Substituting Bullets With Other's Load Data

[TheTexasRAT]

"Basic Handloading" by George C. Nonte, Jr. (page 113):
Chapter 13 Pressure:
Variables That Effect Pressures:
Bullets have an especially strong effect on pressures, and laboratory tests conducted for the NRA show quite clearly that different makes and types of bullets of the same weight may cause as much as 10,000 CUP spread in average maximum pressure with an otherwise standard load. This is the principle reason that when choosing a load from a manual published by a bullet manufacturer, you should not attempt to use a bullet of a different make or type. In the extreme, substituting one 150-grain bullet for another - with the same case, primer, and powder charge - may produce either an increase or decrease of up to 10,000 CUP in chamber pressure. With that 10,000 representing an average figure, the peak difference might well be 15,000 to 20,000 CUP. That much difference under some conditions is sufficient to convert a safe working load to a dangerous load.

George C. Nonte, Jr. entered the U.S. Army late in World War II and retired 20 years later, in 1964, as an Ordnance Corps Major. And was active in the military marksmanship program.
Following his retirement from the Army, he sporadically did private contract consulting work for a US government agency - and served as a consultant to gun manufacturers. He was a recognized expert in the firearms field. Nonte frequently gave court testimony as an expert witness on firearms.
In the 1950s he began a long career as a writer on handloading and guns, and was listed in the mastheads of more than ten firearms publications. He had written dozens of books on firearms subjects. Among them are Firearms Encyclopedia, Modern Handloading, Pistolsmithing, Black Powder Guide, and Home Guide to Cartridge Conversions. Nonte was a contributing editor to numerous gun and shooting publications, and authored more than a thousand magazine articles that were published in more than a dozen outdoor and gun magazines, including The American Rifleman, Guns & Ammo, The Handloader, American Handgunner, The Rifle, Guns, and Shooting Times.

The "Major George C. Nonte Award for Excellence in Firearms Journalism" is awarded annually, in Nonte's memory, by American Handgunner magazine. The first recipient of the award was Massad Ayoob.


"Ammunition, Demystified" - by Jeff Siewert (page 17-18):
War Stories #1
"I used loading data from one manufacturer for the equivalent weight bullet made by a different manufacturer. I picked a starting propellent load based on the projectile weight I was loading. ... imagine my surprise when I dropped the lock block on my Ruger no.1 and found the whole primer, cup and anvil, missing! I immediately ceased shooting that ammunition and rifle until I got the rifle taken apart, inspected for various and sundry loose metal pieces from the primer, and successfully put them back together. The ammunition was broken down, never to be fired in that particular arrangement again. I know I do not want to do that again! While the bullet weight is an important factor in selecting the powder type and weight for your firearm, the ability of the bullet to engrave by the rifling (think of friction and radial stiffness) also dramatically affects the peak pressure a given powder load will attain. Use only the loading data published by the bullet manufacture! Substitution of loading data for equivalent weight bullets can get you into deep yogurt!"

Jeff Siewert has been a ballistic engineer since 1979 and work on ammunition in virtually every caliber between .17 caliber up to 8-inch Howitzer. He has worked on bullets, propellants, ignition systems, cartridge cases, bullet barrel interactions, and rifling design.

Jeff has given classes in projectile design and ballistics and use of projectile design software for personal employed at the following operations:
Remington; Winchester; Federal; Swift; Nosler; Barnes; Armor Holdings; Liberty Ammunition; Sierra; IMI; Raufoss/Nammo (Norway); Norma (Sweden); Nexter (France); USAF Hill AFB; US Army ARDEC; NSWC Dahlgren; ATK; BAE; and General Dynamics.

Jeff has also been a reloader since 1983.

The primer Jeff blew out was with a 'starting load' of a very similar bullet from a different manufacture, and he (as one who designs ammunition for a living) says never substitute one bullet of the same weight and design for another manufactures load data! So the question here is who are you going to listen to, a bonified expert ballistic engineer or someone who says that they are no expert but their opinion is blah blah blah?

I personally emailed Lehigh Defense to ask them if I could use the load data for their .452 caliber 220 grain Maximum Expansion monolithic copper bullet to load their .452 caliber 220 grain Xtreme Defender monolithic copper bullet. The answer I got back was "NO!!!" They went on to explain that even though both bullets weight the same and are made of monolithic copper, the Brinell hardness was different and the data would not work safely even at a starting load. So even with two bullets made by the same manufacture it is not always safe to substitute load data for two bullets of equal weight!

 

[XUSNORDIE]

:rolleyes:

 

[krw]

You wood cringe if I told you what I hav done. But, I aint never locked an action up, hav 10 fingers and both eyes. But, I aint like a Buddy. I aint never mixxd powders!!

 

[Cal30 1906]

You wood cringe if I told you what I hav done. But, I aint never locked an action up, hav 10 fingers and both eyes. But, I aint like a Buddy. I aint never mixxd powders!!

Yes!
I myself have and still do some very unconventional things when it comes to reloading. Just have to be cautious about what you are doing, I don't share much of some of the unconventional things I have done over the years but I can say I have not been harmed and neither have my firearms over the course of 40+ years of stuffing an explosive mixture of components against my cheeks or held at arms length.

 

[TheTexasRAT]

:rolleyes:

You wood cringe if I told you what I hav done. But, I aint never locked an action up, hav 10 fingers and both eyes. But, I aint like a Buddy. I aint never mixxd powders!!

Yes!
I myself have and still do some very unconventional things when it comes to reloading. Just have to be cautious about what you are doing, I don't share much of some of the unconventional things I have done over the years but I can say I have not been harmed and neither have my firearms over the course of 40+ years of stuffing an explosive mixture of components against my cheeks or held at arms length.

I myself have an deep desire to create what is known as a WILDCAT CARTRIDGE, of which there is no previous load data for what so ever. There are other cartridges of similar useable case volumes but even then the bullet I wish to use has no load data what so ever in any of those scenarios. Yet I am still inclined to do it AT MY OWN RISK! This actually was my sole purpose for getting into reloading in the first place. Yet looking forward I doubt I will ever buy a box of factory rounds again.

All that said, I wouldn't encourage others to step out into the world of wildcatting. Nor would I try and stop them from doing what their hearts desire. That is to say you do you as I do not wish to be sued. Yet I will for sure give them WARNINGS against their endeavors. Being I do not want to feel as if I help get another human being hurt and/or killed. But fore sure I wouldn't mind a ticket to the show (from behind a plexiglass shield). And yes, simply substituting a bullet with another bullet's load data is within itself consider per say, but not exactly, stepping into the realm of wildcatting.

So, stay tuned for my wildcat's debut - (and now off to render some brass )

 

[s4s4u]

So soon to make the ignore list......

 

[bhp9]

One must be aware of the fact that powder manufactures can and often do change the burning rates of their powders not to mention that even when they do not each lot of powder can vary in its burning rate. This is why the loading manuals state, use a current loading manual and always start with the lowest loading and then work up gradually.

Jack O'Connor once received a letter that shows what the people who publish loading manuals and the people who make gunpowder are often up against. One Genius wrote Jack and complained that his loading manual was no good and he blew up his rifle. The Genius said he had started with the "maximum load" and "worked up".

 

[TheTexasRAT]

So soon to make the ignore list......

If you think I'm ignorant just what are your thoughts about Nonte and Siewert? You think you have a higher intellect than them? And what about Lehigh Defense's stance? Are they as dumb as me even with all the pressure testing they have done?

If I thought you were joking I'd laugh along with you, but I can see by the expression on your face your not so I'll not beg to differ with one of such a mentality as I got better things to do with my time than waste it.

 

[Hvymax]

With the never ending new developments in Bullets and Rounds it's really hard to find data sometimes. What I have done is find the closest available component and cross reference what I can and carefully work up using a Chrono watching for pressure signs.
It's basic Scientific Method. Take known data and carefully apply it to the unknown. A 90gr copper solid is pretty much going to react the same for the most part. Same with plated lead and most jacketed rounds. There will always be exceptions like heavier jackets, grooves etc but basically anything amiss will usually stand out on the Chrono or primers. Carefully work up observing everything carefully.

 

[Hvymax]

 

[krw]

I went to an auction several years back. Ended up buying 48lbs 748 and 37k Sm rifle primers. So I use 748 in lots of my knockaround ammo. There was no telling hiw many bullets I bought, upward 100k.

 

[bigbillyboy]

If you think I'm ignorant just what are your thoughts about Nonte and Siewert? You think you have a higher intellect than them? And what about Lehigh Defense's stance? Are they as dumb as me even with all the pressure testing they have done?

If I thought you were joking I'd laugh along with you, but I can see by the expression on your face your not so I'll not beg to differ with one of such a mentality as I got better things to do with my time than waste it.

You are approaching it as I do . I sure don't want a gun blown up from a hot load . And hymax ,from his post as well . I generally always follow the manual exactly . Just no worth losing an eye , hand or worse . Not to mention destroying a gun .

 

[Hvymax]

You are approaching it as I do . I sure don't want a gun blown up from a hot load . And hymax ,from his post as well . I generally always follow the manual exactly . Just no worth losing an eye , hand or worse . Not to mention destroying a gun .

When I first built a 450 Bushmaster and 350 legend there wasn't a lot of available data for either and only a few established loads. With a little research I noticed that 460 S&W was pretty close to the Bushmaster and used a lot of similar bullets that I was interested in using. So I started with the bullets and powders that worked for 460 and started working up until everything was within normal parameters. My initial loads wouldn't cycle the rifle and I worked up. Same with Lehigh's in 350 Legend and 357 Sig several years ago. Not a lot of data. Back in the 1980's there wasn't a lot of Data for people wanting to hurl 330gr at over 1,200fps out of a handgun. Half of the bullets were cast in molds that we made using linotype. We even used Betamax Cameras to evaluate the muzzle and cylinder gap flash.

 

[TheTexasRAT]

You are approaching it as I do . I sure don't want a gun blown up from a hot load . And hymax ,from his post as well . I generally always follow the manual exactly . Just no worth losing an eye , hand or worse . Not to mention destroying a gun .

I think teaching from the books of experts is the best way to teach, especially if new Reloaders are lurking about. And it never hurts to remind the more experienced ones just what it is that they are playing with.

All that said I started reloading to create a wildcat. That's right there is no load data anywhere out there for what I am wanting to do. I bought every book on the subject to try and get educated in this endeavor before jumping in head first. And while most the books say not to substitute bullets with another bullet's load data the wildcat ones seem to have missed this admonishment. And there is especially one manual by Earl Naramore that goes so far as to actually teach just how to go about using unknown powders to load safely. Of coarse there are categories of which each type of powders are made to be used within, and one should not try and use them in a category of which they where not designed to be used in. Now I will not be using an unknown powder but I will have to develop a charge from scratch. And while I may glean some since of powder and amount thereof from other cartridges with similar useable case volumes I will be using Naramore's guide lines to work the load up.

I have also taken the extra precaution of acquiring a Ruger Redhawk which can literally handle three times the pressure that I intent to stop at. This gives me a tremendous safety margin to play within. I have no clue as to weather or not my finished product will be safe in other manufacture's handguns being I have no way of accurately testing for pressure, but I will try and make sure that case swell is no greater than .001 of an inch which should be copacetic enough. With the safety margin of the a Ruger Redhawk provides I am still debating as to whether or not I should tie the handgun to a tree or just do the best manly squinch possible when pulling the trigger.

Once I figure it all out I wish to create my own Handloading Manual with the load data there within. I actually have other bullets too of which I will need to work up data for as well and will include them in the manual also. I have gathered every thing except the right weather at this point and time, and am waiting for summer to come along to proceed.

But hey, don't forget that most the manuals say not to be doing such as this. And if I the Ruger Redhawk was not as stout as they are I would have gotten either a Ruger Super Redhawk in 454 Casual or a 460XVR in 460 Magnum to use in the testing just for the extra piece of mind.

Yep, I am planning on playing it as safe as I can when dabbling in the danger zone. And I must say at this point "Do not try this at home. I am what you would call a 'self proclaim wildcatter'. And all experiments will be done deep in the Big Thicket of the Piney Woods of South Texas' great out doors." Can I get a big "Yee haw!"

 

[Hvymax]

I think teaching from the books of experts is the best way to teach, especially if new Reloaders are lurking about. And it never hurts to remind the more experienced ones just what it is that they are playing with.

All that said I started reloading to create a wildcat. That's right there is no load data anywhere out there for what I am wanting to do. I bought every book on the subject to try and get educated in this endeavor before jumping in head first. And while most the books say not to substitute bullets with another bullet's load data the wildcat ones seem to have missed this admonishment. And there is especially one manual by Earl Naramore that goes so far as to actually teach just how to go about using unknown powders to load safely. Of coarse there are categories of which each type of powders are made to be used within, and one should not try and use them in a category of which they where not designed to be used in. Now I will not be using an unknown powder but I will have to develop a charge from scratch. And while I may glean some since of powder and amount thereof from other cartridges with similar useable case volumes I will be using Naramore's guide lines to work the load up.

I have also taken the extra precaution of acquiring a Ruger Redhawk which can literally handle three times the pressure that I intent to stop at. This gives me a tremendous safety margin to play within. I have no clue as to weather or not my finished product will be safe in other manufacture's handguns being I have no way of accurately testing for pressure, but I will try and make sure that case swell is no greater than .001 of an inch which should be copacetic enough. With the safety margin of the a Ruger Redhawk provides I am still debating as to whether or not I should tie the handgun to a tree or just do the best manly squinch possible when pulling the trigger.

Once I figure it all out I wish to create my own Handloading Manual with the load data there within. I actually have other bullets too of which I will need to work up data for as well and will include them in the manual also. I have gathered every thing except the right weather at this point and time, and am waiting for summer to come along to proceed.

But hey, don't forget that most the manuals say not to be doing such as this. And if I the Ruger Redhawk was not as stout as they are I would have gotten either a Ruger Super Redhawk in 454 Casual or a 460XVR in 460 Magnum to use in the testing just for the extra piece of mind.

Yep, I am planning on playing it as safe as I can when dabbling in the danger zone. And I must say at this point "Do not try this at home. I am what you would call a 'self proclaim wildcatter'. And all experiments will be done deep in the Big Thicket of the Piney Woods of South Texas' great out doors." Can I get a big "Ye haw!"

Yee Haw. Comparing burn rates etc let's you understand how different powders respond. That's usually how I choose powders for different length barrels. Mad Science at its best!!!

 

[sandspider500]

I personally emailed Lehigh Defense to ask them if I could use the load data for their .452 caliber 220 grain Maximum Expansion monolithic copper bullet to load their .452 caliber 220 grain Xtreme Defender monolithic copper bullet. The answer I got back was "NO!!!" They went on to explain that even though both bullets weight the same and are made of monolithic copper, the Brinell hardness was different and the data would not work safely even at a starting load. So even with two bullets made by the same manufacture it is not always safe to substitute load data for two bullets of equal weight!

Hmm, could that be because the 220 maximum expansion bullet is designed for a 45/410 chamber? Maybe because the load data is at a 1.915 oal. That won't fit your standard 45 colt chamber. That bullet is .9 long. The 220 xtreme defense bullet is .845 long. If 220 xtreme defense bullet is loaded to 1.86 oal in a 45 colt case and fired in a 45/410 chamber, I can just about guarantee you it will get the same velocity as the 220 maximum expansion bullet.

Take a look at Western powder load manual 8th edition. You will find 45 colt loads fired in a 45/410 chamber. It takes 1-1.5gr more powder for the same loads to reach the same pressure. Why? Because the chamber is 3" long and acts like a pressure vent when 45 colt standard length loads are used, that's a big jump to the rifling. So if you used 45/410 loads(which the Lehigh 220 maximum expansion is) it would be higher pressure in a normal Colt chamber, not that you could anyway, it's too long.

Bang.. your 1.915 oal 220gr Lehigh fires in your 45/410 3" chamber, a lot of the gas from your fast burning pistol powder goes around the bullet. Pressure has peaked already and the bullet hasn't even hit the rifling yet.

 

[TheTexasRAT]

That's a very interesting point you brought up about the gasses getting past the bullet long before the bullet gets to the rifling (more on that in a minute).

Now we should keep in mind that the .452" 220 grain Xtreme Defense bullet is also too long for a conventional 45 Colt chamber as well being it is a bullet made for the 460 S&W Magnum cartridge which by default can handle a longer bullet to start with. And that is why I was having to ask about load data (again because there is none for it in 45 Colt), because it was not designed to be able to work in 45 Colt but rather the 460 S&W Magnum. It will also work in the 45 Raptor, yet I digress.

Anyway being I was going to load the .452 220 grain Xtreme Defense bullet and shoot it out of the same exact Judge I shoot the Maximum Expansion ones in the point you brought up is moot. But still a very good observation that I too had notice when looking over load data in my Western Powders first edition Handloading Guide years ago. And sadly enough it had no load data for the Extreme Defense bullet either. So this was when I decided that I would have to try and figure it out myself. Yet having had no experience with Handloading is why I emailed Lehigh Defense for advise.

Took a while but I finally found the emails:
My first email to them -
Can I use the same load data for the .452 caliber, 220 grain Maximum Expansion Bullets with the .452 caliber, 220 grain Xtreme Defense Bullets?
I have a Taurus Judge Magnum, with a 3" cylinder and a 3" barrel. So the maximum over all length will not matter as the round will chamber no matter what length it turns out to be.

Lehigh Defense's answer back -
Hi,
Thanks for your inquiry. I will go one-by-one here:
"Can I use the same load data for the .452 caliber, 220 grain Maximum Expansion Bullets with the .452 caliber, 220 grain Xtreme Defense Bullets?"
No. Not advisable. These two bullets are different types of copper and have different bearing surface. The pressure will not be the same between the two bullets with the same loads.

So according to Lehigh Defense's answer it was a no go having to do with the Brinell hardness and the bearing surfaces being different between two of their own .452" 220 grain monolithic copper bullets. Anyway if the pressure would not be the same neither would the velocities. I have both bullets in my hand and the bearing surfaces look very much alike yet they still say that they are different. Which means looks can be deceiving and problems can arise between two similar bullets from the same manufacturer, much less one made from another company. And I find it hard to believe that other companies would always have the same Brinell hardness every time also.

So the saying "Different load data for different bullets" is the same idea as "Different strokes for different folk".

 

[DBnoise]

Interesting discussions. There are many more variables othe than bullet composition, profile and weight. I have been loading rifle ammo for nearly 60 years. I also have been very studious of ballistics.both in the military training and civilian life. The piece of equipment I cannot do without is a chronograph. Personally if you load without one you really have no means, although you can measure your brass. Analyze your primers all you want. The philosophy, pressures applied to a projectile equals a velocity. Yes you have a peak pressure and pressure over time within that velocity. It us still the best tool to have.
The other variables, the barrel itself. The chamber, the powder. THE ENVIROMENT. I was loading some Hornady 123gr ELDMs. I was loading for accuracy and in this instance this rifle liked the combination of one of the variables being seated at .005 ogive to lands gap. As ALWAYS when I change a lot number of the same bullet I scrutinize the new vs old. Damn good thing I did. There was a .006 difference in bullet seating depth with the new lot running longer in ogive to lands. WTF Hornady these are match bullets. That is the same bullet that would have probably caused me a an unsafe condition if not checked.
It makes me wonder about all these "factory seconds" bullets that are available. When did they discover in the manufacturing process that they were "substandard".
In today's world the manufacturing processes have become more exacting but the human mind that runs the machines has digressed. So I leave to the best of my ability no measurement not measured.

 

[sandspider500]

Lehigh defense 220gr 452 maximum expansion bullet length .900
45 colt cartridge oal 1.915
Case length 1.275
1.915-1.275=.64
.900-.64=.26" inside the case
Accurate #5 max load 13gr no pressure given
True blue max load 12gr no pressure given


45 colt in a 45/410 shot chamber.
Barrel: 6 " fed 150 primer trim to 1.275
Laser cast 200gr rnfp bullet length .542
45 colt 200gr lc 1.560 oal
1.560-1.275=.285
.542-.285=.257" inside the case
Accurate #5 13.1gr @13,696 psi
True blue 11.9gr @13,478 psi

The biggest factor in pressure of pistol cartridges is case capacity. Especially in the case of a 45 colt in a 3" chamber. Pistol cartridges reach their peak pressure at about 1/2" of bullet travel. In most situations that bullet has just entered the cylinder throat or for semi auto, has just entered the rifling. In your case it still has a mile to go as far as internal ballistics go. The Lehigh employee gave you a generic answer.

Another example in 45 colt.
Beartooth use to make a 350gr bullet called the lcmn(long cylinder medium nose), the nose was too long to fit in anything other than a red hawk when seated to the crimp groove. This was designed this way to give a larger case capacity vs similar weight bullets. The lcmn seated about .365 inside the case, this gave a bigger boiler room vs say a 340 ssk and resulted in the 350 taking about 4.5gr more h110 to reach the same pressure.

 

[TheTexasRAT]

Interesting discussions. There are many more variables othe than bullet composition, profile and weight. I have been loading rifle ammo for nearly 60 years. I also have been very studious of ballistics.both in the military training and civilian life. The piece of equipment I cannot do without is a chronograph. Personally if you load without one you really have no means, although you can measure your brass. Analyze your primers all you want. The philosophy, pressures applied to a projectile equals a velocity. Yes you have a peak pressure and pressure over time within that velocity. It us still the best tool to have.
The other variables, the barrel itself. The chamber, the powder. THE ENVIROMENT. I was loading some Hornady 123gr ELDMs. I was loading for accuracy and in this instance this rifle liked the combination of one of the variables being seated at .005 ogive to lands gap. As ALWAYS when I change a lot number of the same bullet I scrutinize the new vs old. Damn good thing I did. There was a .006 difference in bullet seating depth with the new lot running longer in ogive to lands. WTF Hornady these are match bullets. That is the same bullet that would have probably caused me a an unsafe condition if not checked.
It makes me wonder about all these "factory seconds" bullets that are available. When did they discover in the manufacturing process that they were "substandard".
In today's world the manufacturing processes have become more exacting but the human mind that runs the machines has digressed. So I leave to the best of my ability no measurement not measured.

I use both a Garmin Xero C1 Pro chronograph to measure bullet velocity and a Sterrit micrometer to measure case swell. There were a couple of tools for the average Jo to measure pressures. They did not measure the actual pressures but they did measure one shot to another and one could accurately compare their handloads to factory ammo. But :( to say they are no longer available.

 

[TheTexasRAT]

Lehigh defense 220gr 452 maximum expansion bullet length .900
45 colt cartridge oal 1.915
Case length 1.275
1.915-1.275=.64
.900-.64=.26" inside the case
Accurate #5 max load 13gr no pressure given
True blue max load 12gr no pressure given


45 colt in a 45/410 shot chamber.
Barrel: 6 " fed 150 primer trim to 1.275
Laser cast 200gr rnfp bullet length .542
45 colt 200gr lc 1.560 oal
1.560-1.275=.285
.542-.285=.257" inside the case
Accurate #5 13.1gr @13,696 psi
True blue 11.9gr @13,478 psi

The biggest factor in pressure of pistol cartridges is case capacity. Especially in the case of a 45 colt in a 3" chamber. Pistol cartridges reach their peak pressure at about 1/2" of bullet travel. In most situations that bullet has just entered the cylinder throat or for semi auto, has just entered the rifling. In your case it still has a mile to go as far as internal ballistics go. The Lehigh employee gave you a generic answer.

Another example in 45 colt.
Beartooth use to make a 350gr bullet called the lcmn(long cylinder medium nose), the nose was too long to fit in anything other than a red hawk when seated to the crimp groove. This was designed this way to give a larger case capacity vs similar weight bullets. The lcmn seated about .365 inside the case, this gave a bigger boiler room vs say a 340 ssk and resulted in the 350 taking about 4.5gr more h110 to reach the same pressure.

Your bottom two 45 Colt example [of which I enbolded] are irrelevant because they are not the .452 Lehigh defense 220 grain Xtreme Defense bullet. You are comparing the first bullet to bullets that have absolutely nothing to do with what I ask Lehigh and their answer back to me.

And yes while the ME bullet was made to shot out of a Judge so was the XD bullet going to be shot out of the same cylinders within that Judge. You keep bring up normal 45 Colt data and cylinder jump of which none of the two bullets in question would ever chambered in to start with. So I do not know why you keep bring that into play as if it were relevant to my posting.

Other than that there is a difference as to the bullet seating depth of the ME and the XD bullets which would make a difference in the usable case volume for sure, and while that is as well part of what this whole thread was about as well, yet so is the Brinell hardness and the bearing surfaces of bullets too. And Lehigh Defense's answer was not generic but rather quite specific. There were more emails of us talking back and forth about this subject but I only put forth hear the part that made the point. But you can argue other wise yet I know good and well what and why he said what he said, and it was that the two bullets have different metal compositions and bearing surface, period. Now He should had mentioned seating depth too but that point was moot being the other two points trumped them anyway. But yes in addition it would had made pressure even worse. So your point being taken still does not negate the two points that Lehigh brought up. Weather or not you except this fact is up to you. So just know that beside the point of seating depth that their Brinell hardness and bearing surfaces are so different one from anther that the pressure would be different. And a normal load data for a normal colt cylinder is tee totally irrelevant to the points of the conversation between me and Lehigh Defense.

 

[NikA]

Seems like it would be pretty easy for a person to measure the bearing surface of a bullet for comparison purposes. Might want to make or buy some comparator hardware to make sure the datum lines are the same.

Measuring hardness is a bit more costly, but not a whole lot more. Several options there, indenter tester with right correction factors seems to me to be most foolproof.

My understanding of Lehigh's production process is they basically use CNC lathes to cut the bullets from copper round stock. Shouldn't be any hardening in that process, so either they're using different raw materials seeking different properties for the final product, or they're not willing to entertain questions from reloaders for liability reasons.

If a person were really interested in knowing the answer, wouldn't be too hard to figure out.

 

[sandspider500]

It's ok. You're fairly new to reloading and don't quite understand what I'm telling you. Some day it will click. Remember, that 3" chamber runs about .469 allllll the way out, that bullets bearing surface doesn't touch a thing after it exits the case for a long way. If those two different bullets were seated inside the case the same amount.......it would be at the same pressure. See pressure time curve of pistol powders. The Lehigh employee probably thought you were going to crimp the second bullet in the groove as intended.

Did you post in this forum to learn or proclaim your expertise and experience?

 

[TheTexasRAT]

Yes, I most likely do not understand what you are trying to say being both bullets are jumping in that same long cylinder. And yes I always crimp the bullets, and being there is a handy crimp groove there I figure why not put it to good use. So you are right in assuming that they believed that I would crimp the bullet in the cannelure so niftily provided for such purposes. Yet for some reason you seem to be saying that only one of the bullets [ME] would be shot out of a three inch cylinder while not the other [XD]. Not saying that I have a better understanding than you do, but I will say no matter your expertise you so far are lacking an ability to convey relevant material. There is a saying that goes something like the following - some times something said in a different way helps get the point across. But anyway you using bullet data on bullets that are not the bullets in question is not helping your point.

And I do not mind learning if one has the ability to teach. So if first you do not succeed try try again. But keep these things in mind - both bullets are being shot out of the same revolver (so both bullets will be having the gasses able to blow past the bullets before they hit the rifling)- both bullets will be seated to their crimp grooves as intended by the manufacture (as that is what those crimp grooves are for, and I always but always crimp every round I load for better ignition of the powders and other safety factors as well)- and my original question to Lehigh Defense was can I use their 45 Colt load data for the ME bullet (which was intended to be shot out of an overly long cylinder) with their XD bullet (to be shot it out of the same exact overly long cylinder). So if you can keep your response without wondering outside these parameters perhaps I would have a far better chance at not misunderstanding your thoughts. And it most likely couldn't hurt to keep it simple and direct as possible before expounding more.

 

[TheTexasRAT]

Seems like it would be pretty easy for a person to measure the bearing surface of a bullet for comparison purposes. Might want to make or buy some comparator hardware to make sure the datum lines are the same.

Measuring hardness is a bit more costly, but not a whole lot more. Several options there, indenter tester with right correction factors seems to me to be most foolproof.

My understanding of Lehigh's production process is they basically use CNC lathes to cut the bullets from copper round stock. Shouldn't be any hardening in that process, so either they're using different raw materials seeking different properties for the final product, or they're not willing to entertain questions from reloaders for liability reasons.

If a person were really interested in knowing the answer, wouldn't be too hard to figure out.

Now keep in mind when I asked Lehigh Defense the question in question it was years ago back when I had very little knowledge or understanding of ammunition other than it either goes bang or KA-BOOM, depending on how it was assembled.

So at the time I had no idea as to how to go about measuring Brinell hardness. And if I did I probably would not have asked them the question being I could had just measure the hardness and bearing surfaces and came to my own conclusions right? Any way to keep it simple just know that Lehigh Defense's answer had sufficed my curiosity at that time. Also know now that there are parts of the email I left out (because I do not believe in passing on experimental load data on line, perhaps once it is tested out and proven safe - we'll see) but know that they steered me in a direction they believed to be safe enough. Yes they gave me a specific starting load and max load to try out with the usual warning of be absolutely sure to work up slowly and also keep an eye out for signs of high pressure. Boo-Yah there went you theory that Lehigh Defense is not willing to work with reloaders!

Moving right along, yes since that time I have learned about Brinell hardness testers and how to check the bearing surfaces of a bullet. And I have thought of acquiring such equipment, but at this time I have found that such, in my handloading journey, is not pertinent at this point and time. You might ask why, and I would tell you because I already made those rounds up and am waiting for better weather to test them within as we speak. But yes I do still wish to acquire these tools for future use when I will be lathing out some silver bullets.

 

[sandspider500]

Yes, I most likely do not understand what you are trying to say being both bullets are jumping in that same long cylinder. And yes I always crimp the bullets, and being there is a handy crimp groove there I figure why not put it to good use. So you are right in assuming that they believed that I would crimp the bullet in the cannelure so niftily provided for such purposes. Yet for some reason you seem to be saying that only one of the bullets [ME} would be shot out of a three inch cylinder while not the other [XD]. Not saying that I have a better understanding than you do, but I will say no matter your expertise you so far are lacking an ability to convey relevant material. There is a saying that goes something like the following - some times something said in a different way helps get the point across. But anyway you using bullet data on bullets that are not the bullets in question is not helping your point.

And I do not mind learning if one has the ability to teach. So if first you do not succeed try try again. But keep these things in mind - both bullets are being shot out of the same revolver (so both bullets will be having the gasses able to blow past the bullets before they hit the rifling)- both bullets will be seated to their crimp grooves as intended by the manufacture (as that is what those crimp grooves are for, and I always but always crimp every round I load for better ignition of the powders and other safety factors as well)- and my original question to Lehigh Defense was can I use their 45 Colt load data for the ME bullet (which was intended to be shot out of an overly long cylinder) with their XD bullet (to be shot it out of the same exact overly long cylinder). So if you can keep your response without wondering outside these parameters perhaps I would have a far better chance at not misunderstanding your thoughts. And it most likely couldn't hurt to keep it simple and direct as possible before expounding more.

I'll draw some pictures to make it as simple as possible.

Seated to the same depth in the case, you can use the data for the 220 maximum expansion bullet for the 220 Xtreme defense bullet.

 

[TheTexasRAT]

I'll draw some pictures to make it as simple as possible.

Seated to the same depth in the case, you can use the data for the 220 maximum expansion bullet for the 220 Xtreme defense bullet.

Your right the pictures do help, especially being you are not mixing in different bullet data that was immaterial to these two bullets this time around. And while I guess one could seat the XD bullet that far out I can not see your reasoning for doing so because it was not designed to be loaded in such a fashion. Unless you did so simply for the sake of argument then lets us go there. But first let me say that you where right when you speculated that Lehigh Defense figured I would be seating the bullets all the way to the cannelure. And I find it strange that you did not think so as well. With this point absolutely understood, and hopefully out of the way, let us get back to the point of what Lehigh Defense said about Brinell hardness. If you are not going to believe them at face value then you should at lest do a Brinell hardness test and present the results here that prove them wrong as apposed to just speculating. Yet I'll digress.

Now another place were you lost me also is what good does it do to bring up such a hypothetical situation that has nothing to do with real life situations? Was it just to try and prop up your unproven theory that Lehigh Defense does not know what they are talking about so that you would have ammunition of which to discredit the Position in which I put forth in the original post? If so I again would like to encourage you to bring evidence not only showing to the contrary that the two bullets have the same exact metallurgy but also a non-theoretical argument against what Nonte and Siewert proclaimed in their writings.

And I know that if I were to have posted all the correspondences, in their entirety, I had with Lehigh Defense some of those missing pieces would have helped to clear away some of your misguided thoughts [i.e. -making Lehigh Defense out to be nonfriendly to handloaders, whereby overtly dodging a legit answer to a serious question] as being ridiculous, but I feel as if a lot of the content of those conversations are best left off of any public forum. And if anyone wishes to get with Lehigh Defense on special load data then I feel that they should seek it for themselves with out any of my typos BLOWING THINGS [i.e./e.g. - a perfectly good firearm] out of proportion.

But back to the what if end of this stick. I would have to agree with you that IF these two bullets had the exact same composition in metallurgy and were seated to the exact same depth and fired in the exact same chamber and barrel. Then and only then would the two bullets theoretically have the exact same pressures. I say theoretically here being murphy's law has its way of mixing things up a bit here and there when ever possible. Yet again I agree that the two pressure readings ought to be very close indeed. But what I do not agree with, is you using hypothetical situations as opposed to real substance to prop up your stance upon the subject at hand. Could it be that the absence of such is because no such evidence exist!

Once more I adjure you to stop making thing up just to try and discredit reality, so you can continue to live out your fantasies. After all [H1]cognitive dissonance[/H1] is a reality in which you're best bet is to face off as opposed to embracing. Best wishes. Hope to see you on the other side. And if and when you do make it don't be a stranger.

 

[Hvymax]

I personally emailed Lehigh Defense to ask them if I could use the load data for their .452 caliber 220 grain Maximum Expansion monolithic copper bullet to load their .452 caliber 220 grain Xtreme Defender monolithic copper bullet. The answer I got back was "NO!!!" They went on to explain that even though both bullets weight the same and are made of monolithic copper, the Brinell hardness was different and the data would not work safely even at a starting load. So even with two bullets made by the same manufacture it is not always safe to substitute load data for two bullets of equal weight!

Hmm, could that be because the 220 maximum expansion bullet is designed for a 45/410 chamber? Maybe because the load data is at a 1.915 oal. That won't fit your standard 45 colt chamber. That bullet is .9 long. The 220 xtreme defense bullet is .845 long. If 220 xtreme defense bullet is loaded to 1.86 oal in a 45 colt case and fired in a 45/410 chamber, I can just about guarantee you it will get the same velocity as the 220 maximum expansion bullet.

Take a look at Western powder load manual 8th edition. You will find 45 colt loads fired in a 45/410 chamber. It takes 1-1.5gr more powder for the same loads to reach the same pressure. Why? Because the chamber is 3" long and acts like a pressure vent when 45 colt standard length loads are used, that's a big jump to the rifling. So if you used 45/410 loads(which the Lehigh 220 maximum expansion is) it would be higher pressure in a normal Colt chamber, not that you could anyway, it's too long.

Bang.. your 1.915 oal 220gr Lehigh fires in your 45/410 3" chamber, a lot of the gas from your fast burning pistol powder goes around the bullet. Pressure has peaked already and the bullet hasn't even hit the rifling yet.

The major difference in that particular case is the Brinell Hardness of the projectile. Seating depth can be it's own variable but usually only in heavily compressed loads etc. It creates a lot more pressure forcing a harder material into a bore than a softer one. That's why we use different powders and pressure levels for Soft Lead, Linotype, Plated, Jacketed and monolithic projectiles of various materials.
Even if there isn't data for the particular load you are working up there is almost always data for the components you are intending to use. By crossreferencing you can establish Ratios to use while working up your loads. There is a huge difference between merely reloading and actual Load Development. Merely reloading is just following a recipe. Load Development even using established data within the Min, Max, Do Not Exceed parameters involves shooting for groups over a Chrono and following the data for the desired results. Wether it's the most accurate or just how fast can you make one of those go. As I said previously it's basic Scientific Method.

 

[sandspider500]

The major difference in that particular case is the Brinell Hardness of the projectile. Seating depth can be it's own variable but usually only in heavily compressed loads etc. It creates a lot more pressure forcing a harder material into a bore than a softer one. That's why we use different powders and pressure levels for Soft Lead, Linotype, Plated, Jacketed and monolithic projectiles of various materials.
Even if there isn't data for the particular load you are working up there is almost always data for the components you are intending to use. By crossreferencing you can establish Ratios to use while working up your loads. There is a huge difference between merely reloading and actual Load Development. Merely reloading is just following a recipe. Load Development even using established data within the Min, Max, Do Not Exceed parameters involves shooting for groups over a Chrono and following the data for the desired results. Wether it's the most accurate or just how fast can you make one of those go. As I said previously it's basic Scientific Method.

On the left is a 45 colt case, it measures 1.278, on the right is a 9.3x74r case that has been fire formed and then loaded and shot with a 451 345gr ssk in a 45/410 shot chamber. This load was extrapolated from 45/90 and 458 win mag data and it does not exceed the limit of my firearm.
It measures 2.840 and is still short in the 3" chamber. The colt case is 2"+ shorter. That's a big jump, in a hole that is larger than the bullet.




Both 220gr bullets from Lehigh are soft enough to take the rifling. By the time it hits the forcing cone the pressure is way down. In this particular case, the brinell hardness has no effect on the MAP of the load. Fast pistol powder is used, there is no secondary pressure spike bigger than the initial one that launched the bullet in the first place.

When dealing with handgun cartridges, the biggest factor that effects pressure is the seating depth. All copper bullets are substantially longer than an equal weight jacketed or lead counterpart. When dealing with an oal that is limited by a magazine or cylinder.

From left to right
263gr 45, 296gr 45, 185gr 45 Barnes xpb, 115gr 355 Barnes xpb, Lyman 358156, mp 360-640 hp 145gr, mp 357 130gr rn.

The copper bullets are much longer than a cast or jacketed bullet. The 185gr Barnes bullet is longer (.727) than a 300gr bullet (.712). The 115gr Barnes bullet is longer than a 163gr bullet of similar diameter.

So it would be foolish to use load data for a 115gr jacketed bullet(which is much shorter!!!) for a Barnes bullet loaded to the same length, as the Barnes would take up much more case capacity. If loaded to the same seating depth the Barnes would be too long to fit the magazine. If a Blackhawk 9mm cylinder were used, then no problem.

 

[sandspider500]

The ssk load fired from a 45/410 19.5" barrel.