Same Powder With Different Bullets

[Jimbo357mag]

There have been some discussions here lately about not using loading data for one bullet when using a different bullet, other things being equal. I can agree with that to a point, but I think most data says that in most cases bullets of the same construction act very similar when loaded with the same powder. I am talking about grouping handgun bullets into 3 major groups: copper jacket, copper plated and cast lead.

Can anyone find current published data for copper jacketed bullets in handgun calibers that does not follow reasonable general guidelines. It seems the powder manufactures only pick one type of bullet in a weight class for testing. I have yet to see current data that shows very different max. loads for different bullets, with the same weight with the same powder.

Now if I go back to some of the old Lee data I can find considerable differences between max. loads for different bullets, but I don't take these to the bank as they are a collection of data from years past and some things have changed. I also don't know where the data came from.

So what do you have for jacketed bullets, including but not limited to, REM JHP/JSP, HDY XTP, SIE JHP, NOS JHP, SPR JHP, SPR UCHP (uni-core), SPR GDHP (gold dot), MAG JSP/JHP, WIN JHP/JSP.

Any of these bullets act differently?? For instance I have been loading REM JSPs and XTPs and SIE Sports Master JHP in 44mag close to max and have not noticed any major difference. I wish I had a chronograph. Reloading is a science and we should be able to identify and quantify these differences. ...And of course, Let's Be Safe Out There.

...Jimbo

 

[Yosemite Sam]

I haven't seen major differences with jacketed bullets, but then, I don't load a lot of them.

I was surprised to see a somewhat wide range of loads for lead bullets of a similar weight in Speer #13. They list a max load of 9.5gr of Unique for one 250gr bullet, but 8.5gr for another 255gr bullet. Someone pointed out that some of these are hard cast vs. swaged, but that difference is not obvious from the recipes themselves.

I think determining OAL for a bullet that you don't have a specific recipe for is the hardest part.

-- Sam

 

[Jimbo357mag]

I think determining OAL for a bullet that you don't have a specific recipe for is the hardest part.

-- Sam

Certainly the amount of space the bullet takes-up in the case is important and sometimes OAL needs to be adjusted but I am most often looking at where the crimp groove is when comparing bullets. Most bullets with the same weight will have a crimp groove that leaves close to the same amount of bullet in the case.

...Jimbo

 

[Ruber]

Jimbo,
I had really thought about that a while back. I had moved a bit further from my Dad and I had the Speer manual and he had Hornady. We discussed loads over the phone and pondered exactly what you were asking about after we noticed some of the Hornady loads had a bit more powder than the similar Speer loads.

So we loaded up some .44 Mag and .357 Mag and took out a SBH, a Deerfield and a GP100 for a fun day. We tried two different 125gr JHPs in the .357 mag and two different 240gr JHPs in the .44 Mag. We loaded up about 10 of each load, working our way up in loads about .1gr of powder at a time. Ya, we had a few hundred .44 Mag and .357 mag rounds out there, needless to say, there weren't many folks around our end of the bench at the end of the day.

Had a great time at the range. We did see that the loads were pretty specific to the bullet regardless of making sure the seating depth was similar. Some of the Hornady XTP loads were pretty stiff and didn't exhibit the pressure signs of equivalently loaded Sierras and Noslers. I'm sticking with published recipes for the correct bullets for sure!

Fun Times!!

 

[dougader]

I've noticed that Speer 14 mentions in some calibers/data that their Gold Dots don't quite "track" the same as some of their traditional cup and core bullets. They also mention this for their rifle bullets when compared to the Trophy Bonded bullets they now carry.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

I would really like to see and challenge someone to chronograph 3 different bullets with the same load. A change in velocity is a good indication of a change in pressure. I have been struggling lately with working up some near max loads and looking for over-pressure signs.

I am just trying to look at this from a practical standpoint. Most times we don't have the bullet in the recipe or we might want to change the bullet. It would be nice to know which bullets are close to being the same and which are not.

I think the powder manufactures are playing a little game with us by not comparing different bullets in the same weight and class. :shock:

...Jimbo

 

[Bucks Owin]

The "One book, One caliber" series is handy in that there is a lot of data in there with both jacketed bullets and popular cast bullet molds. For instance "The Complete Reloading Manual for the .45 Colt" that I have in front of me, has 1,367 loads for 42 bullet designs and 52 different powders. "Ruger only" included. A lot of info for around $12 at various auctions... :wink: I have several of them and use them constantly..

 

[contender]

Interesting discussion.
For as long as I've been reloading,, I've looked at all manuels,, (I have at least 4 current ones at any given time.) I study their info,, in all of them when I start working up a load in any gun,, either rifle or pistol.
I see a lot of variation sometimes in starting weights of powder when looking at the same caliber & bullet WEIGHT.
My procedure to find the most accurate load is to select a couple of bullets that will perform the job I need when sent downrange. Then I select a couple of powders,, that have either proven themselves to me to be good all around powders. (Of course it's from the selection of powders for that caliber & bullet weight.) I also read the parts about the testing done by the publishers staff,, to see what they found to be the most accurate. I try to match things like this up. Then,, I load test ammo,, & go to the range & chrono & check for accuracy. Notice,, I did not say I used the exact same recipie as the manuels,, (matching the bullet, the primer, the powder exactly.) Why do I not match things? Because rarely do I have all of the exact same things they used. Example,, Remington primers are rare to find around here & in general for reloading,, at least fo rme,, yet they do use them in a lot of reloads. But lets say I want to match a bullet design to the job I want it to perform,, such as deer hunting. I selected the Nosler Ballistic tip bullets,, and the Hornady poly tipped bullets. Similar in construction type,, and similar expectations downrange. I then select a couple of powders,, for both bullets, and start with the lowest charge listed in all of the manuels for that weight of bullet. I usually build several different reloads. Then I look at seating depth,, using my stoney point OAL guage with the appropiate bullet,, and I START by seating them approximately .050 away from the lands. That's my baseline. I do NOT load ANY loads past the max charge that is the LOWEST max charge in all the manuels.
Then,, a lot of carefull shooting to see what happens. I use load test data sheets,, along with my chrono,, and record everything. Then I study all of it,, to determine which bullet/powder/primer combo gives me the best accuracy. Usually I get 4-6 good canidates to re-test. Then I take each one of those & only change one thing,, bullet seating depth. Depending upon the firearm,, (Contender vs a bolt gun, vs a semi-auto etc,) to try & find that sweet spot of accuracy using just the seating depth as my variable duplicating the other components.
Off to the range again I go. Test loads second chance. Usually after this,, I get a pretty good idea of 1-2 loads that seem to shine,, or show a lot of "forgiveness" in them. Example,, accuracy stays about the same over a .040 range of seating depth. After round two of testing I usually have 1-2 loads that are showing consistant patterns of accuracy & reliability. I then focus on tweaking the powder charge some to see if I can get it a bit better.
All of this brings me to the discussion above.
Rarely as noted do I have all the exact same components listed in each manuel. BUT<< I use the bullet weight,, and seating depth guidelines to find a load that works ACCURATELY in MY guns w/o exceeding any published data. meaning,, you can find good safe accurate loads w/o using the exact same things listed in each manuel.
Just friday,, I was doing test round # 3 in one caliber. (I'm not totally satisfied yet with anything,, and there are other variables.) In my 44 spls,, I'm testing different bullets, powders, & lubes & cast sizes to see what I get. I shot 6 rounds each of 15 different loads over the chrono & for accuracy on friday. I haven't had the time to digest all the info yet,,, but I'm getting there.
Plus,, I was also doing a test of another caliber/bullet combo suggested by a member here. My 357 maxie Contender,, and a new to me, 205 grn lead GC slug. I still have a lot of work to go on that one. In the case of this caliber/bullet combo,, there isn't much data available,, so it's gonna be a slower process to test this one.
Basically,, you can vary a lot of things,, and get excellent results,, but you must ALWAYS error on the side of caution when approaching near max loads.
Now,, some folks may say,, "I can't afford to buy & shoot 200 bullets and 3-6 lbs of powder just to test something." I always say, Why not, if you want the most accurate load you can get for that firearm? Once you get there,, THEN you can devote your $$ on the exact recipie for that gun. and another thing,, a big plus,, you get a lot more trigger time with the gun,,,!
Experimenting,, it's what makes reloading a wonderful addition to the hobby!

 

[pps]

I would really like to see and challenge someone to chronograph 3 different bullets with the same load. A change in velocity is a good indication of a change in pressure. I have been struggling lately with working up some near max loads and looking for over-pressure signs.

I am just trying to look at this from a practical standpoint. Most times we don't have the bullet in the recipe or we might want to change the bullet. It would be nice to know which bullets are close to being the same and which are not.

I think the powder manufactures are playing a little game with us by not comparing different bullets in the same weight and class. :shock:

...Jimbo

I have not done this with three bullets, but I have done it with two similar bullets. Both were 158gr SJHP bullets

Remington 158gr SJHP with 16.5 grains H110 (70deg day) chronographed at 1331fps, no pressure signs.

Zero Bullets 158gr sjhp at 16.5 grains H110 (shot same day/same temp) went for 1190fps, by 16.8grains of H110 we were at 1220fps and FLATTENED PRIMERS

(Rem 5 1/2 primers for both loads in new Remington brass) both bullets were seated to 1.59 col.

The Zero bulets are shorter and more squatty than Remington. Diameter for the Remington is at .357, the Zero was at .358"

 

[Jimbo357mag]

A lot of good information here and I thank you guys. Normally I will work-up a load for each combination of components well under max. and go from there BUT I wish there was some reference that said that "X" bullet will usually cause a little more pressure than "Y" bullet. Without a chronograph it is near impossible to notice small increases in pressure when changing bullets or other components. I would at least like to be able to know when I am going with a little too much pressure. Perhaps someday we will have a chart similar to a burn rate chart showing bullet barrel drag.

...Jimbo

 

[pps]

Oh, I forgot to mention. The crimp was very consistent as the lee Factory crimp die was used for both.

The other powder I've done similar comparison is with the 358156 cast bullet sized to .358 and lubed with my p cubed lube.

With a soft alloy I can get up to 14 grains of 2400 and a muzzle velocity of about 1250....further work up actually leads to a velocity DROP...which is NOT a good thing to see, because the bullet smashes harder against the rifling and drives up pressure.

The same bullet cast with 4% Antimony, .25% Arsenic, and 1.5% Tin and heat treated after it has been sized I have driven to nearly 1400 fps without pressure signs using an undisclosed amount of 2400 (google "Skeeter Skelton load for details)

I think there are so many combinations and permutations of possible loadings that a chart will never be as practical as experimentation.

 

[Ruber]

...I wish there was some reference that said that "X" bullet will usually cause a little more pressure than "Y" bullet. Without a chronograph it is near impossible to notice small increases in pressure when changing bullets or other components. I would at least like to be able to know when I am going with a little too much pressure. Perhaps someday we will have a chart similar to a burn rate chart showing bullet barrel drag.

...Jimbo

I'm with you on this one. Even with a chrono it's difficult to determine what's going on with the pressure inside the gun, it's not always the case that more pressure = more velocity, or vice versa. I've learned through testing that some bullets for one reason or another cause higher pressure than the similar constructed bullets from other brands and can use that in my loading. From the examples I listed above, I'll venture to use Speer or Sierra data for Hornady bullets more than the other way around for working up loads. (But I really would like to see the pressure data for each).

 

[pps]

...I wish there was some reference that said that "X" bullet will usually cause a little more pressure than "Y" bullet. Without a chronograph it is near impossible to notice small increases in pressure when changing bullets or other components. I would at least like to be able to know when I am going with a little too much pressure. Perhaps someday we will have a chart similar to a burn rate chart showing bullet barrel drag.

...Jimbo

I'm with you on this one. Even with a chrono it's difficult to determine what's going on with the pressure inside the gun, it's not always the case that more pressure = more velocity, or vice versa. I've learned through testing that some bullets for one reason or another cause higher pressure than the similar constructed bullets from other brands and can use that in my loading. From the examples I listed above, I'll venture to use Speer or Sierra data for Hornady bullets more than the other way around for working up loads. (But I really would like to see the pressure data for each).

A chart would be valid for the barrel the test data was developed in. The only way to find out what is going to happen in your gun is to carefully work up your loadings in your gun with a chronograph. How a bullet behaves in my S&W is frequently different than in my Ruger. The 4" Ruger is consistently faster than my 5" S&W...go figure?

 

[Jimbo357mag]

I understand most of the ins and outs of reloading and some of this is real interesting but I still wish I could look at the Hodgdon or Alliant website and see the max. loads for several different bullets in the same weight class. The way it is now you get one jacketed and maybe one cast lead bullet in the same weight class. If you go to the next weight class you might get a different bullet or not. It really makes head to head comparisons next to impossible.

Today I was at the range and working-up 2 loads for my Deerfield Carbine. Using 240gr XTPs with AA#9 and Blue Dot. I have to have enough pressure to function the gun. Both of these loads are a little over published max. and I still get some Failure-To-Function's. This is graying my hair a little. Good factory ammo will function the gun fine. (Winchester, Federal) Should I be conserned that I am over max a little with these slow powders? I want to go up a little more, maybe 0.2gr. BTW there are no pressure signs and the recoil is stout.

When I switch bullets I'm going to have to do it all over again I guess.

...Jimbo

 

[Ruber]

As much as I like Blue Dot, I don't have much experience with it in 44 Mag, I stick primarily to a max load of H110 nowadays, which is quite a bit slower and works really well with the 240 grain XTPs in our Deerfield. I did have some loads with Ramshot Enforcer which is really close to AA#9 and I used the Noslers with that. I did have some problems initially where the first version of the manual listed standard primers. I haven't had problems with that load after switching to mag primers as listed in their recent manual.

Where I had pressure signs in the other instances, they were pretty obvious. I had whole headstamps that could not be read any more in some instances, doesn't sound like you're having that.

If you don't mind my asking, what primers are you using with Blue Dot? I've had problems with standard CCI primers and Blue Dot.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

If you don't mind my asking, what primers are you using with Blue Dot? I've had problems with standard CCI primers and Blue Dot.

I'm using Winchester WLP primers which are good for mag and standard loads. I have used H-110, AA#9 and Blue Dot a lot in the 44mag. cartridge. I have some good loads for handguns and a rifle with different bullets but this Deerfield is very finicky.

...Jimbo

 

[Silent Sam]

Well the old 'rules' still apply. If you change a component the prudent thing to do is drop down and work up again. Bullet diameter and construction can make a difference. I have had bullets of the same caliber & type from the same manufacturer that measured different diameters and did not shoot the same, velocity or accuracy. I have also ended up with the same load(s) using different manufacturer's bullets. The only guarantees you'll get is what you load in your firearms.

 

[Ruber]

If you don't mind my asking, what primers are you using with Blue Dot? I've had problems with standard CCI primers and Blue Dot.

I'm using Winchester WLP primers which are good for mag and standard loads. I have used H-110, AA#9 and Blue Dot a lot in the 44mag. cartridge. I have some good loads for handguns and a rifle with different bullets but this Deerfield is very finicky.

...Jimbo

Yep, those are what I use with Blue Dot in .45 Colt for the Blackhawk. Got to thinking about this and thought I might try some Blue Dot loads in the Deerfield as well, see if it acts similarly. From the Hornady manual for the 240gr XTPs I got 18.5gr of Blue Dot with WLP primers, is that in the same ballpark as what you're dealing with?

edit: PS. My manuals starting load for Blue Dot listed 15.7gr fyi.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

Yep, those are what I use with Blue Dot in .45 Colt for the Blackhawk. Got to thinking about this and thought I might try some Blue Dot loads in the Deerfield as well, see if it acts similarly. From the Hornady manual for the 240gr XTPs I got 18.5gr of Blue Dot with WLP primers, is that in the same ballpark as what you're dealing with?

Well, this is exactly what I'm talking about. I started low for the info that I had and have worked-up to 15.0gr of Blue Dot now. My info from the Lee book shows 14.4max for a jacketed bullet and from Alliant Online I found 13.7max for a Gold Dot. If Hornady says 18.5gr then I got a long ways to go.

Thanks for the tip Ruber, I don't have that manual and the info isn't online anywhere that I can find, so like most advise I was going slow and looking for pressure signs.

Going out on a limb here: Seems the XTPs need a little more charge to get up to pressure.

...Jimbo

 

[Ruber]

Going out on a limb here: Seems the XTPs need a little more charge to get up to pressure.

That's what I've found...
Caveats to the 18.5gr is that it was from an older manual and they do list different data in the rifle and pistol sections for Blue Dot in the .44 Mag, but they did do their "rifle" data testing with a Deerfield Carbine.

If anyone would like to share what the latest manual says, it would be much appreciated...

--Ruber