Titegroup 9mm Question for 147gr Load Data

S

STORMINORMAN

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
2,490
Reaction score
1,752
Location
Pacific NW
Now new to using Titegroup and wondering why the Hodgdons Titegroup MAX 3.6gr load data for a 147gr XTP is at a low(?) 27,600 CUP @929fps vs. most of the other powders with MAX loads in the 32,000+ psi range? All these loads suggest a 1.100" OAL.

Is this just a specific instance or typical of Titegroup so-called "published" load data? Trying to get to around 1K with a Federal Hi-Shok 147gr jhp (as in the Factory's 9MS)...

Thanks in advance for your kind consideration, and...

Cheers!
 
Register to hide this ad
sjmjax said:
I don't know for certain.
But, I've frequently seen discussions that suggest Titegroup is prone to very sudden pressure spikes.

I have had good and consistent results with it. But, I'm pursuing mild target loads.
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with Titegroup, about the same as Bullseye, and so is loading data. However, I've been using a 150 grain cast round nose in the 9mm for a long time using fast powder. I'd stick with what ever bona fide load data you can find for your bullet rather than Internet comments like mine. The powder capacity of the 9mm is pretty puny and pressures can go up fast. I use 3 grs. of Titegroup or 3 grs. Bullseye and get around 900 fps; high as I'd care to go. I'm sure some go higher and that's their business, but I'd stick with book figures for safety's sake, Good luck-
 
Titegroup is a rather fast powder and they tend to be "spiky" compared to slower powders. It's also known to be temp sensitive here in the sunny South. It also burns on the hot side and will generate a lot of heat if you do a lot of rounds.
If you look at some different speed powders with a 147gr 9mm you'll notice they about all peek low to mid 900fps range. That's what 33 - 34K psi with a 147gr bullet is going to do out of a pistol length barrel. If your looking for faster your into +P and +P+ loads and exceeding 34K psi. Increase pressure, increase velocity. I've never found +P or +P+ semiauto pistol rounds "fun" at that point... or any more accurate.
If you want to try it, buy a PCC. Longer barrel lets you use slower powders and the chamber/action is usually much stronger than any pistol. You can go till your brass screams!
Sorry to be so long winded. I've been sick for 2 weeks and bored.
 
I've used TG for 38 spl, 357 Mag & 9mm for at least 2 decades now. I like it very much as it is clean burning (compared to Bullseye). It meters well and goes a long way! When using it for 45acp I have found it to be a bit spicier than the W231 I normally use but it does work and I do download it a drop. I have only used TG for 45acp for a brief period when W231 was ungetatable. Got plenty now. :)
 
venomballistics said:
A better question is why would you want to use that powder in that load?
I shelved CFE pistol in favor of AA#7 on this one
Click to expand...
A good suggestion and maybe one worth trying. The original poster is using a jacketed bullet and I'm using cast. I tried #7 and other slower powders with my 150 grain round nose cast loads. While velocities were a little higher, I couldn't get the accuracy with those powders that I got with Bullseye.

An extra 50 or 75 fps isn't worth much to me if the accuracy isn't there. However, any analogy between cast or jacketed may mean little without comparison load development. Again, your suggestion may have merit.
 
rockquarry said:
A good suggestion and maybe one worth trying. The original poster is using a jacketed bullet and I'm using cast. I tried #7 and other slower powders with my 150 grain round nose cast loads. While velocities were a little higher, I couldn't get the accuracy with those powders that I got with Bullseye.

An extra 50 or 75 fps isn't worth much to me if the accuracy isn't there. However, any analogy between cast or jacketed may mean little without comparison load development. Again, your suggestion may have merit.
Click to expand...
9 is an interesting cartridge.
So little imparts so much change it makes 38 seem suitable to be loaded with shovels and buckets.
with 100- 124 grain, CFE pistol offered enough load range to allow acceptable safe margin. At 147 IIRC, minimum to maximum was about a grain and a half ..... viable, but kinda strict. titegroup is even stricter.
#7 gives a greater range between min and max so as not to require angel breath adjustments
My AR9's love this load, and that's what I intended it for. rather than fighting between accuracy and velocity. I let 16 inches of thunder pipe provide the velocity.
it's a bit frustrating as our good old powders dry up. these were less dense and provided some cushion for more exploration. our new powders seem a little short tempered compared to our old friends.
 
Almost every factory load for 147gr 9mm is designed to be subsonic. Wondering if they are caught up in trying to make this load subsonic.
 
Denverd0n said:
Almost every factory load for 147gr 9mm is designed to be subsonic. Wondering if they are caught up in trying to make this load subsonic.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say designed to be subsonic. We're talking 1901! It's just the cartridge was designed around a maximum chamber pressure that's going to give certain amount of velocity accelerating a set amount of mass. Varying powder burn rates and bullet construction will vary velocity, but not in huge amounts.
If your interested in heavy 9mm bullets exceeding 1K fps, 357sig is the way to go. More case capacity, higher pressures and some serious velocities.
 
To my limited knowledge subsonic velocities are under 1100 fps...?

I was looking to see if there was any info out there regarding enough "wiggle room" between the so-called "published" Hodgdons 9mm load data (non +P) MAX of 3.6gr Titegroup at 929fps for a 147gr XTP, using another 147gr JHP projectile with a factory claim of 1000fps, Federal's 9MS.

There's "room" to load them at a longer OAL than Hodgdons suggested 1.100" as well...

Cheers!
 
I have found out, that in my 9mm pistols, with the large 147 gr bullets
that the CFE to HS-6 "zone" of powders, giveme the best accuracy
and highest fps, if you us their maximum load data.
the fast and slower powders were just average in my target accuracy test.
 
Nevada Ed said:
I have found out, that in my 9mm pistols, with the large 147 gr bullets
that the CFE to HS-6 "zone" of powders, giveme the best accuracy
and highest fps, if you us their maximum load data.
the fast and slower powders were just average in my target accuracy test.
Click to expand...
Same here. I'm using CFE-P now after running into a deal on 8lb. keg years ago. Never seem to get to published velocities, but it burns clean and get good accuracy. HS-6 was my favorite 357 mag powder. Haven't seen it in years. #7 and WSF are good heavy bullet 9mm powders too when looking for velocity.
 
Collo Rosso said:
Same here. I'm using CFE-P now after running into a deal on 8lb. keg years ago. Never seem to get to published velocities, but it burns clean and get good accuracy. HS-6 was my favorite 357 mag powder. Haven't seen it in years. #7 and WSF are good heavy bullet 9mm powders too when looking for velocity.
Click to expand...
With heavy cast bullets (150 grains), HS-6 was a good powder and provided accuracy not too far behind Bullseye. However, after going through an 8 lb. keg of HS-6, I found it to be a "niche" powder rather than a versatile one powder and I'll buy no more of it.

Many say HS-6 needs magnum primers and near max. loads to perform well. I tried standard and magnum primers in at least a couple of cartridges and could see no difference in performance factors. Less than max. loads worked well and best accuracy in the 9mm was with such loads. Velocities were great, but HS-6 often lagged behind in accuracy with many loads.
 
I like the 38 short colt over the 9mm. Same size and easier to load both ways. Less power and more loads. Tight Group is a great power and cleaner than Bulls. I have a 686 4inch that will shoot 9mm, 38 short Colt, and 38 super. I had the cylinder cut a long time ago and its fun to shoot - carry, what ever I want to do with Tight Group as the main power. All three runs close together on the spec's. That is the reason I use Short Colt as my main brass to use and load. Be careful and SAFE out there.
 
In my two Hellcat Pro's, (3.7" bbls), with 147 gr. Extreme Plated RN, mixed brass, WSP or FC200 primer,1.145 OAL, Lee FC:
3.6 gr titegroup averages 958 fps, 26ES, 10SD
4.3gr CFE Pistol averages 966 fps, 12 ES, 4SD
Can not really see any differences; both seem to burn cleanly; target accuracy also equal.
Same loads all run fine in all my 3-5" pistols, suppressed or not,
same for UZI, MP5 and M76 subguns (1000fps, 37ES, 11SD in those).
Don't seem to have any copper fouling with either powder in any barrels.
 
Last edited:
Collo Rosso said:
I wouldn't say designed to be subsonic. We're talking 1901! It's just the cartridge was designed around a maximum chamber pressure that's going to give certain amount of velocity accelerating a set amount of mass. Varying powder burn rates and bullet construction will vary velocity, but not in huge amounts.
If your interested in heavy 9mm bullets exceeding 1K fps, 357sig is the way to go. More case capacity, higher pressures and some serious velocities.
Click to expand...
When talking about 147 loads going back to 1901 really does not apply. The 147 load was developed specifically to be subsonic AND still operate an unmodified suppressed MP5.

The load was developed for the special operations community to be used at closer ranger for suppressed use. It had to generate sufficient recoil to operate the MP5, the weapon of choice at the time, be as quite as possible, and not require special modifications to the guns.

Highly developed suppressed weapons frequently have manual bolt closure locks. This turns the weapon into a single shot, eliminating the bolt cycle noise and making the total system as quite as possible. BUT when the s&&t hit the fan the user needed the ability to disable the bolt lock and use the weapon normally, with the same ammo.

Now addressing the OPs specific question about Titegroup. I tried it and didn't like it for 147 loads. Too tight an operating range between barely cycle and way too hot. Went to WSF and never looked back.
 
STORMINORMAN said:
To my limited knowledge subsonic velocities are under 1100 fps...?

I was looking to see if there was any info out there regarding enough "wiggle room" between the so-called "published" Hodgdons 9mm load data (non +P) MAX of 3.6gr Titegroup at 929fps for a 147gr XTP, using another 147gr JHP projectile with a factory claim of 1000fps, Federal's 9MS.

There's "room" to load them at a longer OAL than Hodgdons suggested 1.100" as well...

Cheers!
Click to expand...
Correctish... Mach 1 varies with pressure, temperature humidity and altitude.
It averaged 1110 when I was all over subsonic loadings. I'd aim for a consistent load averaging 1050. This gave me margin for atmospheric conditions.
As I said earlier... 9 mm responds radically to small changes. Working out loads with it has a few challenging dimensions.
The bullet design plays more of a role than usual. Where the total weight is in some quantifiable ratio between the shank and nose sections, slight adjustments or differences between same weight specimens very noticeably affects maximum and ideal loads.
 
I got really good accuracy with heavy for caliber 9mm bullets and light loads of Acc #7. I was experimenting with 9mm bullets cast and jacketed) up to 165 gr (maybe more but it was long ago) and the main problem I had was powder space for all but light loads and keeping a workable AOL. But when I got them to work they shot like a dream. (In case you are curious I couldn't get any expansion with an bullet at such low velocities and I would have had to cast my own soft bullets to get anything worthwhile. I don't think I will revisit that because it was a lot of trouble getting them to chamber, shoot and eject).
 
rwsmith said:
I got really good accuracy with heavy for caliber 9mm bullets and light loads of Acc #7. I was experimenting with 9mm bullets cast and jacketed) up to 165 gr (maybe more but it was long ago) and the main problem I had was powder space for all but light loads and keeping a workable AOL. But when I got them to work they shot like a dream. (In case you are curious I couldn't get any expansion with an bullet at such low velocities and I would have had to cast my own soft bullets to get anything worthwhile. I don't think I will revisit that because it was a lot of trouble getting them to chamber, shoot and eject).
Click to expand...
That right there is Gods way of telling you to get yourself a 357.

With a 147, theres already a whole lot of bullet in the case. It's viable and it'll make you work for it a little. I can't imagine trying for heavier without ending up with a very frustrating single shot
 
venomballistics said:
That right there is Gods way of telling you to get yourself a 357.

With a 147, theres already a whole lot of bullet in the case. It's viable and it'll make you work for it a little. I can't imagine trying for heavier without ending up with a very frustrating single shot
Click to expand...
I've got a model 686. And I used to like to experiment with all kinds of reloading that's off the beaten track. I don't do as much of that as I used to. Now it's mostly for keep a good stock of ammo.
 
rwsmith said:
I've got a model 686. And I used to like to experiment with all kinds of reloading that's off the beaten track. I don't do as much of that as I used to. Now it's mostly for keep a good stock of ammo.
Click to expand...
I do much the same lately.
My party trick used to be the relentless pursuit of subsonic nastygrams. Somewhat similar to your aforementioned experiment. I just did it in 30-06 and 45-70. you'll often see me extol the virtues of flat point designs on this board ... that experimentation is why.
I may need to revisit that test series. A few good go to loads did emerge from it, and many relied on stuff no longer available.
Of course, the quest also lead me to more reasonable cartridges for such endeavors. 350 legend might be a fine cartridge for exploitation.
But then ... we've traveled a fair piece from the original subject
 
The 9x19 147-grain factory ammo I've chronographed ran from ~900 fps (R-P Golden Saber) to just over 1000 fps (Federal HST) from my full-size Beretta PX4 (4" barrel).

I've used Titegroup for both 9x19 124-grain loads and .38 Special loads when I was shooting IDPA. Going from memory - and I'm old, be careful! - 4.3 grains under a 125-grain Zero JHP went ~1050 fps and would put five rounds in 1.5" at 25 yards from my CZ-75B. About the same load under a 158-grain LRN went ~835 fps from a 4" M10-8, but was smoky and the cylinder got too hot to handle quickly.

I would definitely go with a slower powder along the lines of CFE-P as has been suggested above. My personal favorite is BE-86, a near-twin of CFE-P.
 
venomballistics said:
I do much the same lately.
My party trick used to be the relentless pursuit of subsonic nastygrams. Somewhat similar to your aforementioned experiment. I just did it in 30-06 and 45-70. you'll often see me extol the virtues of flat point designs on this board ... that experimentation is why.
I may need to revisit that test series. A few good go to loads did emerge from it, and many relied on stuff no longer available.
Of course, the quest also lead me to more reasonable cartridges for such endeavors. 350 legend might be a fine cartridge for exploitation.
But then ... we've traveled a fair piece from the original subject
Click to expand...
I was getting 1500 fps with a 110 bullet out of a 30-06. The versatility fascinated me but I don't think anything truly useful came out of it, except having a centerfire bolt gun that felt like a .22, which was at least, fun to do. Of course the other end is worth exploring, too. I may still look into the heavy for caliber/light load thing because it seemed to give very good accuracy. I'm glad to see a kindred spirit. Many didn't understand why anybody would want to experiment and say, "Why don't you just buy a .22?" Well I've got a .22 but I have a lot more fun experimenting with centerfire because there's a LOT more you can do with it. Yeah, we are kinda far afield, here, but the heavy light bullet could also apply to 147 gr. 9mm for accuracy.
 
rwsmith said:
I was getting 1500 fps with a 110 bullet out of a 30-06. The versatility fascinated me but I don't think anything truly useful came out of it, except having a centerfire bolt gun that felt like a .22, which was at least, fun to do. Of course the other end is worth exploring, too. I may still look into the heavy for caliber/light load thing because it seemed to give very good accuracy. I'm glad to see a kindred spirit. Many didn't understand why anybody would want to experiment and say, "Why don't you just buy a .22?" Well I've got a .22 but I have a lot more fun experimenting with centerfire because there's a LOT more you can do with it. Yeah, we are kinda far afield, here, but the heavy light bullet could also apply to 147 gr. 9mm for accuracy.
Click to expand...
One motive was suppressed work.
The 300 whisper was but a rumor at the time. A cast 150 grain fp from a Lee mold I picked up at a gun show on a whim really rose to the top.
The result was a really accurate series of loads that addressed anything one would use a 22 for, in a platform of quality that precious few 22's could match.
It took on it's own life after that, migrating to 30-30 and 32 special and a few others by friends following these developments.
Some fine "deer rifles" got to come out of retirement for it.
I've replaced this with PCC's before recently finding a 22 I liked in the Springfield 2020 rimfire. It's a fine and proper rifle that is worthy to keep company with the PCC's.
Still... There's something supremely useful from 9mm through 350 legend worth exploration by anyone
 
STORMINORMAN said:
Now new to using Titegroup and wondering why the Hodgdons Titegroup MAX 3.6gr load data for a 147gr XTP is at a low(?) 27,600 CUP @929fps vs. most of the other powders with MAX loads in the 32,000+ psi range? All these loads suggest a 1.100" OAL.

Is this just a specific instance or typical of Titegroup so-called "published" load data? Trying to get to around 1K with a Federal Hi-Shok 147gr jhp (as in the Factory's 9MS)...

Thanks in advance for your kind consideration, and...

Cheers!
Click to expand...
I talked to Hodgdon about low pressures on some loads. They said some powders for some cartages become unstable and not safe. I believe them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Overpressure signs in a Model 66-3 with starting load data
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
HKSmith
H
P
.357 Mag Pressure Signs: How Sticky is Too Sticky?
2
Replies
46
Views
3K
rosewood
rosewood
S
Help with a 44 Magnum Load, PLEASE!
Replies
17
Views
2K
Eddie Southgate
Eddie Southgate
S
Rifle OAL and brass MAX length Questions
Replies
18
Views
1K
SMSgt
SMSgt
S
300 BLACKOUT ?s
Replies
15
Views
1K
Nevada Ed
Nevada Ed

Latest posts

Back
Top