So many variables, so little data!

[CHLChris]

@Tilos I have read nothing about Titegroup for carbines. In the Lyman #49 it says, "Titegroup is not sensitive to powder position in a case. Hence, it is ideal for handgun loads which occupy only a small space in the case." I take that as why many shooters see TG as a good powder for down-loading to minor.

Just typing a search into Google does not provide published data. I'd like to see more published data, as is found in reloading manuals and such. I might very well end up going by a collection of information garnered by doing Google searches of the experiences of other shooters. But I can't trick myself into thinking that such information is as authoritative or safe as going to the letter of Lyman's data or Hodgdon's data or whatever.

For example, even though I think Federal primers would work well for my use, Lyman's #49 AND Hodgdon's online load data indicate Winchester small pistol primers. I might as well start there instead of forge my own path. I'm bound to do that inthe future with more experience of my very own.

 

[Tilos]

I

@Tilos I have read nothing about Titegroup for carbines. In the Lyman #49 it says, "Titegroup is not sensitive to powder position in a case. Hence, it is ideal for handgun loads which occupy only a small space in the case." I take that as why many shooters see TG as a good powder for down-loading to minor.

Just typing a search into Google does not provide published data. I'd like to see more published data, as is found in reloading manuals and such. I might very well end up going by a collection of information garnered by doing Google searches of the experiences of other shooters. But I can't trick myself into thinking that such information is as authoritative or safe as going to the letter of Lyman's data or Hodgdon's data or whatever.

For example, even though I think Federal primers would work well for my use, Lyman's #49 AND Hodgdon's online load data indicate Winchester small pistol primers. I might as well start there instead of forge my own path. I'm bound to do that in the future with more experience of my very own.

I guess a lot can be gleaned from published data, with published data having a minimum load though, is reason enough not to go below it.
I would be cautious with applying pistol load data to a rifle though.

I have a 357 rifle and mid range loads that work great in my 357 handguns are way hot in the rifle, some manuals I've seen have separate data for 357 rifle, completely different powders too.
Here's a search where you might find something:
Cast Boolits

 

[CHLChris]

357 is known for really supercharging in a rifle barrel. That's not really an issue in semiauto pistol cartridges. Unfortunately, there is NO reloading data that is specifically geared toward PCC's. At least not that I've come across.

 

[ageingstudent]

You might try the Accurate guide (you can get the whole manual for free in a pdf) they list a lot more bullet combos with their powders than most manuals. I like that they have a lot of tested plated and lead options. I notice that there is a wider velocity spread with more on the slower side like was originally posted. I like slower powders for carbine work usually.

 

[noylj]

>We're sort of pushed to think of powders as having a min and a max published load along with the min and max published velocity.

No, you have a START load and a MAX load, NOT a minimum load.
The minimum load for most guns would be a muzzle velocity below 450 fps, where you could stick a bullet in the barrel, depending on length of barrel.
The start load, in almost all cases is based on:
1) a 10-12% decrease in the max charge
2) an arbitrary velocity they start the chart at
or
3) an arbitrary pressure they start the chart at.

Thus, I show for .40S&W that 5.0gn of 231/HP38 and a 155gn JHP can produce 800fps or 940fps, depending on the barrel and barrel length and manual used, but most start loads are 950-1020fps. Thus, you have to work the load down yourself and realize that you may have to replace the recoil spring.
5.8gn of AA2 and 155gn jackets bullet has given 840fps in one manual, but another shows 5.4gn at 1022fps.
Barnes showed their 155gn XPB and 4.6gn of AA5 at 736fps, with a max of 5.1gn at 818fps.
I show starting loads for 155gn JHPs with 3.5gn of Clays for 858fps and 3.6gn of Clays at 854fps in two manuals. One manual even shows 3.7gn of Clays as a start load for 614fps and a MAX load of 4.7gn for 854fps.

 

[CHLChris]

Starting load does NOT equal minimum load. Thank you for that gold! That's one of those nuggets that they won't publish in a manual, but experienced handloaders know. Awesome post, @noylj.

 

[Tilos]

Hodgdon (Titegroup mfg.'er) defines starting loads as:
"Starting Load: Minimum load required. If a starting load is not populated, it often denotes a subsonic load." (copy/paste from Hodgdon site)
Just semantics for me, and why I said, "I guess a lot can be gleaned from published data".
The proof is in the actual re-loading, the reason why all mfg. have you click the "I agree" button on the lawyer speak page to access the data.
I encourage you think long and hard about the risk, and be cautious in whatever you decide to do.
done here/good luck,

 

[BT BT]

I'm trying to find a published load for 40 S&W minor that stays around 130-135 power factor. Maybe 155 grains at 875fps. I'm surprised that I can't find much info on such a load.

3-5 kinds of primers
30+ appropriate powders
dozens of bullets

The math says there would be thousands of possible recipes, but I just can't find enough published data to pull from. Do I search and search for the right data? Or...

Are there secrets about interchangeability that I just don't know yet. For example, are small pistol primers roughly the same? Are there powders that are analogous enough to use that data? Do all bullets of the same weight behave the same?

The Extremely Lethal Projectile (ELP) division of Synergy-Business-Development, Intl. (SBD) has been developing products for the 40 S&W 'Semi and Full Auto' firearms almost from the beginning. The ammunition products have included special applications from single projectiles, multi-projectiles and the first 40 S&W Auto-Shot cartridges.

The Engineering Product Development department found the following Top-4 variables needed to be addressed for specific ammunition categories in order to develop the best possible cartridge:

1) The original design of the firearm: Full Sized, Mid Sized or Compact. This is primarily a feed (magazine to ramp), a barrel length and a recoil spring tension issue.

2) The projectile/bullet design: Primarily the shape of the projectile for feeding, the O.D. rifling contact surface, and the overall weight.

3) Propellant/Powder/Primer: So many variations, yet the best listing for this purpose is Appendix 'D' Relative Burn Rate Chart in the Lyman Reloading Handbook 49th Edition.

4) Crimp/Case to Projectile Friction: This is an infinity situation that both ammunition and firearms manufacturers must compensate for by using window (specification ranges) that insure the highest level of safety, not accuracy performance.

Brief Summary Of Each Variable Above:

1) Original Firearm Design refers to the significant differences in the recoil springs/slides, the feed ramp angle and of course the barrel length causing pressure cycle changes based on the frame size.

2) Projectile Design, the leading 'point' of the projectile has a significant effect on feed (although most commercial 40 S&W ammunition have limited design options forward of the cartridge case due to the length restrictions) this can be altered. The more significant projectile aspect is the O.D. profile or length of area contact causing enough friction to represent bullet weight. (See also #4).

3) Propellant affects can overrides, even hides all others, however the way to control this is by elaborate math, or simple case and primer indicator readings, and controlled shot reputability.

4) Crimp & Bullet to Case Friction is a true consistency issue for re-loaders. Involves projectile pull force variables involving case I.D., case wall strength, actual crimp burred or de-burred case, no-crimp projectiles, projectile profile even how clean the inside of the case to projectile contact area. A true infinity issue.

IF YOU PROVIDE THE FIREARM MANUFACTURER, MODEL AND PROJECTILE/BULLET INFORMATION TO [email protected] the team will advise you on some secrets to your application.

 

[BT BT]

This sounds like the kind of problem/anxiety that a personal chronograph would solve. Or maybe I'm not understanding the question. The concept of an ideal load at a given velocity seems like a bit of a red herring given the nature of reloading.

We're sort of pushed to think of powders as having a min and a max published load along with the min and max published velocity. The important part is the range in between, especially when you're trying to tailor your rounds to some specification like power factor. So if you see your velocity for power factor near the median charge for a powder that's available to you and maybe you've seen recommended elsewhere a few times, you're probably safe to experiment with it. You won't always, and some may never, have the same velocity out of their gun for a given charge, like in the case of a reloading manual that publishes a "most accurate load."

Two other factors that can greatly reduce the number of choices for a lot of people are availability and price. I'm more likely to go with a mix of both when choosing components, buying what I can when I see a good sale.

So the first thing I see when I search online for ".40 S&W minor" is people talking about using WST or Titegroup and a 180 gr HP, FMJ, or plated projectile from their favorite manufacturer. Whether I'm competing or not, I do a fairly thorough search online, not necessarily looking for exact recipes so much as looking for trends and answering the question "what components, even individually, are working for the most amount of people?" Then I look up some manufacturer's reloading data and verify whether velocity data for the min and max for a couple potential recipes will work for what I want to do.

One thing about choosing powders that was drilled into me initially is that there are fast burning powders like Titegroup and Bullseye which often have both a very small window between min and max charge and since they are very fast burning, it means it often takes very little powder. Depending on how impeccable your reloading habits are and your powder measuring system, that can be hazardous in terms of overcharging or double charging whereas a bulkier powder might simply overflow the case if a double-charge were to occur.

Generally, bullets of the same type and same weight should behave "similarly" enough to not be dangerous, but always work up. I could tell you that in my handgun using Unique, the plated bullets I use go 20-30 FPS slower than full metal jacket, but to you that's meaningless because projectile performance may vary more between manufacturers than type and likely vary with the handgun as well.

The differences between lead and jacketed is a pretty common topic so I'd search for that. It's hard to find a satisfying answer when you can't specifically find lead data, but again, you work up.

I have a bunch of different primers and I haven't used them all yet so when it comes time to switch, I'll be working up my loads again since I don't have any good data myself. One thing I do know is that Tula small pistol primers, at least two years ago, were a rather hard primer that didn't do well with match guns or guns that otherwise had lightened hammers/strikers in them. If they weren't seated all the way it would only compound the issue. For most people it was a non-issue.

There is interchangeability between select powders. One simple interchangeability is that HP-38 is the exact same powder as Winchester 231. I would be skeptical of anyone that tells you it's a "secret" as it's a pretty hot topic within the hobby. Don't get confused by burn rates early on. There are some burn rate charts out there where you might be shown "equivalence," but they are still chemically different powders and no one in their right mind is going to suggest using the load data for one "similar" powder when the actual data is available (unless you're wildcatting or something).

The main thing I know is you can definitely spend more time overthinking the perfect load than actually loading and shooting. I'd want to be confident that I was making a good and SAFE choice, regardless of whether I was using tried and trued components or maybe a less popular powder with good looking data (the Ramshot powders come to mind).

This isn't to say I haven't thought a lot about my purchases in advance, but what my chronograph has shown me is that all the stuff I bought on sale when I did works just fine for my needs no matter how many hours I have spent afterwards dreaming of finding some more perfect combination and that kind of relief is worth something.

The Extremely Lethal Projectile (ELP) division of Synergy-Business-Development, Intl. (SBD) has been developing products for the 40 S&W 'Semi and Full Auto' firearms almost from the beginning. The ammunition products have included special applications from single projectiles, multi-projectiles and the first 40 S&W Auto-Shot cartridges.



The Engineering Product Development department found the following Top-4 variables needed to be addressed for specific ammunition categories in order to develop the best possible cartridge:

1) The original design of the firearm: Full Sized, Mid Sized or Compact. This is primarily a feed (magazine to ramp), a barrel length and a recoil spring tension issue.

2) The projectile/bullet design: Primarily the shape of the projectile for feeding, the O.D. rifling contact surface, and the overall weight.

3) Propellant/Powder/Primer: So many variations, yet the best listing for this purpose is Appendix 'D' Relative Burn Rate Chart in the Lyman Reloading Handbook 49th Edition.

4) Crimp/Case to Projectile Friction: This is an infinity situation that both ammunition and firearms manufacturers must compensate for by using window (specification ranges) that insure the highest level of safety, not accuracy performance.



Brief Summary Of Each Variable Above:

1) Original Firearm Design refers to the significant differences in the recoil springs/slides, the feed ramp angle and of course the barrel length causing pressure cycle changes based on the frame size.

2) Projectile Design, the leading 'point' of the projectile has a significant effect on feed (although most commercial 40 S&W ammunition have limited design options forward of the cartridge case due to the length restrictions) this can be altered. The more significant projectile aspect is the O.D. profile or length of area contact causing enough friction to represent bullet weight. (See also #4).

3) Propellant affects can overrides, even hides all others, however the way to control this is by elaborate math, or simple case and primer indicator readings, and controlled shot reputability.

4) Crimp & Bullet to Case Friction is a true consistency issue for re-loaders. Involves projectile pull force variables involving case I.D., case wall strength, actual crimp burred or de-burred case, no-crimp projectiles, projectile profile even how clean the inside of the case to projectile contact area. A true infinity issue.





IF YOU PROVIDE THE FIREARM MANUFACTURER, MODEL AND PROJECTILE/BULLET INFORMATION TO [email protected] the team will advise you on some secrets to your application.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Hey, it's not a rocket. But wait.! I want an ELP full a little rockets!