As I was going through the flotsam and jetsam in the reloading area, I found a box of 500 rounds or .356" lead 125 gr SWCs that my dad apparently bought 20+ years ago to reload for his Model 39-2. With the current paucity of factory ammo, I'd probably be well advised to at least start thinking about reloading for my Franken-Smith.

I went to the MD Smith site and of the powders I have in good supply he suggests loads of 4.7 grains of Bullseye, 6.0 grains of Unique or 4.0 grains of 231. Since I've never loaded a single round of 9mm for this or any other pistol with these or any other powder, I thought I would ask those of you who have more experience with this specific bullet in the 39 series of gun, have you had good results or otherwise with any of these three powders and this bullet type? I don't need to hear about your 149 grain jacketed bullets with Super TNT brand powder, etc. I'm committed in this day and age to this bullet with one of these specific powders.

Can any of you give me any suggestions from your own experiences?

Thanks in advance,
Green Frog

Of those three I've used 231 and Bullseye. I like the 231 better. It's often difficult to find a combination that works really well with the 9mm and lead bullets, at least in my experience. I'm used to the .38 Special where everything shoots from good to great. With the 9mm and lead bullets, for me, it's more like bad to good.

I use 231 in the 9mm. Some lead bullets, if driven too fast will lead like crazy.

The 4.0 grs of W231 is one of the loads I use routinely with the little Lee 122 gr truncated cone cast bullet (sized 0.357”).

Just a note on those MD Smith loads;

per my manuals and lead bullets, those are full loads and you might want to start lower,
until you get to know what is going on, just to be on the safe side.

Some like to shoot lead in their 9mm pistols and some don't.
I have yet to shoot a "Lead" bullet in my 9's but have used coated
that work pretty good if you have time to find out what powder and
speed the bullet and your weapon like.

Since most lead bullets are not loaded to +P speeds, I would forget about the Unique powder and just use the faster powders for nice target loads that you will enjoy, to shoot,

Have fun with those bullets.

Thank you all very much. It looks like a short run of nines using the "found" bullets and 4.0 grains of 231 will be my next step. Enough rounds to do a function and accuracy test (as well as to check for leading.)

The reason I built my 639 based pistol to have as a sort of test mule for 9mm just because I didn't have one (or as I'm now admitting, much experience with one.) I appreciate you giving me the benefit of your experiences.

Froggie

I have shot tons of 125 grain SWC's in 9mm using W231. Use the Winchester load data. Your gun's barrel will tell you if it likes .356 lead bullets!

Smiles,

I realize you are working with what you already have, but if you do have accuracy concerns and want to continue working with lead bullets in your 9mm pistol, you might consider a powder-coated bullet sized to 0.357”, or even a bit bigger. In my experience, the Lee bullet mentioned earlier, sized accordingly, has been excellent.

1. Are these swaged lead, or hardcast?

2. I've fired plenty hardcast through my M&P9. They work, but how much leading depends on the gun.

Example: the M&P is a duty gun. Smith assumes jacketed bullets and doesn't spend effort polishing the barrel. My 686 is highly polished because Smith knows such a gun may be called upon to fire hardcast or even swaged.

Same with my XDM 10mm. Springfield knows that this cartridge is frequently handloaded and they polish the barrel.

3. Hardcast is cheaper than jacketed, except in 9mm. Everglades will sell 9mm 115 grain FMJ for the same price as you pay for hardcast. (Pre panic). So that's what I do. Jacketed for 9mm, hardcast for 10, 357, 44.

I had a 39-2 for several years and mine very much liked WW231 and 124 lead. I think 4.0 grains is on the medium to medium plus side of of the loading range. Where you seat the bullet is a major factor. The happy mix is, As long as will feed and fit in the mag. After you find this, check how dirty/filthy the bore is. If it looks clean you are in the right neighborhood. If filthy, your load is a little light. If an otherwise good extractor fails to eject or you fail to feed, You are most likely 2/10's of a grain too much 231!

On seating the bullets, I always just used the Round Nose seating stem. It may round the edges of sharp nosed SWC's, this will only enhance feeding.


At the time I had 3 9mm pistols. A Star BM (steel frame) A Star BKM (alloy frame and the S&W 39-2 (also alloy). The same box of ammo, produced ac sooty mess in both Stars, and was clean in the S&W but shot accurately in all three! When the transfer was approved for my MAC-10 full auto, I used that same load for about 40,000 rounds over the next 25 years. Under my test conditions, (full auto, stock extended, kneeling, and either a 6" extension or silencer screwed on) 5 round bursts were 3" at 50 yards. [That is pretty good, and cures whatever your target of poor manors!] The MAC fired from an open bolt and was filthy regardless of ammo used! I slugged the bore one time, it was oval, .352 x .358! It never seemed to lead up, and all failures were from trying for too small of bursts!

That tells you 9mm, WW231, and lead bullets are a good combo, I had European Jacketed 9mm that jammed in every firearm I tried it in!

Ivan

I’ve been loading 9mm for over 40 years, but.........I’m sorry, and I’ll show my ignorance here.......SWC= Semi-Wad-Cutter?
In a 9mm? Never heard of that, didn’t think they would even feed.

__________________
"Your other right........."

I pay extra attention to COAL in 9mm. It’s a small volume case with high pressure, so keeping it above min COAL for the particular recipe is important.

I had some coated, 125 gr LRN that I set at 1.06" that reached 1046 fps with the faster powders.
my HS-6 loads got around 1173 fps, with this OAL.

As mentioned, OAL depends on the bullet and it's shape.

Good luck.

In the 1911, 9mm it feeds just fine. It also feeds fine in my 5906 and PPC 9. These were 125grain, .357 dia.!

Smiles,

SWC 9mm,...... how about that! The stuff I learn on this forum..........thanks

__________________
"Your other right........."

On a good day one can learn something, hopefully...?

I always though the Model 39 was an all steel frame: now I learn that they made BOTH steel & alloy frames!

Cheers!

Th steel frame was the mdl 44. Don't think it was ever produced commercially.

__________________
S&W Accumulator

I had some .357 diameter 150gr semi-wadcutters that I ordered for a tight throated revolver. They didn't work so well. I ended up reaming the cylinder throats.

But I was stuck with the bullets. They were pretty much a slightly lighter version of your every-day 158 gr SWC.

I loaded them up and shot them in my 9mm 1911 (Springfield Loaded Target). They functioned fine and actually shot really well. I may use that one bullet for both the .38 and 9mm, just size the 9mm down to .357. I did try some .358 but I was having some random chambering issues.

The profile isn't quite as long as the traditional 38 SWC. IF I can find one I'll post a pic.

20210215_081658.jpg

Smiles,

It’s a bit far afield from Green Frogs original topic but the old NEI #84 design was a 9mm SWC intended to duplicate the H&G #68 .45 caliber bullet for use in .38 Super/9mm. It worked very well and was not prone to causing feed malfunctions, at least in my experience, but when Lee started producing the little 122 gr truncated cone bullet it consistently outshot the #84 by a tiny margin in most of my guns and I drifted away from using it, but mostly because the Lee mold was a 6-cavity and the bullet was 8 grs lighter, so it saved a bit of lead.

In addition to the W231 load already mentioned, I also had good luck with WSF and HS6. I never had any luck with cast bullets smaller than 0.357” and would not hesitate to use slightly larger if the chamber and brass would allow it. I used to favor Remington brass for loads with cast lead bullets.

Well, I finally took the time to dig out the box of 9mm bullets Dad had stashed, and as usual I was only partially right. The label on the box shows they are from American Bullets. They are 125 grain cast RN bullets that have a single grease groove full of a blue lube that looks kind of like the carnauba based lubes I have seen, and the advertised diameter is .355” which is pretty close to what I get with my mics.

I also found a goodly amount of 231, so it looks like as soon as I can sort out and clean a supply of brass I’ll probably load up a test batch of these with what seems a reliable charge of 4.0 gr of 231 behind these bullets and seat to the same COAL as my factory RN ammo and finish off with a taper crimp. Does this sound like a plan?

Froggie

Yes assuming the nose length is similar with the factory rounds. What you want is the brass determining the headspace by having the same trim length. So the bullet "shoulder" should not extend past the case nor should it be overly deep. That might mean a die adjustment of 1/2-1/3 turn to get there from factory.

__________________
Front sight and squeeze

I shoot some 120 gr. powder coated cast lead truncated cone with W231 out of a glock 19 with 4" barrel.

I've chronographed loads from 3.6 to 4.4 of W231.

4.0 grains has by far the lowest extreme spread and standard deviation, and is the most accurate in my Glock. Those shoot at 997 ft/s with a spread of only 16 ft/s. and standard deviation of 7

The 3.6 grain load was too weak to cycle my slide reliably.

The 4.4 load only got to 1086 ft/s and accuracy went out the window

You would probably get similar performance in your model 39 from your bullets. I think 4.0 grains is a great place to start.

__________________
What could possibly go wrong?

I shot 1000 cast 125 RN loaded with Unique, They shot fine but no better than plated 124s. I have tried 125 Cast SWC in the 9mm, don't remember the load, I have 500 more 125 SWC for testing, have a new DW Valkyrie Commander that I hope is more accurate than my 9mm Citadel. The only 9MM I have that didn't like cast is my LC9. The Citadel and 92FS work fine with cast. You may have some feeding problems with the SWC, My 2 Wilson mags won't feed them. Metalforms work fine.

Thanks DeplorabusUnum and pistolpete10, this is exactly what I wanted, "this is what happened when I..." instead of "you ought to try..." (that they've never tried themselves.)

It looks like the 4.0 grains of 231 will be a good starting point as will a moderate load of Unique (care to share a weight here or by PM, pistolpete10?) I just discovered a stash of 231/HP38, so I'll probably be using that first since I've got more of that than Unique. I've got a fair supply of the 125 gr LRNs, but if somebody were to offer me some JHPs or SWCs in the same weight class, I'd probably go for them too.

Thanks again guys!
Froggie

Another vote for W231 form me. I use it for 9mm, 45acp and 44mag. It's proven in my loads to give me consistent measured loads from my RCBS P2000 and very accurate on target. It's also an economical powder, with fewer grains than a lot of other powders. Mind you that I am using jackets bullets and not cast lead.

9mm 124 grain Hi tek coated SWCs from Missouri Bullets with around 3.8 to 4.5 grains of 231 has been my go to load for a long time.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

If you're interested in using Unique, I've tested loads of 124 gr FMJ RN. 4.5 gr of Unique gets me almost identical velocity as the 4.0 gr of W321 (990-1000 ft/s). 4.7 gr gets up to 1020 ft/s. Those are good target loads, but fall short of typical self defense loads.

Some people like to practice with loads that closely match the self defense ammo they carry. I've tested five of those, and they all chrono at an average of 1145 ft/s from my Glock. I tested Hornady XTP, Federal HST, Remington Golden Sabre, Speer Gold Dot, and Fiocchi XTP. Of those, the Gold Dot was by far the most consistent velocity wise, and most accurate. It did have the lowest velocity at 1110 ft/s. What load you choose depends on whether you're after velocity/stopping power, or punching holes in paper.

__________________
What could possibly go wrong?

Well, with that 4.0 gr HP38/231 charge as a starting point, I discovered I had a fixed rotor for an old Pacific powder measure that dropped 4.1 gr consistently. So I loaded up 20 rounds with that charge and the 125 gr LRN cast bullets and took the out to the range today for function fire. I had one FTF, the last round in a newly acquired but used factory mag. Everything else went perfectly. I’ll examine the feed lips (the nose jammed into the top edge of the chamber) but meanwhile I think I’ll load a full box of 100 so I’ll have enough for more extensive testing since these seem promising.

Stay tuned!
Froggie

Well, I’m actually dropping about 4.05 grains of 231. My Franken-Smith is cycling well with this load, but my group is a little wide (The gun? Me?) but those tiny little fixed sights are a challenge anyway.

Next step will be to cast up a bunch of 125 gr truncated cone bullets and see how “Frankie” likes them.

Froggie

I don't know what a Franken-Smith is nor do I know anything about an MD Smith site, but I've used many different cast bullet designs of different alloys and diameters in a variety of 9mm pistols for well over thirty years.

A true .356" bullet will work in a 9mm pistol if the alloy will allow obturation of the bullet based on the powder and charge weight you are using. If not, a fairly soft bullet of larger diameter (.357" or .358") will work much better and can be very accurate and you will not experience bore leading. I'm speaking here of conventionally sized and lubricated cast bullets, not painted, plated, coated or jacketed.

This takes patience and experimentation but the end result is worth the effort. Look at some load manuals, Lyman for sure. Avoid YouTube and unqualified Internet experts. There are no shortcuts and I'm no expert.

If you really want your .356" bullets to work, try lots of different loads (and powders if you have them). Test your loads from a benchrest at 25 yards to weed out the worthless ones, checking for leading and accuracy all the while. Good luck-

Nuthin' a little Chore Boy can't remedy.

Just for the sake of info... while it is true that the 39 was made with a steel frame, there were under 950 of them ever made. They are rare, sought after and valuable.

Less than a thousand steel frame but total 39/39-2 production ran to over 347,000 units, so says Mr. Jinks.

The Model 44 wasn’t steel frame, it was a rare early single action only and legend says that only 10 units were made.

I've used W231 for my 9mm, 45CAP and 44mag target loads. It gives me excellent accuracy in all 3 calibers. I'm sitting on 4.0 grs as well for my 9mm. I always start a load below mid range charges and load up to just below maximum loads. 4grs of W231 was the most accurate load for my 9mms, out of my Glock 19 and my Sig P938. It's an economical powder with fewer grains per round than some other powders and being a ball powder it gives me consistently accurate loads out of my RCBS Pro 2000.

Wow, this is what happens when I reopen an old thread!

To rockquarry, I apply the term “Franken-Smith” to the pistol I assembled for myself from parts. As Sevens states, although steel frame Model 39s exist, they are exceedingly rare. I wanted one for endurance’ sake, so I did the next best thing and resorted to a stainless frame from a Model 639. I used a blued slide (actually a couple of them) to put together packages to suit the moment and my whim, hence the “Franken-“ reference alluding to Shelley’s monster.

Back to the intent of this thread, the hard cast RN bullets with a single groove filled with a hard blue lube seem to be performing well over 4.05 gr of 231, this being lit by some 30+ year old Federal #100 primers we set aside back then because the boxes had gotten damp and they were kinda iffy back then. They’re all dry now and seem to work well.

As for leading, I don’t think I’m getting any (or at least not enough to worry about) but I plan to tear down “Frankie” later today and clean him, so I’ll check then.

As others have said, 231 seems to present a good all around possibility for these loads; accurate, dependable and economical... and the best part is that I have a good supply of it!

The world is looking pretty good today.
Froggie

PS to rockquarry: the MD Smith website to which I refer is a large one that has separate pages for just about every caliber you can imagine. He lists several different bullets (usually some lead and some jacketed) and different powders from different manufacturers. It’s a very useful site and I check there whenever I’m starting or renewing loading for a specific caliber.

Froggie

231 seems to work well in many 9mm applications as do Bullseye and Unique. However, there are many powders not often mentioned or used that I have had at least limited success with from an accuracy perspective.

Probably none of these can be found at the moment on store shelves, but sometimes we have unused containers purchased years ago for some now forgotten handloading project(s). These include Herco, HS-6, the discontinued IMR7625 and IMR4756, Blue Dot, AA#s 2 &7, Titegroup, Power Pistol, and maybe a couple of others.

While few of these are as versatile as 231, Bullseye, and Unique, they are always worth a try if you have them on hand and they are compatible with the bullet your are using.