9mm 124fmj-rn with HP-38 advice?

[OldSarge21]

Hello all. I have a box of Hornady 124gr fun-rn 355771 9mm bullets I want to load up. Mixed headstamp brass, CCI 500 or Win small pistol primers, and HP-38 powder. I found load data in a Hornady Load Notes pamphlet for Win 231 with a starting load of 4.7 grains and a max of 5.3 grains. I loaded up a box of mid range loads (I hope) at 5 grains and COL of 1.150 as listed in the pamphlet for that bullet.

No where else can I find similar load data for that powder and weight bullet. The new Hornady book doesn't list it, nor does Lyman. This makes me a bit hesitant to shoot these loads now. Everywhere else I look shows much lower charges of this powder. My question is: is this a safe load? I got it out of a Hornady pamphlet, but is it now obsolete? I plan to reduce my charges accordingly with newer info but I thought I was being conservative by loading mid-range originally. I realize there are better 9mm powders available but this is what I have. Thanks for your input.

 

[1sailor]

I'm not sure which Hornady bullets those are going by your numbers. Not sure what type of bullet a fun-rn is. I did find a Hornady fmj-rn with the #35571. Pretty much just a standard fmj bullet. The max HP-38 load I can find for that bullet though is only 4.8 grains with a COL of 1.09".

 

[OldSarge21]

Autocorrect changed my FMJ, but reloading and shooting is fun.

 

[Nevada Ed]

Ball (fmj) ammo is ok for target use but some get a little better
accuracy from a JHP bullet, from the Hornady line of bullets.

That powder with a 124 gr will get around 945 to 1166fps ........
depending on the OAL that you use with your loads. (4")

I like a oal of 1.14" with ball for light target use.
The JHP seems to work well with a 1.075" oal in sub and full length pistols.

 

[bigggbbruce]

Hodgdon's site lists HP38 and 124gr bullet, 3.9gr- 4.4gr..

 

[Rule3]

Bullet 124gr FMJ RN #35577 is discontinued


Hornady manual does not list 231/HP38 however a similar Speer (manual) does have data


Your 5.0 grains is towards the HIGH end Max
around +P.



If it was me I would drop it down to 4.0 to 4.5 and work up,

 

[fredj338]

Data never goes obsolete, unless the powders are no longer available. Though current Hogdon data shows a lot lower max charge.

 

[fredj338]

Hodgdon's site lists HP38 and 124gr bullet, 3.9gr- 4.4gr..

That is with a plated/ Look at the 125gr jacketed data & it is 4.8gr. Still, 5gr is pushing pretty hard IMO.

 

[Moe Mentum]

124 gr bullet and 4.3 grains of HP38/W231 works for me.

 

[Nevada Ed]

As a note;

the hodgdon data for the Sierra fmj load is safe with the starting and top load data for a weapon in good condition.

A Sierra manual that I have has even lower and higher powder loadings with a 1.09" OAL setting with their FMJ bullet.

In a 3.5" barrel C9 pistol with a full load of w231 powder with a
OAL of 1.12" with a plated Xtreme bullet, I average 1044fps.

My C9 and full length 9mm pistols, for some odd reason, refuse to
give me good accuracy with the larger 124gr bullet shoved into
the short case with a OAL of just 1.09".
I actually LOOSE fps in my 5" barrel with this short setting.

My weapons like the 124gr Ball with a short OAL of 1.12" with my
C9 liking Bullseye,Red Dot, CFE pistol, w231 and HS-6 with a long OAL of 1.165",
with fps from 945 up to 1014.

The minimum load of w231 that I will use with a 124gr copper coated bullet of any type is.............
4.1 grains of powder for use in a 3 up to a 5" barrel length,

Safe shooting.

 

[oink]

Hornady 4th Edition shows #3557 a 124GR FMJ-RN Ballistic Coefficient - 146, C.O.L. - 1.150 loaded at 4.7 to 5.3 GR of 231

Speer #10 shows a 125 GR JSP sectional density .142, Ballistic Coefficient- .150 loaded at 5.1 to 5.6 of 231

 

[Rule3]

Hornady 4th Edition shows #3557 a 124GR FMJ-RN Ballistic Coefficient - 146, C.O.L. - 1.150 loaded at 4.7 to 5.3 GR of 231

Speer #10 shows a 125 GR JSP sectional density .142, Ballistic Coefficient- .150 loaded at 5.1 to 5.6 of 231

That is the data he has and is questioning it.
It is probably fine, but is perhaps a bit high to start with, Hornady is usually more conservative than Speer.

 

[OldSarge21]

Thanks for all the replies. I understand about not wanting to give reloading advice on the net that isn't published. I will probably back off to the 4.3 grain level and see how they function. Will run them through my chrony and compare to published data. I guess I just got a little nervous when I couldn't find any other comparable published data that was current.

 

[Rule3]

Thanks for all the replies. I understand about not wanting to give reloading advice on the net that isn't published. I will probably back off to the 4.3 grain level and see how they function. Will run them through my chrony and compare to published data. I guess I just got a little nervous when I couldn't find any other comparable published data that was current.

As to data. The data doesn't have to be the exact bullet brand as one may be reloading.


If it is the same weight and profile most any published (MANUALS) and powder companies will work.


The OAL is what THEY tested it at, you need to stay within SAAMI specs. It depends on the bullet profile.



Even going between lead, and plated bullets the data is all within a range. Yes, jacketed data can be used for lead and plated bullets. Again just start at the low end.


If the exact bullet weight is not available you go to the next HIGHER weight bullet.

 

[oink]

That is the data he has and is questioning it.
It is probably fine, but is perhaps a bit high to start with, Hornady is usually more conservative than Speer.

Which is why I also listed the Speer load which is hotter than the Hornady load in question. Thus the Hornady doesn't seem to be an outlier. Granted the Speer book is older and data may be more conservative now. My older Lyman book does have a listing for the same Speer bullet as the Speer book but unfortunately doesn't list 231 or HP-38. It didn't list an overall length with the data but did list a generic overall length for the 125 GR bullets at the chapter introduction of 1.100. The other 125 GR listed was LRN at 3.8 to 4.1 of 231

Sierra Handgun 3rd Edition:
.355 125 gr. FMJ OAL 1.090 3.9 to 5.1 of 231

Lee Modern Reloading 2nd:
125 GR Jacketed Min OAL 1.090 4.4 to 4.8 of 231 (I find the lee book to generally be conservative)

 

[Rule3]

Which is why I also listed the Speer load which is hotter than the Hornady load in question. Thus the Hornady doesn't seem to be an outlier. Granted the Speer book is older and data may be more conservative now. My older Lyman book does have a listing for the same Speer bullet as the Speer book but unfortunately doesn't list 231 or HP-38. It didn't list an overall length with the data but did list a generic overall length for the 125 GR bullets at the chapter introduction of 1.100. The other 125 GR listed was LRN at 3.8 to 4.1 of 231

Sierra Handgun 3rd Edition:
.355 125 gr. FMJ OAL 1.090 3.9 to 5.1 of 231

Lee Modern Reloading 2nd:
125 GR Jacketed Min OAL 1.090 4.4 to 4.8 of 231 (I find the lee book to generally be conservative)

I mentioned the SPEER but not the eact data as I bought the manuals.


The LEE is neither conservative nor liberal (aggressive) it is just copies of OTHER peoples test data. Lee never tested any of those,

 

[oink]

I mentioned the SPEER but not the eact data as I bought the manuals.

It's good to have manuals but I don't expect someone to automatically have a collection of manuals from the start. I probably have 8 of them and I'm sure I'll buy more.

I wish I could find my oldest Lyman. It was maybe 6" X 8" and bound with round plastic spiral binder that's disintegrating. Wife said she would get it rebound several years ago but it's never been seen since. Had some stuff in there that's not so easy to find now plus my margin notes.

 

[H Richard]

I checked my Lyman, current version, and it lists a "125"JHP 231 (same as HP38) at 3.9 to 4.4 gr with OAL of 1.075.

When developing my load with Delta Precision 124 JHP I settled on 4.5 gr 231, OAL 1.077 and Rem 5 1/2. It chrono'd at 1093 fps (from a 3.5" barrel in an RIA compact) and gave a 29.88 ES and 9.38 SD. The 12 yard accuracy was 1.5".

I did look in my old Lyman (3rd edition) and no 124/125 load listed, only close was a 121 gr TC cast bullet and no 231 or HP38 loads listed.

I have used that 4.5 of 231 also with Bayou Coated 124 gr bullets with satisfaction.

 

[scattershot]

HP38/231 are the same powder. With that weight bullet, I use 4.0 HP38 for around 1000 fps.

 

[Twoboxer]

Hello all. I have a box of Hornady 124gr fun-rn 355771 9mm bullets I want to load up. Mixed headstamp brass, CCI 500 or Win small pistol primers, and HP-38 powder. I found load data in a Hornady Load Notes pamphlet for Win 231 with a starting load of 4.7 grains and a max of 5.3 grains. I loaded up a box of mid range loads (I hope) at 5 grains and COL of 1.150 as listed in the pamphlet for that bullet. . . .

One thing is pretty certain . . . that 5.0gr load is not a "mid-range" load. With the Hornady bullet, you have most likely created a significantly over-pressured load.

Quickload shows a pressure of 40k (35k is max) using 5gr WIN231 and the Hornady bullet at a COL of 1.150". That's certainly enough info for me not to START loading there.

QL also shows a pressure of "only" 34k when substituting the Sierra 125gr FMJRN at COL 1.150. This is probably because the Hornady bullet is significantly LONGER (+0.04") than the Sierra bullet. This is a significant reduction in case volume, increasing pressure.

It also explains why Sierra's test data allows higher Win231 charges than Hornady or Hodgdon.

QL is not perfect, and neither is the data found in load manuals. But given the data, I'd strongly suggest using the data on Hodgdon's on line site.

If you have a reliable chrono, you might find yourself in the higher end of Hodgdon data to create a mid-range load. That's been my experience, especailly with a more recent batch of HP38. But not at 5.0gr with that bullet.