Proper COL / Seating Depth for Berrys HBFN

B

Ben_Snow

New member
Hi:

Loading with Berry's 9mm 124gr HBFP Thick Plate Bullets.

Per Berry's COL Data Chart the correct COL for this type bullet is 1.060. That's what I am seating to meet their spec, but it seems rather deep and close to the SAAMI min of 1.000. Granted it's a Flat Nose, but concerned about excessive pressure using a fast powder; I am compensating by using the minimum published load for some test rounds.

Anyone else seat at that depth or lower?

Thanks !
 
TJB101 Wrote
Here are some comparisons... what powder / load are you using?
Click to expand...

TJ - 4.1gr of Titegroup (9mm Luger)

Hodgson shows a Titegroup recipe for this bullet brand/weight @ 3.6gr -4.1gr. with a COL @ 1.150, but Hodgson only lists data for the HBRN, not a HBFP

Hodgson Titegroup Recipe for Berrys 124gr HBRN

The Hodgson data is consistent with Berry's COL chart for a HBRN. The Hodgson load does show 4.1gr as max, however, three other published source books show 4.1gr as a low to middle load.
 
Last edited:
I have been loading that exact same bullet to 1.065 with HP-38. Could possibly move out to 1.070 with a slight bump in powder.

I'm also loading Berry's 124gr flat base and 115gr flat base.

When I 1st started with the 124gr flat base RN I was finding 2 different lengths listed. Berry's listed 1.160 for the RN flat base while Hodgdon listed 1.150 for the HBRN. I used a 1.155 as a start with the flat base RN and a starting load of 3.9gr of HP-38. That round would not fully cycle and lock the slide back on the last shot.

With the 124GR HBFP I started at the 1.065 length and 4.0gr of HP-38 and they cycled flawlessly.

The Hollow Base from Berry's are unlike all others in the same weight and profile. So far the best published load data I've found for Berry's in on Accurate's website.
 
KMW.....I built a few dummy rounds using this COL. They cycled fine through my wife's Sig 320, just concerned about pressure margin with such a deep seat. Is there any specific reason that Berry's would prefer this COL, are Manufacturer's COL recommendations made to fit safely accross a wide range of burn rates?
 
Ben_Snow said:
....are Manufacturer's COL recommendations made to fit safely accross a wide range of burn rates?
Click to expand...


IMHO I'd really have to say no...

4.1 of TG is max for the RN ... I'd back off a 1/10 or so and test.

Are you saying you did run a Berry OAL with 4.1 and all seemed fine?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Because of the hollow base the round either needs to be seated deeper or more powder added to meet the case volume one would think. But if you look at the data on Accurate load data page you will that is not true according to them.

Appears the Hollow Base uses a much more reduced load yet still develops the same pressure as the flat base with more powder. From what I've been told it is because the hollow base expands when fired increasing the pressure.

If using Hodgdon powder I would stick with Hodgdon load data.

Now if you look at the Berry's chart you posted the 124gr HBRN is .070" longer than the HBFP bullet of the same weight. Then if loaded to their OAL as stated the HBRN is also seated 0.30 deeper than the HBFP.

Make sense? No.

Did you work up to that 4.1gr load or did you start there?
 
TJB/KMW --

No, started at 4.1gr

Sierra: 3.7gr - 4.4 gr (125 JHP COL=1.090)
Speer: 4.0gr - 4.4 gr (124 TMJ-RN COL=1.35)
Hodgson: 3.6gr - 4.1 gr (124 HBRN COL=1.150)
Lees: 3.6gr - 4.1gr (124gr Jacketed COL=1.150)
Lees: Lists most 124gr plated COL=1.060 - no data for Titegroup though)
Lyman: 3.8gr - 4.3gr (125gr JHP COL =1.075)
Berrys recommends COL= 1.060
MidwayUSA recommends COL=1.090 (for a similar bullet)
Hornady/Nosler: no data

-- Keep in mind that these are Heavy Plate and rated to 1500FPS, not concerned about velocity, only pressure.

---So we have a range of 3.6gr - 4.4gr with COL all over the place ---- So which load and COL to trust? Berry's recommends a COL but without regard for powder choice; the powder manufacturer lists a COL for the same manu & weight, but for a different bullet.

So if I believe Hodgsons for load, I am at Max for a Round Nose. If I believe Berrys I am at correct OAL for some generic powder load. If I believe the rest I am at low/mid range for load, and a bit deep for COL.

Your hollow base explanation makes sense, but not sure of the CUP for 4.1gr since Hodgsons (nor others) list for that bullet type.

Your thoughts.... please don't say get out the bullet puller - :(
 
So to get this straight.

You started at 4.1gr Titegroup at 1.060" COL which would be Max load according to Hodgdon data. State gun functioned normally at this level. Any signs of over pressure?

Now again comparing the bullet used and the bullet the load data is for the HBFP should develop slightly lower pressure than the HBRN because it is seated shallower by .030". so I would guess you are safe.

Not quite the correct way to go about starting a new load but you got away with it.

Once again I will point you to the Accurate website.
http://www.accuratepowder.com/load-data/ open the pdf. file.

In there you will see listings for 9mm Berry's bullets and will find the plated RN uses almost 1 full grain more powder than the Hollow Base of the same weight.
 
KMW...

Sorry, forgot to add one tidbit.... Didn't get away with anything, haven't fired yet.

I did send a support email to Hodgdon's, and included all my data and some of the conversation we discussed here. Will be interesting to see their response (probably be tomorrow -will post)

Did take a look at the PDF from Accurate, they do recommend a COL of 1.060 (as I used) regardless of powder type. I see where your are going though, and your theory has a valid point, but do you think we can extrapolate that the same 'Hollow Base=Less Powder' data would have the same effect on Hodgdon's? Not saying it wouldn't, just playing devil's advocate, or maybe I don't want to disassemble 100 rounds :( .
 
Last edited:
Ben my best guess would be yes as powders of the same burn rate should behave similarly. Question how much is the difference in powder..

If you haven't shot any of these yet I would put them aside and start again with a lower charge.

Again when I started with the Berry's I was using the 124gr plated Round Nose and started with the data on Hodgdon for the hollow base which using the HP-38 was 3.9gr. The gun being a Taurus PT92C would cycle, feed and eject just fine but the load was so soft that it would not lock the slide on the last fired round.

I moved the load up to just 4.0 and then it would lock back. So if Accurate is correct showing the difference between a flat base and a hollow base then I was starting way below which can also cause over pressures.

So my next trip for supplies I will be picking up a pound of AA#5 to compare with the HP-38 as they both have comparable burn rates.
 
KMW:

You were supposed to say: "Ya, go ahead and fire away, you will be fine" :D

Just kidding, safety first ! Thanks for your responses, much appreciate telling me the bad news even if its not what I wanted to hear.

Will wait for the Hodgdon's response, and if they concur will being the recycle process. I used a light taper crimp, shouldn't be too much work to pull them apart and start over, just the time investment.
 
I don't think you will have to pull them apart. Again being only 100 I'd set them aside and start again, maybe just above the start load then go up a couple tenths.

What I do is load 10-15 at start level then another 10-15 working up until I'm just below max. Then I'll fire 3 shot groups to assure of function with the starting load.

One of the drawbacks of Titegroup is that it's not always very forgiving and can build pressures fast so you might want to keep that in mind.
Take your time and you will be fine.

If you like PM me and we can chat about Berry's. I like them.
 
I seat bullets until the cartridge passes the plunk test. Then I load accordingly.

For my 9s, I am currently using a cast 135 gr bullet seated to 1.035" loaded over a charge of VV N340. Prolly got 2200 rounds or so thru 3 different pistols with nothing surprising happening. They all go bang and hit where they are supposed to.

If I seat the bullets to 1.040" none of them will chamber.

Book COALs are suggestions to give the handloader a place to start. Of course the handloader has to be prudent with this and load accordingly.

If the book calls for 1.060" and the rounds will not chamber, then what good is it just to look at?
 
Dufus---Per Pos#5..... They chamber fine, tested every one with plunk and a calibrated caliper---- This is a pressure concern, not a feed issue.

I don't know if I would call the Manufacturer's published data as a suggestion. That data is thoroughly tested to stay within an acceptable and validated safety margin.
As an engineer I have seen disastrous results when people extend outside a safety margin, and it doesn't always happen right away. Same as a Rebar deficient collapsed bridge that had been in use for months, ammo only has to hit a certain set of conditions before it fails, and it's simply a matter rolling the dice every time you fire. To Quote Dirty Harry, "do you feel lucky?"
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't be too worried about it. I have Berry's OAL PDF and have been using it as a starting point reference for a couple years now (for theirs, and other brand's similar ogive plated bullets). It has never let me down - I believe people who know how to load good ammunition made that chart - I put a lot of trust in it.

I do agree that 1.060" seems a touch short (I load a similar ogive bullet to 1.090"), but certainly nothing that raises an eyebrow with me.

If you wanna go longer and the bullet plunks fine, load 'em a little longer. I would be reluctant to go shorter though. At least, not without reducing the charge.
 
The Gospel according to Saint Nick... From the Book of Plated

Can I have a >>> AMEN!


Extra Bonus Points and double word score for integrating the engineering term "Ogive" into your post. :cool: -----I'll buy you a beer when I get back to Ten Strikes.
 
Last edited:
Dufus---Per Pos#5..... They chamber fine, tested every one with plunk and a calibrated caliper---- This is a pressure concern, not a feed issue.
Click to expand...

Then I guess you misinterpreted my prose as I gave you a scenario in regard to your "short" seating depth.

As an engineer, I have seen disastrous results as well. Most disastrous results occur because of a miscalculation or a bad design.

I simply stated (or misstated) that I start long and commence seating deeper until my cartridges will chamber. Of course, all fitting is done with a dummy round. I record those measurement in MY load manual. But, I still try for fit each time, just to make sure.

So, I would say that I was not writing of feed issues, I was writing of your fear of a short cartridge according to Berry data.

Again, the load book writers are simply stating how long their cartridges are as tested. I appreciate their hard work. You have to remember that now days, they are liable for what they print and for good reason. BUT, I have seen printed mistakes and omissions.

Back in the old days, Sierra would print a load manual, then through the course of time, they would send out "amendments" in order to add new data and to correct previous mistakes.
 
I could easily load the 124gr RN Berry's at 1.170" accept at that length they won't fit in the mag.

The problem I'm finding isn't in the length but with finding reliable charge data between the Flat Base bullets and the Hollow Base bullets. Load data is all over the spectrum between differing sites and seldom lists any data for both types. But I'm working that out.
 
Description

Berry's Superior Plated Bullets are swaged and plated to final weight and re-struck

for accuracy and precision. They are more affordable than jacketed rounds and won't foul

your barrel with lead.



Berry's Superior Plated hollow base thick plate bullets are designed for shooters who need

increased accuracy and higher velocities. The hollow base allows the bullet profile to be longer

and provides more contact area with the barrel and rifling to stabilize the bullet and improve accuracy.

The thick plate allows the bullet to handle up to 1500fps.



The bullet profile is longer but the weight remains the same and you can load these bullets using any

published load data for a jacketed bullet as long as it is the same weight bullet.

SAAMI MAX COL 9MM= 1.169"

SAAMI MAX COL .38 Super = 1.280"

SAAMI MAX COL .357 Sig = 1.140

Can withstand velocities up to 1500 fps.

https://www.berrysmfg.com/item/bp-9mm-356-124gr-hbfp-tp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top