Loading for 9mm subs using titegroup and 157 grain casts

[guzma393]

UPDATE 7/22/23: 2.6 grains of TG did the trick. Locked back in my vp9 and fed flawless in my ap5. Out of curiosity, I loaded down all the way to 2.1 grains and was able to get it to cycle and lock back. Will stick with 2.6 as it felt very underwhelming and doesn't seem to be anywhere near over pressure. Been seating them at 1.155" OAL. Chronos at 856 fps with the ap5 with a 5" barrel and 809 fps with the vp9 with a 4.1" barrel.

I recently acquired a MP 358-147 8 Cav RN mold that I will be using for 9mm subs. Ultimately, I would like this to run on my AP5 with a can, hence is why I went with a RN profile cast bullet as FP and even TC nosed bullets have feed issues due to the lack of any feed ramps. I casted, PCed, and sized them. I then weighed them and they weighed 10 grains higher than what I was expecting, probably due to the alloy I am using (10 BHN range scrap). I loaded a couple of dummies to get them to chamber and dry feed along my AP5, and all was good on that end. I forgot to measure the OAL, but I made sure it is seated long enough to atleast chamber properly, using the plunk test on my HG barrels. Very minimal crimp/no crimp needed as the beveled based design actually worked well for the flaring configuration I had set for FMJ bullets and to my bullet feeding die.

I have alot of titegroup at hand, so I cross referenced load data for both 147 grain and 160 grain bullets, leaning more on the 160 grain side of load data to be safe. I figured I start with 2.6 grains of titegroup and go from there. If it's also worth mentioning, I am using murom-KVB223 small rifle primers (only primers I have at hand, and been loading them just fine on everything small primer pocket related with no issues). I loaded up 10 samples to test at the range. I'm hoping that they atleast cycle and feed in the AP5 as those are my two most critical expectations so far.

It's a bit concerning loading up a heavy projectile in a casing with limit case capacity with a fast burning pistol powder, so I figured I approach this carefully. Anyone went through this venture before?

 

[ohen cepel]

Hodgdon online says 2.6gr of TG is max for a 160gr.

https://www.hodgdonreloading.com/reloading-data-center

So, I would not start there.

The BHN seems soft for range lead. May want to test it again and add some alloy to bump it up some if it is 10. May not matter, but soft lead may catch more when feeding, also may increase pressure some being so malleable.

 

[guzma393]

You're right, I should probably back it out a couple more fractions of a grain. I don't have any harder lead available at this time, but 10 bhn has worked well for me for 9mm, atleast for 124 grain cast loads. In my experience, PC coating and water quenching 10 bhn lead boasts the hardness slightly so that they run satisfactory in 9mm. I'd be more concerned about pressures if I was running dead soft lead at 4-5 bhn.

 

[erwos]

I used 2.5gr of TG when I was loading 160gr coated bullets at max OAL, and it was fine, but cycling (esp lockback) was not always great. If I were doing it again, I'd go to 2.6 or 2.7. But work up your load first. The reality is that even 3.0gr isn't gonna blow up your gun or anything.

 

[guzma393]

I used 2.5gr of TG when I was loading 160gr coated bullets at max OAL, and it was fine, but cycling (esp lockback) was not always great. If I were doing it again, I'd go to 2.6 or 2.7. But work up your load first. The reality is that even 3.0gr isn't gonna blow up your gun or anything.

Good to know. I came up with 2.6 grains last night based on your experiences on a past thread i came across. I'll try out 2.5-2.7 grain test batches and go from there.

2.6 seemed like a happy medium to account for subtle -/+ .1gn variances caused by the powder measure and the daa powder cop die (titegroup likes to stick on everything).

Sent from my SM-A136U1 using Tapatalk

 

[erwos]

Good to know. I came up with 2.6 grains last night based on your experiences on a past thread i came across. I'll try out 2.5-2.7 grain test batches and go from there.

2.6 seemed like a happy medium to account for subtle -/+ .1gn variances caused by the powder measure and the daa powder cop die (titegroup likes to stick on everything).

Sent from my SM-A136U1 using Tapatalk

2.5gr TG is absurdly soft-shooting. An instructor of mine described it as "it's like every shot is the last one in the magazine, recoil-wise". If I didn't have to deal with compensators and PCCs, I'd seriously consider loading it in bulk again.

 

[guzma393]

2.5gr TG is absurdly soft-shooting. An instructor of mine described it as "it's like every shot is the last one in the magazine, recoil-wise". If I didn't have to deal with compensators and PCCs, I'd seriously consider loading it in bulk again.

I wonder how it would all pan out in a roller delayed blowback system like the AP5. I tried it out with 3.3 grains of TG in 147 grain fmj with a can and it felt like I was shooting a gas powered airsoft gun. I can't imagine it being any more softer shooting than that.

Sent from my SM-A136U1 using Tapatalk

 

[lazarus]

I used 2.5gr of TG when I was loading 160gr coated bullets at max OAL, and it was fine, but cycling (esp lockback) was not always great. If I were doing it again, I'd go to 2.6 or 2.7. But work up your load first. The reality is that even 3.0gr isn't gonna blow up your gun or anything.

You may not, but the issue is that it’s a real heavy projectile getting kicked by an extremely fast powder. TG isn’t a real good powder for something that heavy.

3 grains is probably pushing +p+ pressure levels, even if it is a really short duration impulse.

Heavy projectiles are more efficient at extracting energy from your powder because it gets pushed for longer. But you still have less total expanding gases pushing. And you are talking like 40% less powder than a 115gr doing the pushing.

Looking at just Hogdon’s data it looks like Win572, Ramshot true blue, Silhouette, Universal, and Longshot would be better powders.

Longshot looks the best for something that heavy. Almost 60fps more velocity at max pressure. Which is a lot when you are in the 800 range.

 

[smdub]

Flat/truncated nose should feed fine in an AP5? I used thousands of the Lawman 145gr flat nose and am now shooting the blazer 147 flat nose. Never had trouble w/ those in MP5s (or anything else for that matter.)

 

[erwos]

You may not, but the issue is that it’s a real heavy projectile getting kicked by an extremely fast powder. TG isn’t a real good powder for something that heavy.

Counterpoint: I don't know if you've ever seen how much room is left in a 9mm cartridge when you load a 160gr bullet into it with a long profile so it can go max OAL, but the answer is "not much". TG is a smart choice in that particular circumstance. If you use anything that requires more powder, you're going to wind up compressing it down if it even fits at all.

I'm not advocating 3.0gr, but you're also talking to a guy who loads 9 Major. I'm willing to live dangerously if it's a good gun.

 

[guzma393]

Flat/truncated nose should feed fine in an AP5? I used thousands of the Lawman 145gr flat nose and am now shooting the blazer 147 flat nose. Never had trouble w/ those in MP5s (or anything else for that matter.)

I guess myns is picky. To be more specific, it didnt like cast fp or tc nosed projectiles that have been powdercoated. I tried dry feeding them in my ap5 and they would downright jam or deform the projectile. I found it best to feed on RN projectiles, both plated and fmj. I think the biggest reason why they would jam is that the ogive on the cast projectiles I was using are pretty thick, meaning that I would have to seat the projectile deeper than usual to have them chamber on every gun I own. I think it's a combination of short, stubby, and flat point projectiles that causes them to jam up on this instance of not having feed ramps.

I heard of ways to fixing this, i.e. running HK mags or modifying the OEM MKE mags to work with them, but I figured I just invest in a mold for a subsonic projectile with a slim and long profile that is ideal for feeding on not only on my AP5, but also for my R92 357 lever gun (which I will also eventually want to suppress) and maybe even my 350L.

Sent from my SM-A136U1 using Tapatalk

 

[lazarus]

Counterpoint: I don't know if you've ever seen how much room is left in a 9mm cartridge when you load a 160gr bullet into it with a long profile so it can go max OAL, but the answer is "not much". TG is a smart choice in that particular circumstance. If you use anything that requires more powder, you're going to wind up compressing it down if it even fits at all.

I'm not advocating 3.0gr, but you're also talking to a guy who loads 9 Major. I'm willing to live dangerously if it's a good gun.

You are still working with powder density too. GRT isn’t telling me you’d be working with a compressed load and Hogdon thinks you can fit 3.6gr of Longshot in there versus 2.6gr of TG. That gives a lot more wiggle room too on load variance and pressures.

 

[Squaregrouper]

Flat/truncated nose should feed fine in an AP5? I used thousands of the Lawman 145gr flat nose and am now shooting the blazer 147 flat nose. Never had trouble w/ those in MP5s (or anything else for that matter.)

I guess myns is picky. To be more specific, it didnt like cast fp or tc nosed projectiles that have been powdercoated. I tried dry feeding them in my ap5 and they would downright jam or deform the projectile. I found it best to feed on RN projectiles, both plated and fmj. I think the biggest reason why they would jam is that the ogive on the cast projectiles I was using are pretty thick, meaning that I would have to seat the projectile deeper than usual to have them chamber on every gun I own. I think it's a combination of short, stubby, and flat point projectiles that causes them to jam up on this instance of not having feed ramps.

I heard of ways to fixing this, i.e. running HK mags or modifying the OEM MKE mags to work with them, but I figured I just invest in a mold for a subsonic projectile with a slim and long profile that is ideal for feeding on not only on my AP5, but also for my R92 357 lever gun (which I will also eventually want to suppress) and maybe even my 350L.

Sent from my SM-A136U1 using Tapatalk

My AP5 also hates flat tip projectiles. Specifically the RMR Matchwinners in 124gr and 147gr (only ones I have tried)

 

[smdub]

... but I figured I just invest in a mold for a subsonic projectile with a slim and long profile that is ideal for feeding on not only on my AP5, but also for my R92 357 lever gun (which I will also eventually want to suppress) and maybe even my 350L.

Can you run round/pointy projectiles in a tube-mag lever gun? All mine are bigger caliber and there are strict warnings not to use anything but flat tip so recoil doesn't set off the primers. I guess 9mm doesn't have a lot of recoil in comparison but 357 can start getting up there.

Its interesting you and SG both have feed problems. I only have MP5 mags. They lift the front of the round via the mag - no ramp required. Now I'm curious as to how the MKE mags are different. I've been meaning to buy a few to test as they are a bit cheaper.

 

[Harrys]

Here is some additional loads with Tite Group.

https://shootersreference.com/reloadingdata/9-mm-luger/

 

[Squaregrouper]

Can you run round/pointy projectiles in a tube-mag lever gun? All mine are bigger caliber and there are strict warnings not to use anything but flat tip so recoil doesn't set off the primers. I guess 9mm doesn't have a lot of recoil in comparison but 357 can start getting up there.

Its interesting you and SG both have feed problems. I only have MP5 mags. They lift the front of the round via the mag - no ramp required. Now I'm curious as to how the MKE mags are different. I've been meaning to buy a few to test as they are a bit cheaper.

I have MKE mags and AC Unity (clear plastic) mags. With RN and assorted HP projectiles I have run thousands through the MKE mags with zero issues, The AC Unity mags have an issue every 2-3 mags (40rd mags).
With FP projectiles I will have a FTFeed issue every 5rds or so in all of my mags.

 

[John from MD]

I recently acquired a MP 358-147 8 Cav RN mold that I will be using for 9mm subs. Ultimately, I would like this to run on my AP5 with a can, hence is why I went with a RN profile cast bullet as FP and even TC nosed bullets have feed issues due to the lack of any feed ramps. I casted, PCed, and sized them. I then weighed them and they weighed 10 grains higher than what I was expecting, probably due to the alloy I am using (10 BHN range scrap). I loaded a couple of dummies to get them to chamber and dry feed along my AP5, and all was good on that end. I forgot to measure the OAL, but I made sure it is seated long enough to atleast chamber properly, using the plunk test on my HG barrels. Very minimal crimp/no crimp needed as the beveled based design actually worked well for the flaring configuration I had set for FMJ bullets and to my bullet feeding die.

I have alot of titegroup at hand, so I cross referenced load data for both 147 grain and 160 grain bullets, leaning more on the 160 grain side of load data to be safe. I figured I start with 2.6 grains of titegroup and go from there. If it's also worth mentioning, I am using murom-KVB223 small rifle primers (only primers I have at hand, and been loading them just fine on everything small primer pocket related with no issues). I loaded up 10 samples to test at the range. I'm hoping that they atleast cycle and feed in the AP5 as those are my two most critical expectations so far.

It's a bit concerning loading up a heavy projectile in a casing with limit case capacity with a fast burning pistol powder, so I figured I approach this carefully. Anyone went through this venture before?

View attachment 422985
View attachment 422986

My M&P molds also drop heavier and it is across calibers. I have .25 cal air rifle molds through .45 cal molds and they all drop heavy. We Americans must be missing something in the translation.

 

[smdub]

I have MKE mags and AC Unity (clear plastic) mags. With RN and assorted HP projectiles I have run thousands through the MKE mags with zero issues, The AC Unity mags have an issue every 2-3 mags (40rd mags).
With FP projectiles I will have a FTFeed issue every 5rds or so in all of my mags.

Wow. Thats quite interesting that it feeds HP but not FP. They should have identical profile. Sorry for going off-topic.

 

[guzma393]

Can you run round/pointy projectiles in a tube-mag lever gun? All mine are bigger caliber and there are strict warnings not to use anything but flat tip so recoil doesn't set off the primers. I guess 9mm doesn't have a lot of recoil in comparison but 357 can start getting up there.

Its interesting you and SG both have feed problems. I only have MP5 mags. They lift the front of the round via the mag - no ramp required. Now I'm curious as to how the MKE mags are different. I've been meaning to buy a few to test as they are a bit cheaper.

The general consensus is that both RN and FP can be loaded in a tube fed magazine, where you would want to stay away from "pointy and hard tip" profile projectiles. There are some examples of "pointy and hard tip" RN and FP projectiles that should probably not be loaded in a tube fed magazine, but I believe neither really fits the bill for these casts. I think it's also worth mentioning that some pistol primers are more sensitive than others, i.e. federal small pistol primers having a softer primer cup.

In my specific intents and purposes, I would like to use these as pistol caliber subs for my eventual suppressed lever action rifle build, only expecting 700-1000 fps, and will primarily load them in 38 spl as I got alot more 38 spl brass than 357. I figured that there will be a pretty sizable safety factor in combination with the round nose profile, relatively soft (10 bhn) lead, sub sonic powder charge, and use of harder primer cup primers (either CCI spp or srp's), in addition to partially loading the tube magazine to be extra safe.