Revolver versus Pistol: same bullet, powder charge and seating depth

Don't try to estimate, extrapolate, or any other "ate". Load from a reputable, published manual.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with that. If you want to load 9mm Parabellum (9 x 19mm) using VihtaVuori N330 powder you look at the powder manufacturer's load data and use the correct diameter 9mm bullet that goes with that load data and you load according to the published load data. I load quite a bit using VihtaVuori powders and when properly used it is very good powder. It really does not get any simpler.

Ron
 
Historically, the two cartridges have different histories and were developed at different times in different countries for different purposes, all of which is why comparisons often don't work. They are not even the same actual caliber, 9mm Parabellum using a smaller bullet than the .38/.357.

At one point, I did many of those same experiments and succeeded in proving exactly, well, nothing, except that a FMJ 9mm bullet makes a pretty good metal penetrating load in the .357.

Jim
 
How do you know the OAL has to be 1.04 if you don't have the gun in hand. I'd wait until I have the gun inhand and then load to what ever the longest OAL will chamber.
 
I've compared the two by shooting my 9 mm loads in my 929 and my Glock. Same exact load in the revolver will run 50 feet slower, Gas escaping from the cylinder gap is the culprit.

You can't compare 9 mm to .38s and get a correct example.
 
How do you know the OAL has to be 1.04 if you don't have the gun in hand.
Click to expand...

That was the OAL for my SD9VE.
I figure the same principle will apply to the PT 92.

What happens is is the lead of the bullet come between the brass case mouth and the chamber (at least that's what I guess) leaving to not chambering well (not going into chamber so it Needs foreward assist). The OAL of 1.040" was the best I could do with the SD9VE. I could not see the rifling grabbing the bullet but realised the lead plugged the headspacing of the case.
Others have made this experience as well.

I've compared the two by shooting my 9 mm loads in my 929 and my Glock. Same exact load in the revolver will run 50 feet slower, Gas escaping from the cylinder gap is the culprit.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I figured as well. I assume the semi Auto pistol will get roughly 100 fps more with same load than the Revolver.
But the gases escaping the cilynder gap is IMO an safety measure.
 
You are making mistakes thinking that all 9mm chambers are the same. They are most definitely not the same. Colt is known for its deep throat and my CZ is well known for its short throat and fast spin (how many pistols in 9mm have a 1:10 twist?)

There is no guarantee the the chambers will be the same in two different barrels from the same manufacturers. It is less like;y in barrels from different manufacturers.
 
Ok.

Has anyone experience Shooting lead bullets through the Taurus PT 92 AFS 9mm Para?
I use Lee lead cast 124 grain Truncated Cone tumble lube design bullets.

If one can give Infos about the Beretta 92 that will be a hint as well.

This bullet I believe has to be seated ALL it's LUBE GROOVES into the case (9x19). Leaving to stick out ONLY the entire cone.
While seating the lube grooves which are Tumble Lube shave a bit lead and that accumulates on top of the case mouth. So if you seat all the lube groove flush/below the case mouth then the round Chambers allways fine.
 
Last edited:
I shot some 124 grain lead bullets through the chronograph and unluckily stot one of the shade Posts of the chrony.
The pistol was the all new Taurus PT 92 AFS (stainless) in 9mm Para. Seating depth was OAL 1.040".

Here the data: given scavenged shotshell powder
3.3 grain gave 933 fps that is 240 ft-lbs of energy.
3.5 grain gave 972 fps that is 260 ft-lbs of energy.

Honestly! Not impressive energy wise.

The pistol functioned flawlessly.

Both 933 fps I shot have round primers. The 972 fps has a bit of a flat primer but not nearly as the Revolver does have.
The 972 fps had a bit more recoil by "Feeling".

To recall for comparison my other data shot the same bullet from an 38 spl case in a 357 Magnum SAA revolver:
124 grain TC Lee lead .356" bullet loaded with J&G 3.1 grain scavenged powder gives 892 fps of velocity. 219 ft/lbs

124 grain TC Lee lead .356" bullet loaded with Orbea 3.0 grain scavenged powder gives 871 fps of velocity. 209 ft/lbs

124 grain TC Lee lead .356" bullet loaded with Saga 3.1 grain scavenged powder gives 848 fps of velocity. 198 ft/lbs
Click to expand...

I put over the pistols main spring an rubber O-Ring to similate the shock buffing effects of the Wilson Combat Shok Buff. The pistol reloaded reliably and These are a few Cents per Piece.
It seems though it has a quicker return when loading due to the rubber material of the O-Ring.
 
Last edited:
I changed the OAL for the Taurus PT 92 9mm from 1.040" (before for the Glock type pistol) to 1.085" for this new pistol.

1.085" of OAL is about the seating depth of which the pistol will load reliably each round. The Variation of the OAL is actually between 1.082" to 1.089" in which the last one needed a Little foreward assist when loading slowly racking the slide.
Whe racking the slide all These 1.085" OAL dimensioned rounds will load reliably except the 1.089" one.

The bullet used is the Lee 124 grain TC Tumble lube design and when loaded to OAL 1.085" one grease groove is just over the case mouth (one grease groove sticking out).

I did this in order to allow more powder Charge to get more velocity without endangering pressures. Rigth now I load about 3.9 to 4.0 grain of Unique type powder with this 1.085" OAL.

Tomorrow I will measure the velocity.
 
Did any of you catch that the OP is using SCAVENGED powder from a shotshell? He has no idea of the burn rate of that powder especially when he changes the pressure it is working under. Like going from a shotshell and 8000cup to a 9mm at 30,000 cup. And he is guessing on the seating depth of the 9mm bullet. Speer stated a bullet seated .030" deeper could severely raise pressures from 28,000cup to 60,000cup.

Ever reloading manual I have ever owned cautioned against using unlabeled powder in a reload. I have written this to the OP before but was ignored. So far as I know he doesn't even own a reloading manual and get all his information off the internet. And you know how reliable that is.
 
I shot the gun over an chronograph today again.

I did put an simple rubber O-Ring over the spring&guide rod to similate the Wilson Combat Shok Buff. This works well with the rubber O-Ring.

However I experienced a slight difference in reloads from this gun and the SD9VE.
The SD9VE shot an 3.3 grain VV N330 powered 9mm case seated to OAL of 1.040" reliably. However the velocity must have been in the realm of an 38 spl only (at that time I did not have yet an Chronograph).
I received load data for the powder from the shotshell companies. The one spanish one is loaded with (Vectan A1) an powder equivalent of VV N330 and the other spanish brand has CSB 1P powder in it. The argentinian shotshells I have no clue which powder they have in it but it is most likely the so called FM powder known here by that Name on the black marked (BTW I never bought any powder on the Black Market here to Keep within law regulations)

The rounds below are all loaded with Maxam CSB 1P shotshell powder but to simplify I say it is VV N330 (which is a quicker burning powder than Maxam A1).
Now to use the Lee 0.5 cc powder dipper which trhows 3.9 to 4.0 grains of powder I seatd the 124 grain Lee lead TC TL bullet to 1.085" and had almost allways a failure to feed. I realised the slide did not have enough momentum to the rear to load the new round. With this I got 972 (3.5 grain powder) fps which is 260 ft-lbs and 933 fps for 3.3 grain powder which is 240 ft-lbs.

Then I seated the bullets to OAL of 1.062" and with that I got 1027 fps and the gun loaded but on the weak side. This gives an energy of 290 ft-lbs.
Since the slide had a weak travel back feel, I seated the bullets a bit deeper to 1.051" OAL. This gave me an velocity of 1036 fps and an energy Level of 295 ft-lbs which is a very weak 9mm but the Taurus PT 92 AFS reloaded reliably and had a kick to it but did not lock back on the last round (which I don't care about since it mayb due to the rubber O-Ring shock buffer).
This is the weakest powder I have and the other powders may give more velocity.
 
Last edited:
But guys.

If the slide does NOT travel all the way back there is simply not enough velocity and pressure.

Yes in my Situation I have to be very cautious.

That is why I RAISED the OAL to 1.051" due to feeding issues and the fact the chamber of an Beretta 92 style pistol is not surrounded but that much steel as an Glock style chamber is.

I used the Barrel of the PT 92 for the "plunk" test. At about 1.085" the round passed the "plunk" test.
However due to the lack of reliable loading the OAL is now 1.051" for an normal 4 grain powder Charge (1 Lee 0.5 cc dipper full).
 
Last edited:
I find it hard to believe and ammunition company told you what powder they use in their loads. And they don't use off the shelf powders. They buy in bulk and test the powders in a closed bomb test to determine the burning rate.

Did you ever get the Clays or whatever powder you ordered? And do you use a reloading manual? If so which one?

Your 9mm loads sound too light. My standard 115gr 9mm load is 5grs of Bullseye with a 115gr bullet. It works and cycles all my 9mm guns perfectly. And it is a max load for that powder.

It really sounds like you are guessing on your loads. I have been reloading for 38 years and I wouldn't attempt what you are doing. I understand that you are in a tight for powders and componants. I would hate to be in your situation and trying to just shoot and enjoy my guns. I just hope you don't wreck your new gun.:(

And I don't know any reason why you should need an O ring shock buffer in the pistol. It was designed to work without it.
 
Ratshooter,

The european ones will send you an email. They have made their internal burn Charts for their powders they use. At least both spanish ones sent me the info.
American ones not even get back to you in my experience.

No I did not get the powder (Clays) yet. We'll see how that turns out. Hopefully it will arrive. They told me to wait 2 more weeks.

I use free reloading Manuals from Lyman: 44th Edition, 48th Edition and Lyman Cast Bullets Reloading Manual besides the stated loads on the Internet of Hodgdon, VV, etc.
The best reloading Manual is my head and brain. Reason logically and know what you are doing. Example: I can not afford not to take account of the OAL. That is as important as is the powder Charge.

We over here have no choice. I am the only reloader within 500 Km. I can be lucky to get that far as I have come till now. In Brazil you can get powder but no lead bullet molds for example. Here you can get importet as an private Person all molds, dies but they are not allowed to be sold by local gun Shops (as it seems).
Luckily primers can be bought at gun Shops which are the most critical components.
No worries: the gun will not be wrecked. Once the load is established - it runs all smoothly.

The O-Ring buffers are offered by Wilson Combat. I figured there is a reason why those sell them (besides to make Money).
 
I'd get rid of the buffers until you've got everything else worked out. At this point they are just an extra variable that will cause problems getting your gun to function correctly. Once you get some loads that you know are 100% reliable then try adding the buffer back into the mix.

Using a random O ring is just going to cause problems and will be a mess to clean up when it gets torn to shreds.
 
I figured the Advantage of the rubber O-Ring vs the polymer Wilson Combat Shok Buff is that rubber flexes and polymer not so.

On the other Hand rubber is attacked by oil/grease and expands while polymer not.

After 10 shots shot the rubber O-Ring Looks nice. It allways stays were it Impacts the Frame about half way down the guide rod. Seems to not to move down the guide rod.
 
I lowered the OAL for the 9mm Luger to 1.0465" and I got 1042 fps and when I rised it to 1.0475" I got a velocity of 1032 fps.
The bullet is a 124 grain lead TC TL bullet.

I wonder what QUICKLOAD says about the pressure for this OAL and velocity using VV N330 powder. Powder load is VV N330 4.0 grain.

I got some flat primers and want to set the Standard OAL to 1.050" in order not to risk any gun damage (blow up).
BTW with the Shooting today chronographing the loads I used the rubber O-Ring as shock buffer in the pistol without any Problem nor light firing pin strike (seems the sewing machine oil freed the firing pin of the sticky grease).

The gun works now flawless and is a huge improvement recoil wise over the SD9VE or any Plastik pistol.
I have small Hands but surprisingly this big grip PT 92 fits me better (two handed Shooting) than an Glock type pistol. Even with an Pachmayr rubber grip sleeve on the grip.
 
Last edited:
I don't know guys, but I think TGOSA has been expending great effort,and undoubtedly funds, slowly, carefully, methodically working up his reloads with the only components available to him. Easy for some of us to admonish him in his efforts since most of us have virtually unlimited choice in reloading equipment and components. I don't think TGOSA is going to blow his guns, or himself, up anytime soon. I continue to laud his efforts.......ymmv
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top