Experience with Barry’s 9mm HBRN?

[sjmjax]

Anyone experiment with Berry’s hollow base round nose 9mm plated bullets?

I hoped it would produce positive accuracy similar in principle to hollow base wadcutters. I’m sure the cavity concentricity and alignment to the bullets axis would be critical.

Not having very good results. Mostly using Titegroup at upper lead - low jacketed loads. Get some nice tight groups at 15 yards. However that’s mixed with a lot of unexplained flyers.

I’m a pretty good shot and see much better and more consistent results with standard 115 & 124 grain bullets.

Any suggestions to making these fly straight?

 

[1sailor]

I also had issues with Berry's bullets. In my case I think the issue may have been my fault. It's pretty easy to scratch off the coating if you don't have enough flair and you also need to be careful about crimping. It doesn't take much to throw them off. I've ended up going to poly coated bullets. They're accurate and didn't seem to cause the issue I had with the Berry's. Others have had good luck. I think it just take setting the die's correctly. I never had the patience I guess.

 

[GypsmJim]

First measure the bullet diameter. If they are undersized throw them away.

I made the classic mistake of buying 38, 9mm and 41 mag bullets at once on sale and found every single one to be undersized. When inquiring I was told that they were all "within specs". Apparently 0.355 meets the QC requirement. Apparently, all 3 of my barrels must be worn out.

 

[Miracle Man]

I've kicked around the idea of trying those but have not yet. I have used the regular 115 gr. plated round nose with decent results.

I'm fairly new to loading ammo for semi-autos so I'm still a noob in this field more or less. But I have been finding out on here and thru other sources that the 9mm, well lets say does not lend itself well to upper level accurate, consistent reloading.

I haven't done any testing in a couple months (to hot for me). But I was getting some fairly decent results with CFE pistol pretty much across the board. 9mm, 10mm, 45 ACP before I shut down. It's getting close to time for more testing now

 

[smithra_66]

Anyone experiment with Berry’s hollow base round nose 9mm plated bullets?

I hoped it would produce positive accuracy similar in principle to hollow base wadcutters. I’m sure the cavity concentricity and alignment to the bullets axis would be critical.

Not having very good results. Mostly using Titegroup at upper lead - low jacketed loads. Get some nice tight groups at 15 yards. However that’s mixed with a lot of unexplained flyers.

I’m a pretty good shot and see much better and more consistent results with standard 115 & 124 grain bullets.

Any suggestions to making these fly straight?

Yeah I get the same results. For me, plated bullets are the worst for accuracy. They don't have the hardness of jacketed in order to engage the rifling, but they have just enough hardness to not engage the rifling like lead does!

They are kind of in between. I use them for combat drills. I certainly wouldn't use them for accuracy....lead or jacketed are better in my opinion.

 

[austintexas]

Only thing I've noticed is, you have to bell the case enough to ensure you don't scrape off some of the copper coating. I'm having good luck with Unique powder. Near Max Load.
SWCA 892

 

[rockquarry]

Try a variety of cast bullets if you don't cast your own. If you can get conventionally lubed and sized bullets of the right diameter and proper alloy for your gun and load, that's all you need. These will likely outshoot jacketed bullets and almost certainly be more accurate than plated bullets and perhaps coated bullets.

Measure the bullets with a micrometer, not a caliper.

For those shooting 9mm, .355" and .356" bullets may actually shoot well in a few guns. There may be some .356" bullets that will obturate and provide good accuarcy without leading, but generally, a larger diameter bullet will be needed, either a .357" or maybe even a .358". Test your bullets for accuracy at 25 yards from a benchrest. Shooting closer won't tell you what you want to know.

 

[rockquarry]

It's difficult for me to understand why a handloader would go to the trouble to make second-rate ammo capable of only mediocre accuracy instead of the best he can produce. Once the necessary load development and testing is finished and you know what works best, top of the line ammo is no more trouble to put together than something that gives lesser results.

This isn't a criticism of Berry's Bullets; I'm not familiar with them.

I did try someone's plated 148 grain .38 wadcutter bullets years ago. Terrible accuracy, but maybe I got some bad ones that weren't typical.

 

[STORMINORMAN]

I use their 124gr HBFP-TP for 357 SIG range ammo (1,300 fps plus) and the HBRN-TP for 9mm & +P.

TP is "thick plate".

Hodgdons suggests up to 1,100+ fps at "normal 9mm" pressures with over 20 different powders for the RN @ 1.150"...

Mine all seem shoot just fine when loaded towards the upper levels: there's also the +P "cushion" with a few +P loads "book loads" listed using the ACCURATE powders as well.

Cheers!

 

[Nevada Ed]

Some loaders like the hb Berry plated RN bullet in the 9mm for its
extra long oal and its ability to hold more powder with the design of their bullet.

If a long OAL or more powder is your thing, this bullet is what you need.

Another option would be the Speer bullets.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I agree, fo.with cast bullets or coated bullets instead.
There are at least a half dozen different sellers usually discussed on this forum, most are good.

I personally prefer Missouri Bullets but there are others. I use mostly cast bullets but sometimes I buy their Hi-Tek coated bullets.

Good luck finding something you like and that will shoot better in your guns.

 

[WR Moore]

I've used an uncounted number of Berry's plated in .38/.357 and 9 mm. I've not had accuracy problems, so let's go over your issues.

First off, what's your accuracy requirement and how well does you & your gun group with factory ammo? With all due apologies, occasional flyers might be you. I used to shoot long range rifle and I'm all too familiar with this.

Now then, I'm not sure what the design intent of the hollow base bullet is or what (mythical?) advantage it's supposed to have. I'll point out that the skirts of the typical HBWC are much, much thinner than the walls of the Berry's. Or at least they are in swaged HBWCs produced by other makers. So any advantage of the skirts is pretty much lost.

All my shooting has been with the flat based bullet. FWIW, the best 9 mm accuracy has been with truncated cone pattern HP bullets. The flat point thing was determined by DOD funded testing in the last century. Hornady made the bullets and further development yielded the HAP design: flat nosed hollow point.

I generally use Unique for most practice handgun rounds. The 115 gr flat point with Unique gives me a steady 1150 f/s. I haven't clocked the 124 gr flat point-or at least I don't recall it.

Do make sure you're expanding your case mouth enough, I use a slight taper crimp. Despite the fuss about damaging the plating, I don't see accuracy issues and I can see a slight case mouth indent in pulled bullets. [ETA: Since my seating die both seats and taper crimps at the same time, the "indent" is really a very slight scrape mark.] I'm using flat points, I use an OAL about the same as factory defensive ammo with similar bullets.

 

[STORMINORMAN]

Regarding the use of factory ammo OALs, I measured about 8 of the various 9mm "flat nosed" (which includes the hollow point variety) 124mm bullets: Berrys, Gold Dots, XTPs, HHPs, V-Crown, etc.

Once you know their respective lengths you can adjust the OALs so that the available case volumes are identical (or, close enough) and basically use the so-called "published load data" available for the many different 124gr bullets & powders. Since most 9mm hollow points are typically loaded pretty short to begin with (as in 1.100" or less) there is usually plenty of room to make an OAL adjustment (+ or -, but typically plus).

Case volume is maintained and the trick is to find ones that feed and fire more accurately.

But, that's (one of) the point(s) of reloading, anyway... Isn't it?

Cheers!

Cheers!

 

[venomballistics]

I've played with various plated through the years. They are fairly easy to screw up. In some cases, impossible not to.
in some chambers, you will over crimp before they'll "plunk test".
newer coated cast seems much more forgiving, though one would think it shouldn't be.

 

[sjmjax]

I’ve been transitioning to plated bullets, primarily Barry’s, for quite some time. They have generally been more difficult to dial in a consistent accurate load than lead or traditional jacketed bullets.

Been successful with 32, 38/357, 10, 41 & 45.

Not so much with 9mm. With factory & most handloads, I can put all rounds, other than an occasional flinch, into a 2” shoot-n-see target at 15 yard. These hbrn are shooting 6-8 inch “patterns”.

The potential benefits of a heavy hollow base bullets is, in my opinion, two factors. Longer bearing area & off set rotational mass.

Traditional 115 grain bullets are very short with little bearing area. In my opinion, is part of the reason 9mm has a poor accuracy reputation. Short bearing area makes it easier for the bullet to be poorly aligned with the bore.

Benefit of off set mass (hollow base) is greater gyroscope stability. As long as it’s perfectly concentric.

My experience has been that the most accurate 9mm ammo I’ve shot has been factory & hand-loaded 147 grain. I believe that has much to do with the long bearing area. I was hoping to duplicate that with the 124 grain hollow base.

I’ll keep tweaking it. I appreciate your comments. But, I was hoping for advice from those actually experienced with this particular bullet.

 

[WR Moore]

The potential benefits of a heavy hollow base bullets is, in my opinion, two factors. Longer bearing area & off set rotational mass.

Traditional 115 grain bullets are very short with little bearing area. In my opinion, is part of the reason 9mm has a poor accuracy reputation. Short bearing area makes it easier for the bullet to be poorly aligned with the bore.

I’ll keep tweaking it. I appreciate your comments. But, I was hoping for advice from those actually experienced with this particular bullet.

Sorry about the lack of experience with "this particular bullet". However, based upon your second paragraph, let me point out that a flat point bullet of either 115 gr or 124 gr weight has a longer bearing area than a round nose. Let me also point out that a hollow point version of a flat point bullet would have an even longer bearing surface. Please reference paragraph 4 of my previous post.

FWIW, with my FP bullets I'm occasionally capable of near one ragged hole groups from prone at 25 yards. Red dot sights are wonderful things for us old coots. My trigger manipulation sometimes ain't what it used to be.

 

[Tu_S]

Really never used Barry's plated anything until it was all I could find during the pandemic. As others have mentioned you do have to adjust the flairing and crimp.

I also found the most accurate load for 115gn 9mm was the -10% safe new thing to try starting load of 4.9gn of CFEPistol going down range at under 1000fps. Of course it wouldn't reliably cycle everything I have, so in the end I set up the press for 5.2gn.

It's difficult for me to understand why a handloader would go to the trouble to make second-rate ammo capable of only mediocre accuracy instead of the best he can produce...

This really depends on what you're loading for. I'll spend the time with the turret press and autocharger when working on accuracy and developing something new, but there are other times when loading up the progressive and turning out a few hundred good enough practice rounds is the goal for the day.

 

[rockquarry]

Really never used Barry's plated anything until it was all I could find during the pandemic. As others have mentioned you do have to adjust the flairing and crimp.

I also found the most accurate load for 115gn 9mm was the -10% safe new thing to try starting load of 4.9gn of CFEPistol going down range at under 1000fps. Of course it wouldn't reliably cycle everything I have, so in the end I set up the press for 5.2gn.



This really depends on what you're loading for. I'll spend the time with the turret press and autocharger when working on accuracy and developing something new, but there are other times when loading up the progressive and turning out a few hundred good enough practice rounds is the goal for the day.

Certainly not a point I'd argue as we all have different ways of doing things that seem to work well. I've had four progressive machines over many years; got rid of all of them as I probably load no more than ten to twelve thousand rounds of handgun ammo in a year. However, the progressives were easily capable of producing the same quality ammo as the turret machine, though the progressives lack much of the versatility of a turret or single stage for load development and loading in small batches of ten to twenty cartridges for chronographing and group shooting.

I suppose my point was poorly made in my earlier post. I should have said that it's just as easy and no more trouble to load first rate ammo all the time. There's just no good reason to settle for loads that provide nothing better than substandard accuracy when the work to make them and good ammo is the same.

People speak here of "blasting ammo", obviously a reference to subpar ammunition. Hard to see the point in using such.

 

[GypsmJim]

As others have mentioned you do have to adjust the flairing and crimp.

I knew that ahead of time based on my online R&D. My own personal home range has a sand trap and I recover my bullets. My flare and crimp must be OK since my fired bullets are fine.

I can run undersized lead boolits in my revolvers with "OK" results. A 0.452 in my 25-5 isn't awful, but of course 0.454 is awesome. A 0.451 in my 1911s run fine.

Just something about undersized (even by only 0.001) plated bullets that are not satisfactory (for me).

Sorry I don't have data about the specific flavor. The plated of this thread just give me a bad taste in my mouth, mostly because of the response.

 

[venomballistics]

.

People speak here of "blasting ammo", obviously a reference to subpar ammunition. Hard to see the point in using such.

I prefer to think of it in terms of "Standard Ball"
I put significant dev time into my most used loads.
I might produce them by the bucket and use them by the gallon, but knowing it'll be the most likely thing I'll find a handful of in the clutch, it is typically the most tested and refined loads on the bench