Well I've started my latest adventure in reloading, the .40 S&W. I loaded up 50 rounds of Berry's plated 165gr TC and 180gr TC both over 5.3 grains of Universal Clays and headed out to the gun club to try them out. I also took along 100 rounds of 165gr Winchester "White Box" as a control and comparison.

I took all of my .40 S&W Sigs and put 15 rounds of each load through each pistol. The guns are 226 SAS, 229 SAS, and 239 Gen II SAS. All shooting was done offhand at 50'. Shots were fired in 5 round strings roatating through the 3 different loadings in each string.

I have to say that I was surprised by what seemed to be a lack of reloading data for the .40 compared to other handgun cartridges. Most of my manuals are relatively recent and there really wasn't that much of a variety to choose from.

My first surprise at the range was that I had significantly smaller groups with the 239. Literally my groups with the 239 were about 1/2 the size of what I was able to shoot with either the 226 or 229. Maybe not all that surprising since the 239 was the last gun I shot during my range session. I think I'll repeat the experiment but reverse the order and start with the 239 next time.

Both the 226 and 229 seem to have a strong preference for the 180 gr. handloads. Groups were significantly smaller than my 165gr handloads and slightly smaller than the Winchester factory loads. My 165gr handloads grouped slighly larger than the Winchester factory loads.

The 239 was justt the opposite and liked the the 165gr handloads better than the 180gr. Both handloads grouped slightly tighter than the Winchester factory.

What does all this mean? I really have no idea except that it was a fun way to spend some time at the range. I'll probably be experimenting more with the 180gr loadings in the future. I was just really amazed at how much better I was able to shoot with the 239 this afternoon.

Well I've started my latest adventure in reloading, the .40 S&W. I loaded up 50 rounds of Berry's plated 165gr TC and 180gr TC both over 5.3 grains of Universal Clays and headed out to the gun club to try them out. I also took along 100 rounds of 165gr Winchester "White Box" as a control and comparison.

I took all of my .40 S&W Sigs and put 15 rounds of each load through each pistol. The guns are 226 SAS, 229 SAS, and 239 Gen II SAS. All shooting was done offhand at 50'. Shots were fired in 5 round strings roatating through the 3 different loadings in each string.

I have to say that I was surprised by what seemed to be a lack of reloading data for the .40 compared to other handgun cartridges. Most of my manuals are relatively recent and there really wasn't that much of a variety to choose from.

My first surprise at the range was that I had significantly smaller groups with the 239. Literally my groups with the 239 were about 1/2 the size of what I was able to shoot with either the 226 or 229. Maybe not all that surprising since the 239 was the last gun I shot during my range session. I think I'll repeat the experiment but reverse the order and start with the 239 next time.

Both the 226 and 229 seem to have a strong preference for the 180 gr. handloads. Groups were significantly smaller than my 165gr handloads and slightly smaller than the Winchester factory loads. My 165gr handloads grouped slighly larger than the Winchester factory loads.

The 239 was justt the opposite and liked the the 165gr handloads better than the 180gr. Both handloads grouped slightly tighter than the Winchester factory.

What does all this mean? I really have no idea except that it was a fun way to spend some time at the range. I'll probably be experimenting more with the 180gr loadings in the future. I was just really amazed at how much better I was able to shoot with the 239 this afternoon.

Good report. I too have just started handloading the 40 S&W, again. I took a sabbatical after having a KB in a BHP several years ago. Mine was with Hodgdon Clays. A powder I will never use again in this caliber. With the unsupported chambers on the pistols I have, an overload is going to be real bad. I don't care to go there again!

My firearm now is one of the new Glock 22s. I am still trying to figure out how to shoot this thing! From a rest I can make one hole groups all day long. Shot offhand is another story all together!

I am using the 180gr Ranier HP bullet at this time with Berry's on the way.


Here is my report from another forum:

"I'm all for the 40 S&W. With this new firearm came 2 mags, 15 rounds each! I bought several more. 15 +1 rounds of 40S&W aught to get the job done. If it doesn't, you are in the wrong place!

It is 55* here today. I got outside! I ended up at the range no less! How about that?

Here is the report from 1 factory round and 5 reloads.

The 5 powders I tried were SR4756, SR7625, HP-38, Titegroup and HS-6.

All performed well. There was a wide spread in velocity from one powder to another.
Here are the results and some targets.
One disclaimer. The SR7625 load was shot after running a fellow club member's M629 Effector's handloads over the chronograph. It was a 3" version and the ammo was driving a 240gr bullet at over 1200fps most of the time.

All targets were at 15 yards. (They were configured like this so.........

At any rate here goes:
Fiochhi 180gr JHP
Low 1016fps
High 1027fps
Avg 1020fps
ES 10.44fps
SD 6.08fps
Recoil was substantial.
Target:


4.4gr Titegroup
Low 893fps
High 908fps
Avg 900fps
ES 15.42fps
SD 6.4fps
Target:


6.2gr HS-6
Low 801fps
High 818fps
Avg 810fps
ES 17.12fps
SD 6.24fps
Target:


4.5gr HP-38
Low 781fps
High 827fps
Avg 808fps
ES 46fps
SD 19fps
No target today as this load is what I was shooting in the previous post.

5.5gr SR7625
Low 923fps
High 966fps
Avg 943fps
ES 43fps
SD 19? (I turned the chronograph off before I was ready!
Target:



Last but not least, 5.8gr SR4756
Low 809fps
High 821fps
Avg 815fps
ES 12fps
SD 5.47fps!
Target:


All shots were fired from a MTM rest on a bench. Still not bad at all. The lines on the targets are 1/2" difference.
I'll take groups like this anytime!"

FWIW

Skip that's pretty impressive shooting, particularly shooting right handed with your right hand behind your back. <GRIN> Good trigger work! What kind of rest do you use? Ransom rest or a sand filled (bag)? I need to buy myself a rest to do better evaluations & was wondering what to buy. Thanks. Preston

__________________
NRA Life Member

Hey Sarge,
Years ago, when there were a bunch of kids here at the house, we were cheap!

Here is what I am using now:


If it were me though I think I would get one of these now:

There is a slide in part so the last rest can be used for rifles too.
I don't know what the costs are.

I like the 40S&W. It is an easy cartridge to handload. I've been loading it since they first came out in 1990 and I bought a 4006. Talk about lack of handloading data! It was tough to even scrounge up cases for the first couple of years. Some of the early published data in 1991 was not exactly well tested and was quite hot, probably extrapolated from 10mm info. I still have the G&A and Shooting Times magazines from 90/91 with it. Way hot by todays standards, esp. 200 gr loads!

I have settled on using WSF as my go to powder and prefer 165gr bullets. I tried a lot of things early on. AA#2 and #5, were decent. I eliminated Unique almost immediately for poor accuracy and erratic pressures. There are newer powders that may be better, but WSF has been very consistent for me and gives great accuracy and high velocity w/very low ES. Titegroup and Power Pistol look very interesting in newer powders though.

__________________
" I said, good DAY! "

I used Red Dot with 165 and even 180 grain lead bullets for years. I now use WST for poly-coated 180 grainers and VV N350 for jacketed 180 bullets.

Why does a lot of the reloading data say not to load for guns that do not have a fully supported case (aka Glock)?? They mention bulged cases. Why would factory ammo be any different? This is of course assuming the reloads are done correctly. I have loaded and shot 40sw in both Sigs and Glock and have not noticed a problem.

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

I have picked up a lot of range trash brass after USPSA sectional matches, where .40 is most common. I discard about 1/4 of it.

Unsupported cases tend to swell in .40, even new. You get bright "smiley faces" showing a thin area. Each time you reload it, it swells again and the chance increases you will put the stretched (more brittle) area back over the unsupported part of the chamber and get a blowout.

So the CYA advice is don't reload such cases with thin areas near the head. You pays your money and you takes your chances....

__________________
Science plus Art

I plan on reloading my own brass. Any problems related to brass fired in a 4043?

When I bought my first .40 five years ago and started reloading for it and I also found that there was a limited amount of reloading info, especially for cast bullets. I was shooting 165 grain CSWC and on top of 4.6 grains of Bullseye and it gave me about 950 fps. This powder formula was from a reloading forum and it seemed to work well, now, fast forward five years to this past Christmas. That is when I purchased a 148 grain mold and started casting my own. Again, going back to the same resource, I found a formula using 5.2 grains of Bullseye under that bullet with a listed velocity of 850 fps. I loaded up 100 rounds and headed off to the range. The first round out of my S&W99 stung my hand like a magnum revolver. I knew I had a problem. Set up the chronograph and two rounds averaged 1100 fps. Needless to say, I took the rest of the 97 rounds home and pulled the bullets. I then spent countless hours trying to find data on that bullet and could not find anything, even from Lee or Lyman or the Powder manufactures. In my research, I did read how the .40 is a fickle round using cast bullets. A lot of people seem to think is due to the different types of barrels being used. To solve my problem, I finally took some heavier load data and pared it down for that bullet. I was able to work up a great load using 4.7 grains of Unique. This gives me an average of 850 fps and cycles well with both my M&Pc and the S&W99. Picking up the brass, the heads look good, so I am going to stay with that load. It is combat accurate out of both guns, shooting to point of aim at 15 yards. Moral of the story is, with a .40, if using unpublished data, start with a known base then go slow and low and take nothing that you read or hear as a guarantee of safety or performance. Even with the load I listed above, I make no promise it will work for somebody else.

Reloading brass is not the issue. It's all about which firearm you have to shoot your loads out of. If it is a M610 revolver there is little to worry about. If it is one of the semi-autos with unsupported chambers, watch out. This round is a high pressure round to start with. There have been KBs with factory ammo in both the 9mm and the 40S&W in some.

I personally think this is one of the best defensive rounds ever. It just takes some extra caution to handload. Not because of the case or bullet selection but because of firearms chambered for it.

I like most of them too! Even the tactical Tupperware.

FWIW

Can you explain the "smiley faces" a bit further.?? Not sure what you mean.
I want to know what to look for on the brass. All of mine is from the range and there sure is a lot of folks that shoot Glocks there.

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

Glad to help.

Before you clean the brass, hold it by the mouth and rotate it in your fingers, looking closely at the brass near the case head. When brass stretches, it makes it shiny, so if you see a "smile" of shiny brass near the case head, that usually indicates it expanded into the unsupported area in the chamber.
Sometimes you can see the actual bulge in the case.

Take an unsupported .40 barrel out of a gun, put in a cartridge and look how much brass shows from the bottom. That is where the "smile" forms. Different guns show different amounts. Now try it in a revolver; nothing shows.

Look at the headstamp and see if it is sharp and clear. If not, the case has probably been shot many times.

Inspect the case mouth and body for any tiny cracks.

After you load the cartridge, drop it into a cartridge gauge and make sure it goes all the way in. It is especially likely to cause a blowout if the cartridge is fired slightly out of battery in an unsupported chamber. I mark these cartridges for brass discard, run them through a Lee FCD, and use for practice.

I shoot "range trash brass" and I have to be disciplined to throw out the defective brass instead of trying for just one more reload.

__________________
Science plus Art

Thanks for the explaination. Couple other questions.
Wouldn't the same be true for a 9mm out of a Glock o Matic?
When you run the brass through a full length die and also through the Lee factory crimp/post sizer die doesn't that reform the case back to normal?
I understand that if the case bulges in a unsupported barrel and even if it is "worked" back in shape it will be weaker at that point.

Geez, I have thousands of 40SW brass. Bad enough I can't shoot lead out my 40 and 9 Glock without buying a different barrel. Now worry about the brass.
I load them very light if that means anything.

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

NO. You don't understand the cause of the problem.

Glock did not want to design a new frame; it wanted to use its existing 9mm frames for economy and making compact .40's for the LE market. So, instead of making a gun with a fully-supported chamber, it undercut the chamber to accommodate the ramp angle. Result: a partially-unsupported chamber.

As the frames WERE designed for 9mm cartridges, they fully supports THAT caliber. NOW do you see why it is a problem with the .40 and not the 9mm cases?

Well, what can I say? Guess I know NOW
Why is factory ammo in 40 SW OK to shoot and not reloads? If one were to shoot 40 SW from a Glock would one need to use new brass every time?
Thanks

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

I just picked up a NEW Glock 35, 22 and 23 and the chambers appears to be as fully supported as my Glock 19

__________________
Semper FI

New brass is, obviously, NEW; i.e., unstressed. Note that even with factory new ammo, there have been KB's in .40 Glocks.

How can you tell whether you actually have a FULLY supported chamber? Easy - take the barrel out and put a case or cartridge in. Can you see any part of the case OTHER than the rim? If so, you don't have a fully-supported chamber. Compare a Glock .40 to a 1911 .40, such as an SVI, S&W or Para. You'll see the difference.

Good thread here. By birth I am a revolver person, semi auto handguns are something I am somewhat new at and still learning about. 9mm I discovered, is generally not big enough, the 45 ACP is generally too slow as I like higher velocity ammo. Enter the .40, it so far is a good match for me. My experiences are all with factory ammo, but I am going to buy dies this year for the .40 and begin I think. I own a Glock and a CZ in this caliber. The Glock is a 3rd gen. 22, which I am told has a better chamber that the older ones do.

__________________
Geoff. Since 1960.

Well, if you can find a 610, you can shoot .40 in a wheelgun. As far as Glocks - I had a 23. Not a bad gun, but I never got into that "Gaston Glock is God" hype. I'd look seriously at an M&P or XD before I bought more Teutonic Tupperware.

Anyone considering a 40 should check out some of the great used S&W 3rd Gen autos in 40S&W on the market now. They are undiscovered masterpieces that just quietly go about their business of shooting well with substantial durability while Glock 40s were loudly blowing up (granted, they do seem to do OK in 9mm). Plus, you can shoot cheaper lead bullets for practice in their broached rifled barrels, assuming you are a handloader; even then lead bullets in 40 are not that common.

The S&W 4006 is the standard, a 4053 makes a great carry gun, the 4040PD is even better for that but somewhat harder to find, and I've recently seen lots of 4046s (DAO versions of the 4006) around here for a give away $300.

Then there are the HK USP 40s, my personal favorites ... just to show that I don't have any bias against polymer guns in general. Like the new M&P. In fact, good polymer guns are very, very good .

__________________
" I said, good DAY! "

I don't know why someone would think that lead bullets in .40 are not that common - I've been shooting them for about a decade, including my Glock. I started with 175 grain SWC's and now use poly-coated 180 grain RNFP's. To the extent lead bullets in .40 are "not that common," it is because many of those reloading .40 are shooting USPSA Limited and want high velocity and low smoke. I find the poly-coating achieves both objectives at less cost than jacketed bullets.

THAT said, I second the recommendation for a good used S&W. They are becoming a glut on the market as PD's replace them with new models. Around here, the preference is for SIG, S&W M&P's and Glock, in that order. They all had S&W Third-Gens prior to that change and those guns are now on the used market.

Take advantage of the opportunity to get a probably little-used pistol for a good price.