of the measurements I took were about .378", which is what I crimped the cartridges at. Furthermore, there were burn marks on one side of the case, which I think is the hot gases blowing back. Where should I go from here?

[painter]

Without chronoing that load it's hard to say, but if you go by the Hodgdon data for Berry's 124 gr you are barely at min power factor.

According to the reported max velocity the best you'll get is 129 ish pf with that powder. I'd continue working up to a max of 4.15-4.2 gr and see if you get a bit better performance.

[Wobbly]

The load was 1.075" OAL with the 124gr Acme NLG sitting on top of 3.95gr of Universal Clays. They all fed and shot fine. I marked some of the brass, so I could inspect them later. What I found is that the brass didn't expand at all. Most of the measurements I took were about .378", which is what I crimped the cartridges at. Furthermore, there were burn marks on one side of the case, which I think is the hot gases blowing back. Where should I go from here?

Your chamber pressure isn't high enough to seal the case to the chamber. When that happens, gas expels to the rear and leaves the "burn marks" you see. You need to raise the chamber pressure. You can get a new powder that burns slightly faster, or add more of the old powder.

I would expect the inside of the cases are black and sooty. This is also being deposited in your gun, possibly with particles of unburned powder. When the powder is loaded right for the job, it should burn cleanly. The inside of the case may be gray, tan, or colorless. Like this...



Hope this helps.

[HossMan]

The load was 1.075" OAL with the 124gr Acme NLG sitting on top of 3.95gr of Universal Clays. They all fed and shot fine. I marked some of the brass, so I could inspect them later. What I found is that the brass didn't expand at all. Most of the measurements I took were about .378", which is what I crimped the cartridges at. Furthermore, there were burn marks on one side of the case, which I think is the hot gases blowing back. Where should I go from here?

Your chamber pressure isn't high enough to seal the case to the chamber. When that happens, gas expels to the rear and leaves the "burn marks" you see. You need to raise the chamber pressure. You can get a new powder that burns slightly faster, or add more of the old powder.

I would expect the inside of the cases are black and sooty. This is also being deposited in your gun, possibly with particles of unburned powder. When the powder is loaded right for the job, it should burn cleanly. The inside of the case may be gray, tan, or colorless. Like this...

Hope this helps.

Yes, thanks for your help, Wobbly! After shooting IDPA last night, the gun wasn't all that dirty. I'm still loading a hair under minimum power factor according to Hodgdon data. I didn't inspect my brass this time, because I forgot to.

After looking at one of my reloads, the gunsmith said my crimp was not enough. I haven't messed with the crimp die since receiving it already installed on my Dillon. It's been crimping cases to .378. My gunsmith said I should have a bulge at the base of the bullet, then the crimp being a thousandth shorter than that. I am not aware of how to achieve that with the crimp die. Do I start by slowly screwing it down, or do I start slowly screwing it up? I had just read in various places that it is sufficient to remove the flare with the crimp die.

[painter]

If your rounds are all chambering, I'd leave the crimp die alone.

If you feel you must adjust it, you'd screw it down very slightly. I don't think that adjusting crimp will give you a bulge at the bullet base, because a crimp die only works the case mouth.

[HossMan]

I don't think that adjusting crimp will give you a bulge at the bullet base, because a crimp die only works the case mouth.

Sorry, not "giving me a bulge at the base", but having a natural bulge at the base that then tapers to the crimp. He showed me one of his reloads. It had a bulge at the base of the bullet, but the thickness of the bulge didn't go all the way to the case mouth. My reloads have the bulge that is even in thickness all the way from the base to the case mouth. Thanks.

[painter]

Still, the purpose of the crimp is only to remove the flare, not to give the case any particular shape. It is not for bullet retention, or any other purpose.

If your reloads are chambering, I'd leave it alone.

[IDescribe]

If your crimp is truly .378, it's fine.  If you want to turn it down to .377, that's fine too.  But you don't NEED to.  I wouldn't recommend going narrower than .377.

Painter is right -- if it's working, leave it alone.  And unless you show us a picture of one of your loads, it's hard for us to really say.  Remember that when you and your gunsmith are discussing it, HE has the advantage of being able to look at it at the same time.  If you want to post pics here, you need to post the pic elsewhere first -- like at Tumblr, the link the pic here.

You are looking to remove the flare only. 

Now...

I'm still loading a hair under minimum power factor according to Hodgdon data.

No, you don't know where you are in relation to minimum power factor, according to Hodgdon or otherwise.  The Hodgdon data list velocities for two charge weights -- the lowest and the highest -- you may NOT assume that there are perfectly equal divisions between the top and bottom load velocities per charge weight.  So unless your charge weight happens to be the lowest or highest charge weight of the window, and that corresponding velocity equals a hair under minimum power factor (and neither of those is the case), you can't claim that you're using load data that's a hair below minimum power factor.  And even if you could, the load data never lines up perfectly anyway, so it's not a very useful idea to begin with.  And even if it were, YOU aren't using the same bullet in the load data, so such a statement wouldn't be very useful anyway.

What you want to do is say, "I'm looking at Hodgdon's load data for Bullet X, which has a charge window of 3.x - 4.x, and these current loads are using 4.xgr.  And, really, until you get these properly chronoed, there's nothing going on here regarding velocity except guessing.

If I were getting sooty "burn" marks on the outside of the case at a powder charge of 4.0, I would go ahead and increase the charge weight to 4.2 and see if that fixes it.  As Wobbly said, those sooty burn marks are the result of your not getting a good pressure seal, and if you're not getting a good pressure seal, you're not close to the top of SAAMI standard pressure, and you can bump up .2gr without worry.

We need to see pictures to evaluate your crimp situation.  You need to get your chrono into play to see what your bullets are doing. 

[Wobbly]

Sorry, not "giving me a bulge at the base", but having a natural bulge at the base that then tapers to the crimp. He showed me one of his reloads. It had a bulge at the base of the bullet, but the thickness of the bulge didn't go all the way to the case mouth. My reloads have the bulge that is even in thickness all the way from the base to the case mouth. Thanks.

Pardon my French, but this guy is an idiot if he doesn't understand that different brand dies will size and crimp in highly different ways. There is always more than one way to skin a cat.

Some dies size with a tapered case, as per the SAAMI spec for 9x19 Luger. Some dies size with a (easier to manufacture) straight wall sizing die, so of course the base of the bullet will show up much more clearly in the finished product. Then some fall between these extremes. Each method has good points and bad.

So is he saying that all factory ammo with the tapered case is loaded incorrectly ?? What are his credentials for making such a statement ?? Some investigation will probably reveal that while competent, he's used only one brand of die his entire career, has no background in design or engineering to understand the various methods and options, and has a closed mind about new ideas.

Historically speaking, this closed mind "my way or the highway" just never seems to hold up.

I'm off my soap box now.