For guy with a hammer, everything looks like a nail

1

1wise1

Inactive
My hammer is, several pounds of BullsEye powder, but I can't find a recipe for loading 147gr jacketed hollow points. Alliant guide only lists BE-86 with Federal 100 primers. Anybody got numbers for BullsEye and CCI 500's ?

It was suggested on other, unnamed forum, that BullsEye is too fast a powder for a 147 gr bullet.? But yet another says 3.4 - 3.5 grains of BullsEye under any 147 FMJ has been the standard load for everybody for 20 years or more because the pressure increases the cyclic rate. (and 3 and a half grains per bullet makes an 8lb keg seem endless)

Chime in anybody?
 
1wise1 My hammer is, several pounds of BullsEye powder, but I can't find a recipe for loading 147gr jacketed hollow points. Alliant guide only ...
Click to expand...

There is a phone # on the container. Give it a call you may find helpful friendly people that will give you safe reloading information if any can be had.:)
 
No Alliant published data, but start at 3.0 grains for a 147. It should cycle the gun, go up from there
 
Are we talking .38 Special or .357 Magnum? Probably you are asking about .38 Special and the Lyman manual does not provide any BE data for the 147 gr JHP and the .38 Special, not listing any BE loads for bullets heavier than 140 gr jacketed. The Speer manual shows 3.1 to 3.5 gr BE with a 147 gr cast bullet but not jacketed. Did I miss something in the question since the previous posters seem to know exactly what you are referring to? But the 140 gr JHP with BE in the Lyman is indicated as 3.5 to 4.3 with the CCI 500 primer.

Perhaps the reference to "should cycle the gun" refers to an auto instead?
 
Last edited:
I assume from your post that you are reloading for 9mm. If this is correct the only Alliant data I got for that load is for lead, start 2.8 grs - max 3.3 grs. This data came from the Alliant techs.

Tom
 
Here's a page from Alliant's 2004 manual with data for 9mm using a 147gr XTP. Please note they only list max loads. Reduce by 10% for a starting load.

{please read the board policy on posting copyrighted materials} You can quote the applicable load, but not post direct copies. It's complicated, but it turns out raw data may not be copyrighted, but the layout, typeface, and how the data presentation is organized can be.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is usually a good reason for a particular powder being left out of a catalog or manual, and it's really simple.

The maker of the powder is saying that it's the wrong powder, and that it should not be used. Obey the restrictions.

Bullseye is one of the fastest burning powders available. The nine mm( I assume that is what you are putting 147 grain bullets into) is a very small case that will have very little space when loaded with a heavy bullet. The 147 is the heaviest bullet that can be used in a nine. This is a bad idea.
 
1wise1,

Not all JHP's produce the same pressures, so you want to check with your bullet maker. Speer told me, for example, the data that is safe with their Gold Dot bullets, which have softer, electroplated jackets, sometimes have starting loads that exceed maximum loads with other bullets. This article explains it further.

In recent years there have been improvements in pressure measuring technology. Some old loads have been dropped.
 
This is also a good time to mention that most or all of the powder companies suggest that only the most current data should be used.

It is not a good idea to just look around in all possible places until you find load data that you want.an article in a fifty year old American rifleman should not be considered a reliable source.
 
"...recipe for loading 147gr jacketed hollow points..." 9MM? There's one, supposedly from Alliant, jacketed 147 grain load on Handloads.com. 3.8 to 4.2.
Wouldn't use the one from the unknown source using a CCI magnum primer for no apparent reason. No such thing as a BTHP pistol bullet.
"...with Federal 100 primers..." Which primer you use isn't terribly critical.
 
>...boat taken l to lessen bearing surface

You have my auto-correct. Really helps, doesn't it?

OP: WHAT CARTRIDGE? Do we just assume 9x19?
If it is 9x19:
Start loads range from 3.3-3.8gn and MAX loads range from 3.8-4.2gn.
If you can't find data, call the powder manufacturer. They have always been happy to help when I call.
 
Several pounds of Bullseye?

Many would like to have your problem. Especially with us wheelgun guys.

To speak generally for a moment: The reason why you're having trouble finding data for B'eye/147 is because it's an awkward combination. B'eye is a very fast propellant for such a heavy bullet.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm certainly not suggesting you shouldn't produce such a loading. I'm just saying that slower powders are far more commonly used for 147's.

Two things to keep in mind: First, you're not going to produce barn-burner rounds. These will be fairly mild range shooters (and potentially very good ones). Second, load carefully. This powder/bullet combination will produce a very steep pressure curve. i.e. small increases in powder charge, could result in large increases in pressure. Care and patience must be taken when doing your load work ups.

All that said, have you considered lighter bullets? 124's would work better. And 115's sit right in Bullseye's wheelhouse - and excellent combination.
 
>There is usually a good reason for a particular powder being left out of a catalog or manual, and it's really simple.

>The maker of the powder is saying that it's the wrong powder


Powders are chosen because they make them, there is a demand for data for that powder and/or they want to sell the manual.
Most powder companies announced about 15 years ago that they could no longer afford to test all applicable powders and were going to only test handgun cartridges with what they consider handgun powders, shotgun gauges only with what they consider shotgun powders, and rifle cartridges only with what they consider rifle cartridges (most, though, accepted that there was about 50-100 years of some powders filling two of those niches and they would "probably" test them.
Thus, the absence of a powder does not prove any problem. However, when VV tests every one of their powders from N320 to N105, and leaves out one of them, I do suspect that there IS a reason for its exclusion (they seem to be about the best for testing EVERY powder that can be made to work for common cartridges)
 
If I look at Alliant's free pamphlet reloaders guides from both 1996 and 1998 they show 4.2 gr Bullseye 147 gr XTP 1.14" OAL, 4" barrel, 1,010 fps, 32,900 psi.

If I plug that bullet, cartridge, OAL, powder, charge, and barrel length in Quickload, I get 1,089 fps 42,373 psi.

SAAMI max ave pressure for 9mm is 35 kpsi and 38.5 kpsi for +P.
That would be 3.85 gr and 4.02 gr respectively in Quickload land.

That would make 3.5 gr the starting load at 10% reduced from the most conservative source.
 
There is usually a good reason for a particular powder being left out of a catalog or manual, and it's really simple.

The maker of the powder is saying that it's the wrong powder
Click to expand...


Not really. Just means there is presently little demand for information regarding that load. That demand changes over time. Lots of popular loads 30 years ago are no longer listed today. Not because they suddenly became bad choices.

It is not a good idea to just look around in all possible places until you find load data that you want.an article in a fifty year old American rifleman should not be considered a reliable source.
Click to expand...

True, but old data is not necessarily bad data either. The load data for Bullseye from 30 years ago cannot be distinguished from today's load data for the same powder. Alliant simply doesn't test nearly a broad of a range as they once did, and certainly looks like they are trying push BE-86.
 
Just noticed that. This is his 2nd post since 2013, so I'd imagine he will reply in another 3 years or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top