Powder Charge Data - Question/Concern

[john16443]

I am loading 45 ACP and 9mm Luger. I have Bullseye (BE), Titegroup (TG) and W231 powders available, and want to develop mid velocity loads for each caliber with these powders. I'm 'shooting' for 750 - 800 fps out of the 45, and 1025 - 1075 fps out of the 9mm. Reviewing all the manuals and data I have for these calibers and powders, I wanted to gain more insight into what I perceive as inconsistent information for the charges suggested for these powders for loading 9mm. Experience/knowledge/clarification from you long time reloaders is most appreciated for the question that follows.

I know that the 231 is the slowest powder of my group, followed by TG, and BE being the fastest. Looking at the 230gr FMJRN data available, it consistently indicates that the charges for the BE are less than those for the TG, and the TG are less than those for the W231 at the same indicated velocities or pressures. This makes perfect sense to me based on the 'speed' of the powders.

Now when I look at the 9mm tables from these same sources for the 115gr FMJRN, I find that in many cases, the suggested charges for TG are LESS than for BE.

I don't understand why this is the case for 9mm, and want to understand this before I load up the 9mm.

Thanks;

John

 

[OKFC05]

You will drive yourself bat-flap crazy trying to second-guess actual reloading tables produced by shooting, against tables of the "speed" of powders.

Why? The actual burning rate of a powder depends on several factors, such as expansion ratio of the cartridge, pressure, and containment. It is NOT a constant.
In a given cartridge, the relative buring rates of two powders may be different than the same two powders in a different cartridge. Relative burning rate charts are rough guides, at best, and aren't a substitute for loading charts. Don't guess when reloading.

The solution is to use the actual loading tables from at least one, preferably two reputable sources. Even then, you will find some small differences resulting from different test barrels, etc. Finally, use a chronograph to see what your load does in your gun on that day at that temperature. Only then are you sure what you have.

 

[PPC'r]

In your 9mm, 1025-1075fps is a bit slow for the 115gr fmj or jhp. May not function your gun, 1075fps probably would, but 1025fps might be sketchy. My load for 9mm, 115gr, and 4.4 grs. of T.G. This chronos @ approx. 1145fps out of a 4" gun. If you want something that is pretty soft shooting, try 147 fmj w/ 3.5 grs. of T.G., It chronos @ approx. 920fps. in a 4", this is fast becoming my new favorite.
As far as your .45 goes, I know you didn't mention it, but Hodgdon Clays (NOT Universal or International Clays) is a great powder for soft shooting .45 rounds, using 230gr fmj. My load is 3.9 grs. of Clays behind 230 fmj, it clocks at approx. 770 fps out of a 4.25" 1911. Hope this helps.

 

[PPC'r]

OKFC05 is right on the money, when he mentioned the value of a chronograph. It is an extremely valuable reloading tool. It will keep you safe.

 

[john16443]

Thanks OKFC05. Of course I will only be using published data, and my intent was to learn/understand more about the basis of the published data. Your response helps me to understand that, and as a new reloader, tells me not to overthink this.

 

[Roadranger]

I use TiteGroup for both the 9mm and the 45 ACP. I use 5gr. of TG in the 45 with a 200 or 230 bullet with perfect results. With the 9mm, I load 4.8 with the 115 and 4.4 with the 124 gr. bullet. Ideally, one would start low and work up until the pistol in question functions reliably and go with that. TG is just about all I use for auto rounds except for the 10mm. Bob!

 

[Rule3]

Apples and Oranges. The 45 ACP is a low pressure round and the 9mm is a high pressure. It is as OFCO5 stated, containment.

When you start comparing or cross referencing powders you will really go nuts. But if you stay with one make of powders you will see the different powders have specific use. Between all the manufactures they all have powders that will cover all burn rates and calibers.

That's why I pretty much settled on HP 38/Win 231 for all my general handgun loads. It works for all of them. Yes I have other powders for full house Magnums and some other brands, they all work.

Look at the different pressures..

Basically 45 acp is big and slow, 9mm is small and fast. small case, lots of containment, lots of pressure more speed.

It threw me for a while that larger (heavier bullets) in the same caliber usually used less powder than the lighter bullets, didn't seem logical, but then you see the difference in velocity.

 

[SMSgt]

Open three different reloading data tables side by side and you'll find three different specifications. Why? Many reasons. Each uses a different source to establish thier data. Some use actual guns, although the barrel lengths may vary--producing different pressures and velocities for the same powder weights--and some use "test barrels.

 

[TSQUARED]

I am loading 45 ACP and 9mm Luger. I have Bullseye (BE), Titegroup (TG) and W231 powders available, and want to develop mid velocity loads for each caliber with these powders. I'm 'shooting' for 750 - 800 fps out of the 45, and 1025 - 1075 fps out of the 9mm. Reviewing all the manuals and data I have for these calibers and powders, I wanted to gain more insight into what I perceive as inconsistent information for the charges suggested for these powders for loading 9mm. Experience/knowledge/clarification from you long time reloaders is most appreciated for the question that follows.

I know that the 231 is the slowest powder of my group, followed by TG, and BE being the fastest. Looking at the 230gr FMJRN data available, it consistently indicates that the charges for the BE are less than those for the TG, and the TG are less than those for the W231 at the same indicated velocities or pressures. This makes perfect sense to me based on the 'speed' of the powders.

Now when I look at the 9mm tables from these same sources for the 115gr FMJRN, I find that in many cases, the suggested charges for TG are LESS than for BE.

I don't understand why this is the case for 9mm, and want to understand this before I load up the 9mm.

Thanks;

John

As a previous respoder stated - you will go bananas attempting to rationalize the various reloading manuals. I tend to o wth the powder manufacturers data. Unfortunately Hercules/Alliant has changed their recommendedloadsseveral times in the last 20 years. If you want a copy of the Alliant 2005 date PM me your e-mail address and I'll forward it to you.
I have used Titegroup in 9mm with 147 gr.jacketed bullets at ca 900 fps. Titegroup burns hoter than the other powders you mentioned and I would not use it with lead bullets.
W-231 is a tad too slow in 45ACP. I have a tendency to use either Clays or WST. Bullseye is also an excellent choice although it does not burn as clean as either Clays or WST. Currently I load VV N-310 with 185 gr. LSWC's and WST or Clays with either plaed or jacketed 230 gr. bullets.
I now use Bullseye for my 9mm 124 and 147 gr. jacketed bullet loads. I run 115 gr. jacketed at 1150 fps, 124 gr. jacketed at 1050-1090 fps and 147 gr. jacketed at 900 fps. These function well in my S&W M&P9Pro, Dan Wesson PM-9 and S&W 952.

 

[Sully]

I loaded 231 in 45 ACP. Everything from 200 grain to 230 bullets...and some baby soft loads all the way up to HOT loads. It never let me down. My soft target loads I had to install an 8 lb main spring to get it to function.... ( Now thats LIGHT!!)

 

[Harrison]

In any mainstream reloading manual, Lyman, Speer, Hornady, etc. if you read the several chapters preceeding the load tables, you would find information answering all the questions you asked. A major mistake of beginning reloaders is buying a manual and going directly to the load tables, without reading and understanding the preceeding information. The load tables tell you want, the other stuff explains why.