.380 rounds not fully chambering

"...Different nose profiles necessitate..." Nope. SAAMI max OAL will be fine with any bullet.
Your 3rd picture(that works just fine) looks like the case isn't sized all the way down. You have the shell holder just kissing the bottom of the sizer?
"...9....something..." 80. SAAMI says .984" is max. .910" minimum.
 
The factory ammo is .62 OAL but they are hollow points. Pretty substantial difference from the recommended OAL. Is that normal?

I believe the cases have been fully sized. The brass is not what is getting hung up.
 
The wildcard in this whole story is the Berry's Hollow Base bullet. Few powder manufacturers supply load data for this bullet in all it's sizes. Trust me there is a big difference between a flat base and a hollow base bullet even of the same size.

The Berry's Hollow Base is longer, they even state that on their web page. Titegroup is not very forgiving. I would not try shortening them w/o adjusting the load down.
 
turtlehead said:
The factory ammo is .62 OAL but they are hollow points. Pretty substantial difference from the recommended OAL. Is that normal?
Click to expand...
No, that is not normal, hollowpoints or not. Is your ".62 OAL" a typo? That's less than SAAMI minimum CASE length of .670", regardless of OAL. Something isn't adding up, to say the least. I suggest you zero your measuring device and measure again.
 
Please measure the following:
--the diameter of the mouth of the cartridge
--the diameter of the base of the cartridge (just forward of the rim).

These measurements will help everyone to understand:
(1) how much taper crimp you have applied
(2) whether there is a "bulge" at the base of the case.

What depriming/resizing die are you using?

Thanks.
 
20180204_131105_resized.jpg

20180204_131154_resized.jpg

Here is the commercial hollow point.

I did measure the base and rim of the hollow point and my reloads and they are the same.

I do believe the case was sized correctly. No bulge at the bottom. Sized empty case plunks and falls out of the chamber just fine.
 
When I start with a new bullet that will be used in a semi-auto handgun, I make a round without powder and primer. The case is fully resized. I seat a bullet in this neutered case, and drop it in the barrel chamber. It either goes in or it does not.

If it does not, I seat a few thousandths deeper and try again. I keep going until the cartridge passes the plunk test. I measure and record the measurement for future use.

I have a hell of a spread sheet with all these measurements. It is almost large enough to create a database and some day I will.

I might glance at the books to see how it compares, but the seating depth will not change regardless because this cartridge is customized to my chamber, not some book writers universal receiver and barrel.

It saves some time and trouble. I have been faced with some pretty serious out of battery incidents in the past, but none since I have started the practice described above.

Most times book COALs are just for reference and just tell you what the load developers did when they wrote the book. Remember: they were not developing loads for your guns, but they were kind enough to share their data. You still should be very careful when starting with new components in such a small case as the 308 ACP. It is not designed for the pressures that a 9mm is.

On other note: I don't like Titegroup because there usually is not enough spread from start to max for my liking. I have never used it for that reason, but that is just me.

When I loaded a lot of 380 ACP, I used to get some super accurate loads using Bullseye.
 
And that is why cheap digital calipers are nice for reloading. Quick, easy to use and measuring to 3 decimal places is good enough for any handgun round.
 
Cheap measuring instruments have no place in my work space. The Mitutoyo caliper shown in the OPs photos are high quality. As long as you know how to use them.
 
The calipers are great. It's me that's defective.

That is a good point in favor of digital, though. I'll just have to be more attentive.

And, going forward, I will always have the barrels out for plunk testing. Was relying on my case gage and that doesn't tell the whole story.
 
Thank you for posting the end of the story. I suspect there's lots of folk like myself that don't post but follow the situation. You provided the end of the story and I thank you for that.

P.S. This isn't just my opinion but it has been asked and answered here before a couple of times, it is okay to resize without decapping.
 
turtlehead I take it from your previous post that you have pulled these apart and are starting over? Probably a smart idea to better be safe than sorry.

Western Powders/Accurate/Ramshot lists a suggested OAL of 0.960" with the Berry's 100gr Hollow Base bullet. Hodgdon lists 100gr 380 bullet using Titegroup with a starting load of 2.6gr and a max of 3.0gr with a OAL of 0.980" which you have already found does not work. But they are not using this bullet.

As I stated earlier the overall length of the Berry's 100gr Hollow Base bullet is longer than the Berry's 100gr flat base therefore it needs to be seated deeper which will normally raise pressure. But because of the hollow base that negates some of that pressure.

I would suggest starting with a dummy load to determine the correct length. I would start at 0.970" and keep working shorter until you pass the plunk test. While doing this I would also back the crimp off to the minimum needed to still fit the chamber. This will make it easier to make the adjustment using the same bullet assembly.

After you establish your length then start at the beginning charge and check for function.
 
Thanks. I'll be taking your advice.

500 pulled and 200 more to go. Turns out there were 700 of these loaded. :eek:

I can highly recommend the Hornady Cam-Lock bullet puller for .380. It's doing a fine job. Of course made easier by the bullets sticking so far out...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top