9mm 115g and AA#7

Scorpius · 02-22-2015, 03:01 PM

Wanting to be light on my P38's and a sweet nearly new condition P08 (1936 S/42) which I had to at least shoot a few mags from once :-)

Well this sent me on a search for a low load that would cycle. I'm sure I could probably go a little lower but cross reference between Hornady and Accurate's load data I decided to run with 6.8g of Accurate No. 7. The bullets were lead cast RN 115g.

All of my pistols shot and cycled perfectly. My next load up i'll probably drop to 6.4g to see the results. Mainly I was worried about luger cycling. But until I find myself a shooter version, I probably won't run anymore through this one. Perhaps allow myself 2 mags a year, if that. This years quota is filled (and next years...lol).

Anyone try any lesser similar loads? My next will likely be some 125g lead cast RN with 5.8g load.

Sieger · 02-23-2015, 03:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scorpius

Wanting to be light on my P38's and a sweet nearly new condition P08 (1936 S/42) which I had to at least shoot a few mags from once :-)

Well this sent me on a search for a low load that would cycle. I'm sure I could probably go a little lower but cross reference between Hornady and Accurate's load data I decided to run with 6.8g of Accurate No. 7. The bullets were lead cast RN 115g.

All of my pistols shot and cycled perfectly. My next load up i'll probably drop to 6.4g to see the results. Mainly I was worried about luger cycling. But until I find myself a shooter version, I probably won't run anymore through this one. Perhaps allow myself 2 mags a year, if that. This years quota is filled (and next years...lol).

Anyone try any lesser similar loads? My next will likely be some 125g lead cast RN with 5.8g load.

Hi,

Not with that powder, but for a one holer load that's just powerful enough to cycle your action try the following:

Powder: Bullseye

Bullet: 115 grain round nose lead.

Cases: Winchester Western Commercial Brass.

Primer: Remington 1 1/2.

Charge: 3.6 to 3.9, your Luger will tell you which is the most accurate. These should be less than 1,000 fps.

Over All Length: Critical!!! With round nose try 1.73 inches. Also, spend a minute and read my Sticky on how to determine proper O.A.L. when loading a new bullet type.

This load is a light target load that should not hurt your Luger to shoot frequently.

Hope this helps!

Sieger

sheepherder · 02-23-2015, 09:38 AM

I thought it odd that you'd select AA#7 rather than AA#2 (which is on my wish list), so I checked my Hornady powder comparison list [pic below]...

I presently use Red Dot. I have most of a can of Blue Dot (similar to your AA#7) but too much goes unburned out of a 4" barrel (I use it in my larger magnums). I like WW 231 but it is not available in my area for several years now. I detest Bullseye and Unique and haven't bothered to try newer powders.

(Ignore the highlighted powders - they were for a different comparison).

sheepherder · 02-23-2015, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick W.

A longer barrel might help in some of the above.

I used/use the Blue Dot in my 8 3/8" barreled S&W Model 27 357/44 magnum wildcat conversion. Lots of room for powder in the 44 case and a nice flat trajectory for the 357 bullet. The longer barrel does allow for more complete combustion.

...But it's the flat hollow whomp of the report that I love...

rhuff · 02-23-2015, 03:28 PM

It has always amazed me as to how different the burn rates are depending on whose burn rate chart that you read. When I compare my Hodgdon Burn Rate chart to the one that Sheepherder posted, they are way different. His lists BE as the fastest, and mine lists BE as #9, with others as faster, including Red Dot as #6. Winchester 231 is #23 with Unique being #25. HS#7 and Blue Dot are very close as to burn rates.

I guess one looks at many burn rate charts, and try to extrapolate the results. I would think that No. 7 might be a bit dirty when loaded low because it is such a slow powder, but if it works for you, then you have a winner.

Scorpius · 02-23-2015, 04:02 PM

Well these days you work with what you have. Seems to have done well for night power accuracy on my 9mm kimber solo and my 10mm DW Patriot BT :-)
I have one more powder I may try but it's new on the market (pistol power or something like that I forget and not home to check).
As for dirty comments yes that would explain the visible smoke when fired also it would explain the few little yellow looking discs that are in the breech and chamber areas. I had assumed it was probably powder that didn't burn and discolored due to hitting the lube on the rails. I may try to find a newest burn chart and find something faster burning to try as suggested.
As for coal yes I do the magazine trick for my 556 reloads. My bolts are easier .003 off the lands.
For this I found 1.72 worked well for the feed. Not a single jam or missfeed.

sheepherder · 02-23-2015, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scorpius

Well these days you work with what you have. Seems to have done well for night power accuracy on my 9mm kimber solo and my 10mm DW Patriot BT :-)
I have one more powder I may try but it's new on the market (pistol power or something like that I forget and not home to check).
As for dirty comments yes that would explain the visible smoke when fired also it would explain the few little yellow looking discs that are in the breech and chamber areas. I had assumed it was probably powder that didn't burn and discolored due to hitting the lube on the rails. Thanks bill. Exactly what I wanted to see. I have a 1936 sn 9779 g.
They could be twins in appearance.
I am interested in this one but would need to pick it up for less without matching mag.
Do you have any shooter grades (matching preferred) you might be willing to thin? Maybe do a two deal?
I may try to find a newest burn chart and find something faster burning to try as suggested.
As for coal yes I do the magazine trick for my 556 reloads. My boots are easier .003 off the lands.
For this I found 1.72 worked well for the feed. Not a single jam or missfeed.

I think you got a reply to Bill Lyon's For Sale thread mixed in there...

rhuff · 02-24-2015, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scorpius

I have one more powder I may try but it's new on the market (pistol power or something like that I forget and not home to check)..

If the other pistol powder that you have at home is Alliant Power Pistol, then you have one of the best, IMO, for many calibers, including 9mm. It will meter great, produce good velocity, and burn much cleaner.

Scorpius · 02-24-2015, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sheepherder

I think you got a reply to Bill Lyon's For Sale thread mixed in there...

Lol damn site doesn't work well on iPhone.

02-22-2015, 03:01 PM	#1
Scorpius User Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 31 Thanks: 7 Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts	9mm 115g and AA#7 Wanting to be light on my P38's and a sweet nearly new condition P08 (1936 S/42) which I had to at least shoot a few mags from once :-) Well this sent me on a search for a low load that would cycle. I'm sure I could probably go a little lower but cross reference between Hornady and Accurate's load data I decided to run with 6.8g of Accurate No. 7. The bullets were lead cast RN 115g. All of my pistols shot and cycled perfectly. My next load up i'll probably drop to 6.4g to see the results. Mainly I was worried about luger cycling. But until I find myself a shooter version, I probably won't run anymore through this one. Perhaps allow myself 2 mags a year, if that. This years quota is filled (and next years...lol). Anyone try any lesser similar loads? My next will likely be some 125g lead cast RN with 5.8g load.

02-23-2015, 09:38 AM	#3
sheepherder Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: ...on the 'ol Erie Canal... Posts: 8,181 Thanks: 1,398 Thanked 4,438 Times in 2,327 Posts	I thought it odd that you'd select AA#7 rather than AA#2 (which is on my wish list), so I checked my Hornady powder comparison list [pic below]... I presently use Red Dot. I have most of a can of Blue Dot (similar to your AA#7) but too much goes unburned out of a 4" barrel (I use it in my larger magnums). I like WW 231 but it is not available in my area for several years now. I detest Bullseye and Unique and haven't bothered to try newer powders. (Ignore the highlighted powders - they were for a different comparison). Attached Images __________________ I like my coffee the way I like my women... ...Cold and bitter...

02-23-2015, 03:28 PM	#5
rhuff Patron LugerForum Patron Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Az. Posts: 2,270 Thanks: 2,686 Thanked 958 Times in 704 Posts	It has always amazed me as to how different the burn rates are depending on whose burn rate chart that you read. When I compare my Hodgdon Burn Rate chart to the one that Sheepherder posted, they are way different. His lists BE as the fastest, and mine lists BE as #9, with others as faster, including Red Dot as #6. Winchester 231 is #23 with Unique being #25. HS#7 and Blue Dot are very close as to burn rates. I guess one looks at many burn rate charts, and try to extrapolate the results. I would think that No. 7 might be a bit dirty when loaded low because it is such a slow powder, but if it works for you, then you have a winner.

02-23-2015, 04:02 PM	#6
Scorpius User Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 31 Thanks: 7 Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts	Well these days you work with what you have. Seems to have done well for night power accuracy on my 9mm kimber solo and my 10mm DW Patriot BT :-) I have one more powder I may try but it's new on the market (pistol power or something like that I forget and not home to check). As for dirty comments yes that would explain the visible smoke when fired also it would explain the few little yellow looking discs that are in the breech and chamber areas. I had assumed it was probably powder that didn't burn and discolored due to hitting the lube on the rails. I may try to find a newest burn chart and find something faster burning to try as suggested. As for coal yes I do the magazine trick for my 556 reloads. My bolts are easier .003 off the lands. For this I found 1.72 worked well for the feed. Not a single jam or missfeed. Last edited by Scorpius; 02-24-2015 at 11:11 PM.