Titegroup 9mm Question for 147gr Load Data

[STORMINORMAN]

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!

 

[sjmjax]

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.

 

[rockquarry]

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.

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-

 

[Collo Rosso]

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.

 

[chief38]

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]

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

 

[rockquarry]

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

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.

 

[venomballistics]

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.

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.

 

[Denverd0n]

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.

 

[Collo Rosso]

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.

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.

 

[STORMINORMAN]

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!

 

[Nevada Ed]

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.

 

[Collo Rosso]

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.

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.

 

[rockquarry]

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.

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.

 

[Bullseye Smith]

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.

 

[Minshooter]

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.

 

[Yendor357]

My broken record response:

Spend $600 on a Garmin Xero. That will answer a lot of questions.

 

[rockquarry]

My broken record response:

Spend $600 on a Garmin Xero. That will answer a lot of questions.

Just about any other chronograph will do the same.

 

[mscampbell2734]

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.

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.

 

[venomballistics]

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!

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.