.40 powder favorites

[guntherapist]

I'm looking for a powder to load the .40.
I prefer a powder that has a high load density and is a double base powder.
Bullet weights will mostly be 165 and 180.
Thanks

 

[guntherapist]

I'm looking for a powder to load the .40.
I prefer a powder that has a high load density and is a double base powder.
Bullet weights will mostly be 165 and 180.
Thanks

 

[Beans]

I am using 2.8 grs of Clays and a 180 Gr bullet cast from a Magma Mould.

My Chorny gives a reading of 775 FPS, A PF of 135, Accuracy is great, recoil is very soft.

I am shooting a Glock 35.

The brass almost drops at my feet.

 

[Skip Sackett]

I had a KB in a BHP with Clays powder and 180gr LTC so I stay away from it in the 40S&W.

That being said, I just got one of the new Glock 22s. It also has an unsupported chamber so care has got to be taken when loading for it. Plastic embedded in my hand isn't a very appealing thought!

At any rate, I have a personal thing going on this year where I am only going to load with Hodgdon/Winchester/IMR powders. What I wanted was a high velocity 180gr PHP round for carry purposes and tactical practice. Something in the 1000fps range with minimal pressure.

Maximum pressure for the 40S&W according to SAAMI is 35,000psi. I was looking for a load that gave me that velocity that was well under that ceiling though, I found several. One though is from a single base powder, SR4756, the other though is from Longshot and that is a double-base one.

Longshot has the highest posted velocity with the lowest pressure on the Hodgdon's data website.
Here it is:
180 GR. HDY XTP Hodgdon Longshot .400" 1.125" 6.5 1009 25,000 PSI 8.0 1159 32,300 PSI
I have used this data with both Ranier and Berry's 180gr PHP bullets with good success. I have some targets and chronograph if you are interested in it.

 

[guntherapist]

Thanks for the info.
Which Winchester powder is appropriate for the 180 bullet? Are all Win powders double base?

What does 'unsupported chamber' mean?

I have loaded a lot for revolver but am new to auto's.

 

[jsd30]

I have used H-Universal for bullet weights from 150 to 180 gr in my Glock 23. Universal is very consistent & accurate, and very clean burning. I have not experienced any problems with pressure, even at the max loads I shoot in the Glock 23. I am loading the max published load for Universal in the Sierra Loading Manual, V Edition.

 

[Skip Sackett]

What does 'unsupported chamber' mean?

The explanation is: "when the feed ramp intrudes into the chamber causing a void where the chamber leaves some part of the case exposed."

If you do a search in this part of the forum for a thread started by dennis40x you will find some outstanding pictures showing this.

What are you going to be shooting these 40S&W out of? If in doubt, call the manufacturer and they will be able to tell you if it falls into that category.

In my mind, there is no Winchester powder in the proper burn rate area for shooting in firearms with unsupported chambers, but that is just me. Maybe WSF, maybe, never used it. Take that opinion with $5 to your local Starbucks and you can buy a nice cup of coffee!

There are a lot of other powders that are in that area though. Accurate Arms has 2 and Hodgdon has several along with IMR and Vihtavouri.
Again, just my opinion.

YMMV!

 

[Skip Sackett]

Originally posted by jsd30:
I have used H-Universal for bullet weights from 150 to 180 gr in my Glock 23. Universal is very consistent & accurate, and very clean burning. I have not experienced any problems with pressure, even at the max loads I shoot in the Glock 23. I am loading the max published load for Universal in the Sierra Loading Manual, V Edition.

I want to caution you here with using other data with the 40S&W. In my KB I too used data for that load. In fact, someone else I know did the exact same thing, it was from the "conservative" Lyman #48 manual. It was only .5gr over what Hodgdon's data said, but it was enough. It was right out of the manual though, I wasn't trying to hot rod anything. Scared me pretty good too!

At any rate, check the powder manufacturer's data for this round first and foremost.

 

[Amici]

I am currently using two powders for my .40 loads; WST for poly-coated bullets and VV N350 for jacketed. Both are 180 grain bullets.

As VV is hard to find and expensive when you do (at least for me, due to hazmat charges), I intend to use TiteGroup when the N350 is used up. Many of the .40 shooters I compete with are very happy with it for 180 jacketed loads.

 

[growr]

Accurate Arms #5 (7.5 grns) and a 165 Montana Gold projectile has been serving me very well for over 8 years. Seems to work well in all of my 40's
Might work for you as well.
Randy

 

[Skip Sackett]

Be careful with Titegroup in the 40S&W. The loading density is so small that a double charge can fit in that case real easy. It is a good powder, one that I don't use much, but a good one none the less.

May I ask to what velocity you are loading to with it?

I understand you are a re-loading veteran and will take every precaution to see the above problem doesn't occur, but it is a possibility that should not be overlooked.

I checked their data for a 180gr bullet with Titegroup. Not much wiggle room and the pressure curve is serious. Half a grain difference in powder weight raises pressures 7,000psi. Say your powder measure is rated for +/- .1gr per throw. At the higher end of the data you could easily end up in problem territory. Why not use a powder that fills the case more and is slower burning?

Just wondering and would like to hear your feedback.

 

[jsd30]

I want to caution you here with using other data with the 40S&W. In my KB I too used data for that load. In fact, someone else I know did the exact same thing, it was from the "conservative" Lyman #48 manual. It was only .5gr over what Hodgdon's data said, but it was enough. It was right out of the manual though, I wasn't trying to hot rod anything.

+1 what Smithcrazy said ... even tho I shoot the max published loads, and haven't had any problems, I did work these loads up from much lower starting powder charges, chronographing as I worked up to the max. For the Glock 23 I have, it shot most accurately at the max load, and I did not have any pressure signs. But, as I'm sure you're aware, each gun is diffferent. And BTW, these max loads are fired in new brass. I don't think I would shoot these loads in fired brass from a Glock with the issue of the unsupported chamber area. Might work just fine, but I haven't tried it. These max loads are not my usual plinking/practice loads ... for those I use Blazer or WWB.

 

[John R]

Originally posted by growr:
Accurate Arms #5 (7.5 grns) and a 165 Montana Gold projectile has been serving me very well for over 8 years. Seems to work well in all of my 40's
Might work for you as well.
Randy

+1
I burn a lot of AA-5 in handguns, good stuff.

 

[Littledragon777]

I have used AA#5 for several years in my 40 M&P. For just punching paper I like 7.9 grains under a 165 grain Winchester FMJ bullet with CCI primers. I also use to shoot 5.1 grains of Titegroup with the same 165 grain Win FMJ and CCI primers. Both loads performed well but I like the AA#5 a little better for accuracy in my M&P.

 

[Beans]

That being said, I just got one of the new Glock 22s. It also has an unsupported chamber so care has got to be taken when loading for it. Plastic embedded in my hand isn't a very appealing thought!

I just purchased 3 new Glocks, 23, 22, 35 all in 40 S&W.

Because I shoot lead for everything except SD, for that I use factory 180 JHP's, I purchased 3 after market barrels.

These barrels are advertised as having a supported chamber. When comparing them to the new factory barrels I couldn't tell the difference in the unsupported area.

I have obtained some "Glocked" range brass and noticed the slight swelling at the base. None of this shows in any three of my New Glocks
(Feb,09 Manufacture date) with either barrel, after market or factory, using either handloads or factory SD ammo.

I don't try to obtain anything close to Max loading in any of my Smiths or Glocks.

On an another IDPA site* with a thread devoted to match shooting with the .40 S&W , Clays seem to be one of the powders of choice. They do warn, however of trying to load max or near max loads with Clays because of presure spikes when using max loads.

They have not experienced any problems with light load of Clays in the ,40 S&W

* these guy are shooting over 50,000 rds per year combining match and practice rounds.

* This same site also reports that Glock has recently and quitly changed their barrel configuration to a more fully supported chamber

 

[roundgunner]

 

[VAdoublegunner]

I have used WSF for 40S&W since it was introduced. It is far and away my favorite powder. You will experience very low ES and SD with this powder in the 40.

I load for HKs and 3rd Gen S&Ws (and a couple of Ruger Vaqueros!). I've tried a few other things years ago, including AA#2, AA#5, and WSL, but there is no better powder than WSF for 40S&W IMHO.

Data is well established for all bullet weights in Winchester publishings and it is recommended that you consider not exceeding them as published. The upper end is quite correct for this loading.

 

[guntherapist]

Roundgunner - is that a picture of a 'supported' and a 'unsupported' chamber?
Why in the world would someone build an unsupported chamber?

I have a M&P .40, which chamber does it have?

Smithcrazy - how many grains powder = 100% loading density in the .40 with 180 bullets?

I like to have as full a case as possible without compressing. Preferably a double base.

I have loaded mostly VV for my revlovers and rifles in the past. N110 and N560

 

[Skip Sackett]

Smithcrazy - how many grains powder = 100% loading density in the .40 with 180 bullets?

I like to have as full a case as possible without compressing. Preferably a double base.

It is much more controlled by volume, that is if I understand your question correctly. Case volume is measured in Cubic Centimeters. In the Lee manuals there is a "usable volume" measurement at the beginning of each set of data.

The 40S&W is supposed to have .69cc "useful case capacity".

Titegroup is listed and for a maximum load with a 180gr Jacketed (used for comparison only) it shows the volume of the load at .36cc. That would mean that there is .33cc of empty space in the usable portion of the case. Not enough room for a double charge but one certainly enough for a serious overload.

Longshot has nearly the same VMD as Titegroup only you use more. Just for comparison, don't use this data, a 6.5gr charge (minimum)of Longshot is 0.53586cc while a 4.2gr charge (maximum)of Titegroup is the above listed .36cc. Velocity is higher and pressure is lower and there would be no way not to notice an overcharge using Longshot, that is, unless you don't look!

I hope that makes sense. The density is the same but the volume is different because you use more. Granted, because of physics, that translates to more recoil but it has a different "feel" to it over Titegroup.

Clear as mud?

 

[Amici]

Originally posted by smith crazy:
Be careful with Titegroup in the 40S&W. The loading density is so small that a double charge can fit in that case real easy. It is a good powder, one that I don't use much, but a good one none the less.

May I ask to what velocity you are loading to with it?

To "make major" in USPSA, the load must have a power factor of 165. For a 180 grain bullet, which is probably THE projectile of choice in .40, which rules the Limited Division, you would want a velocity of 920 fps. In practice, one would want a velocity of 950 or so, to cover any changes due to temperature or altitude when being chrono'd at a match.