Bayou 124gr, 9mm load data

[flyrobb]

I got a sample pack of 124 gr Bayou coated, TCN, to load and in searching my loading manuals the Lyman Cast has RCBS, 124gr CN data with many powders I have on hand.

Do you think this data would translate to the Bayou bullets ok? This is my first go round with these bullets so just looking for a good starting point.

 

[gwpercle]

That's the data I use with NOE 124 grain TC bullets and would also use the data for the Bayou Bullets , of course do not start with maximum loads....start low and gradually work up powder charges.
I have been trying loads with the 124 gr TC cast bullets with Bullseye, 700X , Red Dot , Accurate #5 and Unique. Stumbled on some Tightgroup and will give that a try next. Really like the 124 gr TC bullets .
Load Safe,
Gary

 

[flyrobb]

That's the data I use with NOE 124 grain TC bullets and would also use the data for the Bayou Bullets , of course do not start with maximum loads....start low and gradually work up powder charges.
I have been trying loads with the 124 gr TC cast bullets with Bullseye, 700X , Red Dot , Accurate #5 and Unique. Stumbled on some Tightgroup and will give that a try next. Really like the 124 gr TC bullets .
Load Safe,
Gary

Lyman lists a COL of 1.050. A COL of 1.070 with the Bayou's is pretty close to the shoulder so I may start there. What COL have you used with your loads?

 

[gwpercle]

I'm an old school reloader. I seat them until they drop into the barrel fully, called plunk test . Start with a few dummy rounds, no powder or primer . If they manually feed from magazine , into chamber and can be extracted ( if bullet jams into rifling, retracting slide might leave bullet in bore with spilled powder in the action) . Then we load some with powder and go shooting. Adjust seating depth and powder charge as needed...I call it fine tuning.
Keep a dummy to set seating dies next time. This eliminates all that pesky measuring . Us old reloaders are very low-tech. Reloading manuals didn't even list COL . I just looked at 1967 Hornady , 1970 and 1974 Speer and 1986 RCBS Cast Bullet Manual......not one has a COL listed.
The 2007 Speer and 2010 Hornady do show COL dimensions but by 2007 I had been reloading 40 years and didn't need it.
I started in 1967 and learned how to load with out measuring it.
Back in the day all we had was yardsticks , rulers and tape measures...not much good for measuring that COL stuff anyway .

I just remembered I have one of those tools to measure with. Wait , let me find it !

Found it , All three dummy rounds measured 1.051 !
Eureka ! I'm no longer low tech...1.051 COL , All this time and I had never measured them.

I would say 1.50 OAL as Lyman listed would be fine. I could seat mine .001 deeper and it would make no difference. Go with it !

Gary,
No Longer Too Low Tech.

 

[rwsmith]

I use Lyman......

As long as the bullets are sized right and the profile/weight is similar I use Lyman data and it works great.

 

[flyrobb]

I'm an old school reloader. I seat them until they drop into the barrel fully, called plunk test . Start with a few dummy rounds, no powder or primer . If they manually feed from magazine , into chamber and can be extracted ( if bullet jams into rifling, retracting slide might leave bullet in bore with spilled powder in the action) . Then we load some with powder and go shooting. Adjust seating depth and powder charge as needed...I call it fine tuning.
Keep a dummy to set seating dies next time. This eliminates all that pesky measuring . Us old reloaders are very low-tech. Reloading manuals didn't even list COL . I just looked at 1967 Hornady , 1970 and 1974 Speer and 1986 RCBS Cast Bullet Manual......not one has a COL listed.
The 2007 Speer and 2010 Hornady do show COL dimensions but by 2007 I had been reloading 40 years and didn't need it.
I started in 1967 and learned how to load with out measuring it.
Back in the day all we had was yardsticks , rulers and tape measures...not much good for measuring that COL stuff anyway .

I just remembered I have one of those tools to measure with. Wait , let me find it !

Found it , All three dummy rounds measured 1.051 !
Eureka ! I'm no longer low tech...1.051 COL , All this time and I had never measured them.

I would say 1.50 OAL as Lyman listed would be fine. I could seat mine .001 deeper and it would make no difference. Go with it !

Gary,
No Longer Too Low Tech.

Boy do I feel silly buying a digital caliper. I just returned from my reloading bench and took a hammer to it and will go old school from now on. I am also going through all my manuals with a sharpie and marking out all the COL's. I feel better already.

You really do make some very good points and we would probably learn much more buy using some of those old school methods rather than depending on the data printed in the manuals. Guess we tend to look for the easy way sometimes.

Thanks for pointing out the error in my ways.

 

[fredj338]

There isnt any real diff between coated or lubed, the bullet shape & weight are what you need pay attention to. As gw notes & i say all the time, OAL is gun & bullet specific. So set your oal first, then look at the data & start at midrange & work up or doen as needed.

 

[eo1bart]

Lyman lists a COL of 1.050. A COL of 1.070 with the Bayou's is pretty close to the shoulder so I may start there. What COL have you used with your loads?

I load the Bayou 124gr TCN with 5.2gr AA#5 @ 1.07 COL
Very accurate and light recoil in my Browning Hi Power.
Also have used 3.5gr Titegroup with good results

 

[gwpercle]

Boy do I feel silly buying a digital caliper. I just returned from my reloading bench and took a hammer to it and will go old school from now on. I am also going through all my manuals with a sharpie and marking out all the COL's. I feel better already.

You really do make some very good points and we would probably learn much more buy using some of those old school methods rather than depending on the data printed in the manuals. Guess we tend to look for the easy way sometimes.

Thanks for pointing out the error in my ways.

I didn't mean to infer your way was wrong or inferior , it was just my old low tech way and the reason I had never measured them. Actually using the caliper to set it is probably a better place to start from than the old guesstimation trial and error way.
Now that I have found the caliper I'm going to put it on the bench and use it. But if I ever do not have a COL , I know I can do it the old way. My COL was only off .001 !
Gary

 

[rwsmith]

I don't believe that COAL is as critical as all that, BUT...

I'm an old school reloader. I seat them until they drop into the barrel fully, called plunk test . Start with a few dummy rounds, no powder or primer . If they manually feed from magazine , into chamber and can be extracted ( if bullet jams into rifling, retracting slide might leave bullet in bore with spilled powder in the action) . Then we load some with powder and go shooting. Adjust seating depth and powder charge as needed...I call it fine tuning.
Keep a dummy to set seating dies next time. This eliminates all that pesky measuring . Us old reloaders are very low-tech. Reloading manuals didn't even list COL . I just looked at 1967 Hornady , 1970 and 1974 Speer and 1986 RCBS Cast Bullet Manual......not one has a COL listed.
The 2007 Speer and 2010 Hornady do show COL dimensions but by 2007 I had been reloading 40 years and didn't need it.
I started in 1967 and learned how to load with out measuring it.
Back in the day all we had was yardsticks , rulers and tape measures...not much good for measuring that COL stuff anyway .

I just remembered I have one of those tools to measure with. Wait , let me find it !

Found it , All three dummy rounds measured 1.051 !
Eureka ! I'm no longer low tech...1.051 COL , All this time and I had never measured them.

I would say 1.50 OAL as Lyman listed would be fine. I could seat mine .001 deeper and it would make no difference. Go with it !

Gary,
No Longer Too Low Tech.

I believe that there is room to play with COAL in 9mm but when you start approaching heavy to max loads you should use a lot of judgement in varying the length on the shorter side and not not go beyond a few thousandths of a inch in. Making them longer than recommended is no problem as long as they feed through the action.

.38s and cartridges based on black powder have a lot of extra space in them and you can put the bullet in where it 'looks' right. I just don't put it below where I can get a decent crimp on the shank if there's no cannelure.

 

[flyrobb]

I didn't mean to infer your way was wrong or inferior , it was just my old low tech way and the reason I had never measured them. Actually using the caliper to set it is probably a better place to start from than the old guesstimation trial and error way.
Now that I have found the caliper I'm going to put it on the bench and use it. But if I ever do not have a COL , I know I can do it the old way. My COL was only off .001 !
Gary

Naw, didn't take it that way. I found your post very interesting as I had no idea that the old manuals didn't list COL's. I've only been hand loading for a couple years so everything is interesting to me.

rwsmith: I believe that there is room to play with COAL in 9mm but when you start approaching heavy to max loads you should use a lot of judgement in varying the length on the shorter side and not not go beyond a few thousandths of a inch in. Making them longer than recommended is no problem as long as they feed through the action.

I generally start longer than the listed COL just to be on the safe side. I am getting into the habit of checking for function with dummy rounds before loading for real. My two nine's I shoot are a 3913 and G19, both seem pretty forgiving.