.

load data for 9mm

375H&H375H&H Member Posts: 1,545 ✭✭✭✭✭
Using 115 gr. lead bullets . I have Win 231 , but will pick another powder if need be . Picked up 1000 of these little buggers for $25.oo , so I'm gonna be doing alot of plinkin with em [8D]

Comments

  • Hawk CarseHawk Carse Member Posts: 4,296 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I'd make up a few with the starting load off the Hodgdon www.
    Increase only as necessary to get function of the gun.
    Hope I didn't see keyholing.
  • dcs shootersdcs shooters Member Posts: 10,969
    edited November -1
    Start with 4.3gr to 4.8gr max of WW231. Good luck with them. I gave up on lead in my 9,s years ago and just shoot jacketed now.
  • NordicwargodNordicwargod Member Posts: 102 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    231/ HP 38 with lead bullets is one of the best combinations I have ever used. I shoot 15k plus of lead bullets each year and most of them are 9mm. I would start out with 4.2gr and work up if you need to. It will feel like a very soft load but it will move pretty good, 1000 to 1050fps or so. With a 115gr bullet it may not cycle your gun, you did not say what it was. And I have found if you push 9mm lead too hard the accuracy suffers quickly so bench rest each load and see what happens. I shoot 4.0gr behind a 125gr truncated bullet and its a tack driver. Soft and accurate! This load works in all my 9s excluding my friends Glock 35 with a 9mm conversion barrel. And yes you can shoot lead through a glock!
    Thats a great price for bullets, wish I could be so lucky.
  • bpostbpost Member Posts: 31,141 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Checking my records I show a load of 4.6 WW-231 shooting the 121 grain Lyman cast truncated cone bullet. You would be OK starting at 4.5 in my opinion.
  • 62fuelie62fuelie Member Posts: 1,046 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have used 4.5 grains of 700X for years. It burns cleanly and gives good function in P-35 Brownings, Springfield XD, and S&W 5906.

    I just checked to be sure and the DuPont Manual shows 4.5 grains of HiSkor 700X for both 115 and 124 jacketed bullets, so they should be plenty safe with lead. Agree with the recommendation to verify ANY load before you use it.

    Checked the Hodgdon site and they show 3.7. I wonder if they reformulated when they bought DuPont's powder business??
  • shoff14shoff14 Member Posts: 11,994 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by 62fuelie
    I have used 4.5 grains of 700X for years. It burns cleanly and gives good function in P-35 Brownings, Springfield XD, and S&W 5906.



    4.5? [:0]
  • babunbabun Member Posts: 11,497
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by shoff14
    quote:Originally posted by 62fuelie
    I have used 4.5 grains of 700X for years. It burns cleanly and gives good function in P-35 Brownings, Springfield XD, and S&W 5906.



    4.5? [:0]


    4.5? WOW!! way too much!!!
  • babunbabun Member Posts: 11,497
    edited November -1
    CHECK HERE BEFORE YOU USE ANY LOADS LISTED ON THIS THREAD

    http://data.hodgdon.com/cartridge_load.asp
  • shoff14shoff14 Member Posts: 11,994 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by babun
    quote:Originally posted by shoff14
    quote:Originally posted by 62fuelie
    I have used 4.5 grains of 700X for years. It burns cleanly and gives good function in P-35 Brownings, Springfield XD, and S&W 5906.



    4.5? [:0]


    4.5? WOW!! way too much!!!



    Yep, I would have to look in my journal for my 115 lead load, but my 124 and 125 grain load is 3.2 and it is HOT.
  • babunbabun Member Posts: 11,497
    edited November -1
    First, I don't reload for the 9mm. But I have just finished researching the 700x use in it. Seems that the most specified loads
    stop at 4.1 grs as a hot load for JACKETED 115gr bullets. Almost all loads for the lead bullets suggest less. With best accuracy at at 1000 fps or close to it.
  • NordicwargodNordicwargod Member Posts: 102 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Now this is interesting. I have never used 700x before and after reading this I too looked it up in the burn rate chart. It shows that it has almost the same burn speed as 231/hp38 but you use less of it. I have been using 231 since it evolved from 452AA way back in the 80s and I love it. I load it in 9mm, 40s&w, 32acp, and sometimes with jacketed loads of 38 super. I load mostly lead and have been doing so for what seems forever.
    Normally the amount of powder of this load would be associated with a very fast powder, AA2, titegroup, etc. Yet 231 and this 700x is slower and with 700x you use almost 20percent less. How new is this powder and does anyone agree with my thinking that you are getting more for less with it?
    My load for 9mm is what I said above, 4gr of 231 with a 125gr lead truncated bullet,, and it is "light" but accurate! I load about 1000 rounds a month and compete on a weekly basis. I usually go with the saying of "if it works don't fix it" of most things in life but this 700x has my intrigued!
    I would like to hear any comments of regular/experienced users of this powder.
    Not trying to hi-jack this but 9mm has always given me more accuracy and function issues with loading lead than 40 or 45 has.
  • Hawk CarseHawk Carse Member Posts: 4,296 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have loaded several kegs of 700X, mostly for 12 gauge but a good deal for pistol because I always had plenty on hand.
    It is a large flake powder and does not meter particularly well in 4 grain pistol loads. If you want your powder drops to be within a tenth of a grain, 700X is not for you. A vibrator (I use a cheap aquarium air pump strapped to the measure.) improves consistency but it is still not as uniform as a Ball powder.

    The burn rate chart is deceptive, 700X is substantially faster than 231, as the actual load data shows.
  • NordicwargodNordicwargod Member Posts: 102 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Interesting! Well others experience is what I value. Thanks, at least that answers that question for me. 231 is also a flake powder but is rather dense, it measures quite well. When I pull a case of the plate and measure the powder its always right on at least at 4gr. When I do 32acp I have had some issues and may go to a dense ball powder in the future.
    I have also used shotgun powders for pistol loading. Red dot, Unique, Green dot, and lately Promo which is what I have been using for .45auto. Anyone have any experience with this. Maybe I should start a new thread about coarse flake powders in pistol loads.
  • shoff14shoff14 Member Posts: 11,994 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    231/HP38 is a smashed ball powder. It meters well in any meter I have.

    700x is a true flake powder, it doesn't meter great. However, I have found that I can get it to meter with in .1 if I follow the following method. Dump powder, two good taps on the powder measure and a strong up stroke to rattle it a little more. I also keep the hoppers 3/4 or higher.

    700x is must faster powder then 231/HP38. I have loaded it in 9mm and 45. Although it is not the most ideal powder for 9mm I continue to use it in every plinking round I shoot. It is cheap! Our local pawn/reloading shop keeps it for $12/lb. That is almost 5 dollars cheaper then 231/HP38. I can load 2100 cartridges with 125 grain lead bullets. It keeps the cost down to where I am shooting 9mm for 9 cents a round.
  • NordicwargodNordicwargod Member Posts: 102 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I did notice that 231 is much more dense than red dot, Unique, and Promo. I have to use a much smaller disc to get the same weight so that explains it.
    Hi-Scor 700x is actually listed as slower on the Handloads burn rate chart than 231. That really makes me wonder about relying on their information!
    Shooting lead bullets in 9mm is problematic with fast powders in my experience. Even with Precision coated bullets my friends have had erratic results with Titegroup. I have used 231 on a regular basis now and have never looked back. I know its more pricey than some others but it works well. Whats the point of spending all that money on bullets when they make a shotgun pattern at 30 feet?
  • NordicwargodNordicwargod Member Posts: 102 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Alright, I have looked at six different burn-rate charts and all of them have 700x at the same and most even slower than 231. What gives? I have been doing this for a long time and slower powders take larger charges to attain equal pressures. Lots of exampled of this. Can anyone expand and explain this?
  • babunbabun Member Posts: 11,497
    edited November -1
    I don't know why, but 700x sure acts faster than the burn charts show. I have some where a powder comparison list that shows 700x having a much higher "burn rate" {not the correct term} than the other powders near to it. I will try to find it and post it here. Give me a little time....


    Added info...
    I can not find my info on the 700x powder. IIRC, 700x reaches peak pressure faster than the burn charts, {that are a 'closed bomb' test} would indicate when compared to similar powders. An example would be two cars traveling 2 mile distance at the posted speed limit of 70mph. A corvette will get to 70mph faster than a yugo, but at the end of the 2 mile trip both are going 70mph.
  • NordicwargodNordicwargod Member Posts: 102 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Hmmm? So is the 700x the Corvette or Yugo of pistol powders?
    I think you are saying that the 700x is smaller [charge weight] and more effecient [power to charge ratio] than other powders in the same burn rate?
    I know that after WWII there were some rifle powders developed that were smaller and slower burning than some of the larger stick powders of the day. 748 comes to mind. The 308 cartridge was only developed because of the effeciency of these new powders.
    I've never used 700x, but the idea of a more-effecient pistol powder intrigues me.
  • 5mmgunguy5mmgunguy Member Posts: 3,853
    edited November -1
    4 gr of 231, its a great powder. 3.5 on the 700-X NOT 4.5.
Sign In or Register to comment.