Reloading the Missouri Bullet 9mm 125 gr SWC

[shield]

Yeah, I wouldn't try shooting the 1.10 with it sticking up like that in your barrel. The 1.05 looks good to go. You might try shooting a few of those. You should still be OK with about 4.0g HP-38, or you could back off to 3.8g as a starting point.

The only other difference I've noted is your crimp of .376 which should be OK. I'm using .379".

 

[sophie]

Yeah, I wouldn't try shooting the 1.10 with it sticking up like that in your barrel. The 1.05 looks good to go. You might try shooting a few of those. You should still be OK with about 4.0g HP-38, or you could back off to 3.8g as a starting point.

The only other difference I've noted is your crimp of .376 which should be OK. I'm using .379".

I agree on the 1.050" oal and am just deciding how much to charge and agree on the HP38. I also will work up a Unique load and try them both in both guns.

Over 30 years ago I loaded 9mm for my Highpower and used .375 to .376 for my taper crimp. I always figured and read somewhere that you need to add about .020 for average case thickness and it has always worked for me. Example --.356" sized bullet and taper crimp of .376" and so on. Actually all you need to do is flatten the slight bell that you create in sizeing the brass to accept the bullet. But you already know this. I have always been leary of bullet setback in the brass case on my 9mm and .45acp lead bullets. In my High Power I always shot copper jacketed bullets sized .355" so in those I used .375" taper crimp.

Thanks for the input.

 

[rwsmith]

Thanks

Yes, your round looks like mine. Take a look at these rounds and they are identified with the oal marked and the one on the left (1.10") looks just like yours. And on down to the 1.050" on the right. I had been to town to eat and noticed you sent the picture. Took me a few minutes to get mine together.

I actually have not shot this M&P 9c yet and got to thinking. Do you think in your wildest imagination that it would make any difference when it comes to bullet drop in the barrel? I would not think it would make any difference at all because the barrel is steel and the bullets are either copper jacket or lead so how could it make a difference in the beginning of the rifling of the barrel by going out and shooting 50-100 rounds. That is just my thoughts.

The dummy round on the right marked 1.050" oal and you can see there is just the slightest bit left of the driving band of the bullet above the case rim. About the thickness of a fingernail or about 1/64" .

Tell me what you think.

I have went back and added 3 pictures of the round in the barrel. The two pictures with the rim above the face of the barrel are the 1.10" oal bullet. The picture with the round flush or just slightly below is the 1.050" oal bullet. You can see the longer oal would be a problem. I had one more picture to post but had reached the limit on space.

Very illustrative pics......Thanks!

 

[moxie]

Your 1.050 looks right to me. Sticks out about the thickness of a thumbnail.

 

[shovelwrench]

I run these from a .38 Super loaded with 3.3 Bullseye. BUT, a reduced spring. They shoot VERY well.....

Just trying to point out that the larger .38 super case (and 6" barrel) doesn't have any problem with the bullet making it out the barrel..... Considering the Supers larger case lowers pressures, you should be able to drop your load below 3.3

 

[shield]

James, I checked my son's 9c, and the 1.10 OAL SWC round sticks out just like yours. The 9c is different than my FS 9 and Shield. Definitely go with the 1.05 OAL.

 

[sophie]

James, I checked my son's 9c, and the 1.10 OAL SWC round sticks out just like yours. The 9c is different than my FS 9 and Shield. Definitely go with the 1.05 OAL.

Thanks for the reply. Good to know your son's barrel checked like mine did on the 9c. I loaded 3 different powder charges of 50 rounds each, HP38--3.5 gr---3.8 gr---and Unique 3.9 gr and used the OAL of 1.050" and all pass the plunk test in the barrel. May be a few days before I get to go shoot and try them out as I have to leave town for a week. I am anxious to see how they feed but will just have to wait till I get back.

You know for all practical purposes your son's barrel for the 9c and my barrel for the 9c should be the same but this way we know for sure. I don't know how these will function in the 9c but we'll see.

 

[Wee Hooker]

I have added some more info on post #13 about OAL of the MB 125 gr. in the 9mm SWC and the seating depth. All the lengths listed fit the dillon 9mm case guage but the 1.050" is the only one (maximum OAL) that fits the S&W M&P 9c barrel like it should. It will be interesting to see if and when you check your Shield just how the OAL of 1.10" fits the Shield 9mm barrel.

As i mentioned before the 1.10" OAL is just fine in my S&W 6906 but not in the 9c and I wanted a load that would feed and shoot satisfactorily in both guns.

A word of caution here. Missouri sells two 125gr SWC. One is for the 9mm, the other for the 38 super. There is a difference in profile and the 38 super bullet needs to be seated excessively when plunk tested in any of my 9mm handguns. ( Read: dangerously deep IMHO).
That said, the 1.1" OAL used with the 9mm bullet will fit my 9c, 9 pro, 1911 pro, Glock 26 and Glock 17.

 

[shovelwrench]

I believe we're talking about the SWC here..... I've only seen one listed....

 

[Wee Hooker]

I believe we're talking about the SWC here..... I've only seen one listed....

Actually, I stand corrected . It's the 125 TC flavor that I was speaking of. I've recently loaded both profiles for the 9mm . The 38 super version IDP #6, is the one that messed me up when I ordered 1000. I never would have guessed they would be that different. Fortunately, they work fine in the 357sig.

Good catch, thanks for setting the record straight. I think I need another coffee.