You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
380 handloads
- Thread starter Unique
- Start date
It's a small case, so small changes in charge can change pressure a good bit. Hodgdon has load data for a 100-grain FMJ that is a span of just 2.9 to 3.1 grains. Fortunately, 231/HP38 is a fine spherical propellant that meters well, and it is possible to set a number of measures at 3.0 and have the thrown charges stay in that range.
What I would do is start at about 2.5 grains and make just one round each in 0.1-grain increments up to 3.1 grains and load and fire each one, looking for ejection and the slide locking back. When it does that, you have a round that will feed. Keep going to 3.1, while watching for pressure signs along the way. Then just pick a number between the minimum load that cycled the gun and the top load that behaved and set you measure to that value. Then load test rounds and fire a quantity large enough to satisfy you that it works consistently and gives you the practice load you want.
What I would do is start at about 2.5 grains and make just one round each in 0.1-grain increments up to 3.1 grains and load and fire each one, looking for ejection and the slide locking back. When it does that, you have a round that will feed. Keep going to 3.1, while watching for pressure signs along the way. Then just pick a number between the minimum load that cycled the gun and the top load that behaved and set you measure to that value. Then load test rounds and fire a quantity large enough to satisfy you that it works consistently and gives you the practice load you want.
Yesterday I did few rounds from min to 3.1 and the low end wouldn’t even rack the slide, then as going up the slide would rack but had ejection problems (stovepipes).
Got to 3.0 and 3.1 and they did ok.
Found other data that stated slightly higher.
This morning I think I’m gonna just try tightgroup just because.
It’s hard for me to shoot this gun accurately because my big hands are all over that small gun and lots of times when I finish last round it doesn’t stay locked back due to being up against the slide stop
But really I’m loading these rounds for my daughters and my wife’s Glock 42
Got to 3.0 and 3.1 and they did ok.
Found other data that stated slightly higher.
This morning I think I’m gonna just try tightgroup just because.
It’s hard for me to shoot this gun accurately because my big hands are all over that small gun and lots of times when I finish last round it doesn’t stay locked back due to being up against the slide stop
But really I’m loading these rounds for my daughters and my wife’s Glock 42
Schlitz 45
New member
I've loaded tons of 380 mostly using Xtreme 100gr jacketed flat nose bullets using Tight Group & CFE Pistol. Tight Group does better closer to max loads & seems to burn cleaner but I've never had function issues at starting level loads shooting in a Sig P238 & Colt Mustang.
Update
Ok here’s the update.
I went everywhere with the HP-38 then this morning I went everywhere with Titegroup. I settled with 2.9 grains with a 100 grain berrys RN bullet, CCI small pistol primers and a c. o. a. l. Of .980”
That is the charge I am most happy with
Yep Schlitz 45. It’s close to max.
Ok here’s the update.
I went everywhere with the HP-38 then this morning I went everywhere with Titegroup. I settled with 2.9 grains with a 100 grain berrys RN bullet, CCI small pistol primers and a c. o. a. l. Of .980”
That is the charge I am most happy with
Yep Schlitz 45. It’s close to max.
Unique,
Keep in mind that it is close to the max in a SAAMI standard pressure and velocity test barrel which has a chamber and headspace machined to SAAMI minimum within half a thousandth of an inch. Unless your chamber and its headspace are that tight, pressure will be a little lower in yours. Also, the way Hodgdon and most reload data sources develop loads, they actually run the charges a little smaller than a commercial loader using the same powder would do by not letting their worst case high-pressure round in the testing exceed the SAAMI Maximum Average Pressure (MAP) value. In other words, they treat the SAAMI MAP as a hard limit. A SAAMI compliant manufacturer will use that MAP number as it was intended, which is as an average peak pressure value for ten rounds, not as a maximum. There is a bit more complexity in the SAAMI system than that, and I am not recommending you go over the book because of the variation in lot-to-lot powder burn rates. I am just pointing out you are probably at perfectly acceptable levels with either load data source and there may even be more headroom with your particular lot of powder. But it takes pressure measuring gear to tell. A different data source may allow a little more powder just because they bought a different powder lot for their testing than the other source did, and theirs happened to have a little bit lower burn rate.
If you have a chronograph, it is possible to use QuickLOAD or GRT to make estimates of how much further up you can go with your particular lot of powder.
Keep in mind that it is close to the max in a SAAMI standard pressure and velocity test barrel which has a chamber and headspace machined to SAAMI minimum within half a thousandth of an inch. Unless your chamber and its headspace are that tight, pressure will be a little lower in yours. Also, the way Hodgdon and most reload data sources develop loads, they actually run the charges a little smaller than a commercial loader using the same powder would do by not letting their worst case high-pressure round in the testing exceed the SAAMI Maximum Average Pressure (MAP) value. In other words, they treat the SAAMI MAP as a hard limit. A SAAMI compliant manufacturer will use that MAP number as it was intended, which is as an average peak pressure value for ten rounds, not as a maximum. There is a bit more complexity in the SAAMI system than that, and I am not recommending you go over the book because of the variation in lot-to-lot powder burn rates. I am just pointing out you are probably at perfectly acceptable levels with either load data source and there may even be more headroom with your particular lot of powder. But it takes pressure measuring gear to tell. A different data source may allow a little more powder just because they bought a different powder lot for their testing than the other source did, and theirs happened to have a little bit lower burn rate.
If you have a chronograph, it is possible to use QuickLOAD or GRT to make estimates of how much further up you can go with your particular lot of powder.
I always took the low end to heart but did the same thing in progressing up as the pistol showed me what was enough pressure to reliably cycle the slide.
If that was over max I was fine with it. No big jumps, but a tenth or so more once the cycling was good.
Start low, work up but take MAX with a grain of (ahem) Powder.
If that was over max I was fine with it. No big jumps, but a tenth or so more once the cycling was good.
Start low, work up but take MAX with a grain of (ahem) Powder.
Ok. I’ve been playing around with things again and now my new favorite load for the 380 is :
3.1 gr’s of hp-38
100 gr. Berry’s RN
And c. O. A. L. Of .980”
One day I’ll drop to a 95 grain bullet but that’s what I have on hand but this load has great accuracy, burns clean, 100% reliable. And not a max charge for this Glock as far as pressure signs go.
Gonna stay here.
3.1 gr’s of hp-38
100 gr. Berry’s RN
And c. O. A. L. Of .980”
One day I’ll drop to a 95 grain bullet but that’s what I have on hand but this load has great accuracy, burns clean, 100% reliable. And not a max charge for this Glock as far as pressure signs go.
Gonna stay here.