Determining initial load data?

[Larry Piekarski]

I am new to this, so help me understand the theory.

I am reloading 9mm ammo for IDPA and general practice. A friend of mine recommended Oregon Trail bullets, LRN 115g, and Bullseye Powder. So, that is what I have.

Oregon Trail sent me load data the bullets, but only with these powders, Clays, AA2, WSL, 231, AA5, and HP-38.

The Lee book I have only lists AA2, 5 & 7 for LRN 115g, however the data is very similar.

This tells me that load data from bullet mfg to bullet mfg doesn't change much for the same style and wt.

Now, my Lee book does list a bullseye load for JHP 115g.

So, my thought was this. Compare JHP loads and LRN loads for a same powder and see what the difference is, then extrapolate for Bullseye. The following are Start Loads.

      JHP vs LRN @ OAL (% change)
AA2 4.0 vs 4.4 @ 1.1" (+10%)
231 3.8 vs 4.3 @ 1.1" (+13%)
AA5 6.3 vs 5.6 @ 1.095" vs 1.1" (-11%)
HP-38 4.7 vs 4.4 @ 1.125" vs 1.1" (-6%)

But that is all over the map. So, I am confused.

I have searched all over the internet in all the different databases, and can't find a single occurrence of this.

Is there a reason this will not work, and that is why I can't find data?

Or, is there a rule of thumb to follow to find a starting point?

[Jim Fleming]

Larry, welcome to Reloading. You very likely will love it.

As far as getting started goes, I have to tell you publicly for several reasons. Stick with published loads, in powder weights, bullet types, brass and last but not least, primers.

First of all, Oregon Trail didn't make your Bullseye Gunpowder. A company called Alliant did. The link for them is: http://www.alliantpowder.com/

Alliant suggests that you use 4.7 Grains of Bullseye under a 115 Speer Gold Dot Jacketed Hollow Point bullet.

Here's another link that will take you to exactly the page I got that info from: http://www.alliantpowder.com/reloaders/recipedetail.aspx?gtypeid=1&weight=115&shellid=23&bulletid=25. On this page it also lists OAL's so that you can keep your OAL within SAAMI specs.

Here again I'll tell you to _not_ do as I've done, but I will tell you what I have done and done routinely. Since I happen to know that the tensile strength of lead is much lower than copper I simply substituted lead bullets for copper bullets of the same weight. But this is considered a dangerous practice! Under not circumstances should a new reloader attempt what I've done. As you get experience and knowledge of your new hobby, you will understand what kind of things can be done by a reloader that Ammo Factories don't even dream of doing...

Enjoy, Sir.

[Chris]

Lead is a lubricant. Because of that it produces less resistence within the bore as compared to an identical (size, weight, profile, etc.) jacketed bullet. If you load identical bullets... one lead, one jacketed... with the same powder charge, the lead bullet will produce slightly less internal pressure and slightly more velocity.
If you are dealing with handgun loads at velocities under 1300/1400 fps (for hard cast lead bullets) or under 950 fps for swaged lead bullets you can swap lead for jacketed load data without problems.
Other considerations... you didn’t mention what type of pistol you have. Glocks use a polygonal rifling that doesn’t like lead bullets and Glock states it clearly in their manuals. If you’re going to shoot lead from a Glock you need to get an aftermarket barrel with cut rifling (Lone Wolf is a good place to look).
Second... IDPA requires a 125 power factor for 9mm. To reach that you have to drive a 115 grain bullet to a minimum velocity of 1100 fps. Bullseye is a very quick burning powder (so also is Clays and AA2). They are designed to use small amounts to produce soft shooting, low velocity target loads. You can hit 1100 fps (the bare minimum... most of us load 50 fps above minimum power factor levels so we don’t get DQed at chrono time) with Bullseye but you are working at the upper pressure level of the 9mm cartridge. Even with that, the 115 bullet can have problems knocking down steel poppers and other steel targets. It doesn’t have the mass and momentum. The vast majority of the top IDPA shooters (I’m a Master) use a 147 grain bullet in 9mm. Drive that to 880/900 fps and you make power factor easily... with less powder... and less recoil... and at significantly less than full pressure. The heavier bullet also smokes steel.... no poppers left standing.
Chris Christian - Team Pro Arms

[Jim Fleming]

Thank you Chris, it's nice to have someone that's both knowledgeable and that knows how to express themselves...

Well said, Sir! I acknowledge that you're not necessarily agreeing with what I've done and said, you've merely explained why it worked.

Thank you, again.

[Chris]

Jim,
Thanks for the kind words. In another thread you mentioned "monster loads" from a .357 Mag Contender... but were understandaly reluctent to mention specifics. I concur with that, for the obvious reasons. But, I think we have similar reloading experiences.
Twenty-some years ago, while doing an article for Gun World magazine... I got 1600+ fps from a ten-inch Contender .357 mag with a hard-cast 180 grain bullet and copius amounts of either H-110 or 2400 (don't remember which). I was working with a new bullet lube, and accuracy was fine until I cracked that 1600 fps range (no gas check on the bullet). I've been reloading since 1969, and even worked up the original load data for JD Jones in his 6mm Whisper cartridge... as well as having written a few books and a pile of gun articles involving reloading.
You can do some neat stuff if you have the experience... and discipline. I have some loads I won't talk about either... for obvious reasons. But, they work like a champ.
Chris Christian

[Larry Piekarski]

Chris,

I have a couple questions, but I will hit them one at a time. As a new shooter and reloader, but a long time Mechanical Engineer, I am not sure I understand why a 147g bullet will knock down steel better than a 115g.

IDPA power factor is mass * velocity, right? Then for a given power factor, mass and velocity are inversely proportional. So, if you double the mass, you have to cut the velocity in half.

But, the momentum of the bullet, or kinetic energy, is mass * velocity squared. So, again for the same power factor, if you double the mass, the velocity squared is 1/4, and therefor the kinetic energy is also half. I am not doubting you because of your history, just from a kinematics standpoint, it doesn't make sense.

One thing I am neglecting in the loss of velocity between the muzzle of the gun and the eventual impact with the target. My thought is that, at IDPA distances, the velocity loss is negligible. Furthermore, the loss will be consistent regardless of velocity, so whether a bullet traveling at 880 ft/s or 1100 ft/s, even if the loss is not negligible, it can still be factored out as a constant and ignored. Maybe that is an incorrect assumption.

What I do know is this, that all objects fall downward due to gravity at the same speed. So, if you had a perfectly flat surface and shot a gun perfectly parallel to that surface and dropped a bullet from your hand at the same height as the barrel, and at the exact time the fired bullet left the muzzle, both bullets would hit the ground at exactly the same time. From that, it would seem that a lighter bullet traveling faster, would get to the target faster and therefore drop less. Again, at IDPA distances, this is probably negligible, but it makes sense.

So why the heavier bullet?

[Chris]

Larry,
I'm not an engineer and cannot even fathom, or comment upon, all the math & formulas and such you listed. I'm just a IDPA Master Class shooter with a wall full of trophies and a lot of experience knocking down steel targets.
My "anecdotal" observations are that the 147 grain 9mm knocks steel down much better than 115 grain 9mm bullets, at the same 125 power factor. It is my opinion... but one that seems to be shared by a majority of the upper level IDPA and USPSA shooters who use a 9mm. I can't explain the "whys". I just see the results.
Chris Christian

[jallen201]

Larry, here's the disclaimer.  I am no engineer, I have a degree in political science, but I did a lot of statistics and was on the engineering team in high school.  While mass and velocity are inversely related it doesn't look like an arithmetic relationship.  That is only based on a very quick comparison of 2 Speer loads.  The 115 grain bullet is 92.7% of the mass of the 124 grain, but the 124 grain bullet retains 95% of the velocity.   

[Jim Fleming]

Guys, you're forgetting what Chris said... Upon impact on a solid steel target the 147 gr ball has more momentum/inertia upon impact...

The 115 gr ball doesn't have the momentum the 147 gr ball has. Yes, *theoretically* they should be about the same, but this isn't theory, this is real world, dirty knuckles, kind of reality. The heavier ball knocks the steel harder than the lighter pill does.

Remember the 147 gr ball is traveling almost as fast as the 115 does. key word, ALMOST. I don't know the numbers (velocity) and for this EXCELLENT thread the actual numbers don't mean a lot, what matters is the extra energy imparted into the steel plates by the heavier ball, that is traveling (speaking relatively) almost as fast as the lighter one.

[Jim Fleming]

Thank you, again, Chris, and the answer is yes, I wasn't and still am not afraid of a little bit of exploration into that gray area that we're not going to openly write about. Those readers that choose to do so are ON THEIR OWN.

Hee, Hee, Chris, years ago, I bought a Saeco 5 cavity mould in 180 gr x .357 from Bob Palermo of Penn Bullets at a PGCA Gun Show, and was driving them through a fourteen (14) (yes I said fourteen) inch Contender Barrel. I think I posted that I don't own a Chronograph, but when I did some extrapolation, I was out there in that same place... LMBO! Copious Quantities...

I like making them hardcast blue pills, they fly so nice, and by d*mn they do hit hard! LOL!

I've met JDJ my ownself, he worked on that selfsame Contender a few times, but that's for another thread...

Jim,
Thanks for the kind words. In another thread you mentioned "monster loads" from a .357 Mag Contender... but were understandaly reluctent to mention specifics. I concur with that, for the obvious reasons. But, I think we have similar reloading experiences.
Twenty-some years ago, while doing an article for Gun World magazine... I got 1600+ fps from a ten-inch Contender .357 mag with a hard-cast 180 grain bullet and copius amounts of either H-110 or 2400 (don't remember which). I was working with a new bullet lube, and accuracy was fine until I cracked that 1600 fps range (no gas check on the bullet). I've been reloading since 1969, and even worked up the original load data for JD Jones in his 6mm Whisper cartridge... as well as having written a few books and a pile of gun articles involving reloading.
You can do some neat stuff if you have the experience... and discipline. I have some loads I won't talk about either... for obvious reasons. But, they work like a champ.
Chris Christian

[Larry Piekarski]

The 115 grain bullet is 92.7% of the mass of the 124 grain, but the 124 grain bullet retains 95% of the velocity.   

That may be the reason. I think what you are saying is that the lighter bullet slows down faster because it is traveling faster. That makes sense now that I think about it. I watched a show on TV about exotic cars and they made the comment that it takes something like 4x the horsepower to double the speed. Going back to bullets, that would mean the 115g bullet at 1100ft/s would be affected more my wind resistance than a 147g at 880. So, even if the bullets has the same momentum at the muzzle, the lighter, faster bullet could slow down more by the time it got to the steel target and therefore have less momentum left.

It would be interesting to chronograph a bullet with 2 chronographs, one at the muzzle, and one just ahead of the target. (I'll let Chris make that shot, because I think I would be buying someone a new chronograph =:-0 ) Has anyone done that?

I spoke with my friend that was pushing me towards the lighter bullets, and realized two things. 1, he didn't realize we shot steel in IDPA, and said he would go with a heavier bullet. 2, I don't think he realized that there was a power factor requirement. So, he was comparing a 115g to a 147g, both with light loads. I think in that case, the 115g would recoil less, if both had the same muzzle velocity.

[jallen201]

I was actually using this table (http://www.speer-ammo.com/ballistics/ammo.aspx) comparing the Speer 115 and 124 rounds.  It also has 50 and 100 yard velocities.  One thing I was pondering at work, and I need a lot of outside stuff to ponder at my job, if we're not talking about factory rounds and the round is loaded to the exact power factor the mass and velocity are perfectly proportional.  I would imagine, and this is just a guess, that the disproportionate difference at the muzzle is the result of drag created by the barrel affecting the 124 grain bullet less.  I don't know enough about how factories load ammo to really take a stab at that one.     

[Jim Fleming]

Larry:

You're halfway correct... Remember we're dealing with inertia here... a 115 gr ball can be accelerated more easily than a 147 because of simple mass. By the same token a 115 gr ball decelerates more quickly due to the same exact law of Physics.

Newton's First Law (also known as the Law of Inertia) states that an object at rest tends to stay at rest and that an object in uniform motion tends to stay in uniform motion unless acted upon by a net external force.

To accelerate the 115 gr ball the outside force is, of course, the expanding gases of burning gunpowder.

In deceleration the 115 gr ball the outside force is, of course, wind resistance.

115 gr balls are also going to be easier to stop than 147 grain balls for exactly the same reason, (logic) but in reverse. The kinetic energy of the 147 gr ball is going to hit harder on that steel plate than the 115 gr ball, it's that simple.

This same exact logic also applies whether or not wind resistance is present or not.

Chris Christian has been exactly on the money with his experience. I'm no engineer by any stretch of the imagination either. I'm just a hard knocked kind of guy that happened to recall Sir Isaac Newton's law...

Lastly, before anyone out there says nice things about what a genius I am, I'm not... I'm a thief! The post of Newton's law is a DIRECT COPY and PASTE from Wikipedia.

The 115 grain bullet is 92.7% of the mass of the 124 grain, but the 124 grain bullet retains 95% of the velocity.   

That may be the reason. I think what you are saying is that the lighter bullet slows down faster because it is traveling faster. That makes sense now that I think about it. I watched a show on TV about exotic cars and they made the comment that it takes something like 4x the horsepower to double the speed. Going back to bullets, that would mean the 115g bullet at 1100ft/s would be affected more my wind resistance than a 147g at 880. So, even if the bullets has the same momentum at the muzzle, the lighter, faster bullet could slow down more by the time it got to the steel target and therefore have less momentum left.

It would be interesting to chronograph a bullet with 2 chronographs, one at the muzzle, and one just ahead of the target. (I'll let Chris make that shot, because I think I would be buying someone a new chronograph =:-0 ) Has anyone done that?

I spoke with my friend that was pushing me towards the lighter bullets, and realized two things. 1, he didn't realize we shot steel in IDPA, and said he would go with a heavier bullet. 2, I don't think he realized that there was a power factor requirement. So, he was comparing a 115g to a 147g, both with light loads. I think in that case, the 115g would recoil less, if both had the same muzzle velocity.

[kahrberator]

Ok, so I'm confussed. The label on a jug of HS6 says one thing and there site says another. To make it more difficult seems that most sites only have one powder listed for 115 gr. FMJ. Now if it's a HP or cast there are plenty to choose from. So is one to assume that Hodgdon doesn't recommend using HS6 for 115 gr. Even Handloads only list HPs at 115 gr. So where does a person go for good clear info?

[Mike Gleason]

Ok, so I'm confussed. The label on a jug of HS6 says one thing and there site says another. To make it more difficult seems that most sites only have one powder listed for 115 gr. FMJ. Now if it's a HP or cast there are plenty to choose from. So is one to assume that Hodgdon doesn't recommend using HS6 for 115 gr. Even Handloads only list HPs at 115 gr. So where does a person go for good clear info?

This is a dillema all handloaders run up against, but fortunately there are all lot of resources to help you out.  A good way to go is to checkout the recommended load data from several bullet companies (sierra, speer, hornady, barnes, nosler, etc) for your specific caliber, bullet weight and powder.  This can be done easily by visiting their websites.  Take into consider the particular primer they used to develop their load data. You will usually find a couple recipes that are similar, but might differ a by a 1/4, 1/2, 1 grain whatever.  It might not be HS6 and you'll have to change powder types.  It's generally safe to say an average of the similar starting loads will get you going.   You can then work up from there until your reach your desired accuracy (be careful not to exceed the advised maximum load.)

This will require a small investment in time, but the rewards are worth the satisfaction you'll gain by fine tuning an accurate load that works for your favorite side arm.  Be very careful about taking someone's word on a specific pet load they have worked up and swear by.  What works for them might not be safe in your firearm...  MHO 

[Jim Fleming]

Well said Mike, about being VERY careful.

This will require a small investment in time, but the rewards are worth the satisfaction you'll gain by fine tuning an accurate load that works for your favorite side arm.  Be very careful about taking someone's word on a specific pet load they have worked up and swear by.  What works for them might not be safe in your firearm...  MHO