I have Winchester Autocomp and HP-38 powder along with some Hornady 115gr XTP bullets and Remington 115gr MC bullets. When I look up the load data for autocomp on Hodgdon website, it only shows 2 loads for 115gr, SPR GDHP and LRN. I'm assuming I would use the data on the SPR GDHP for the XTP bullets and the LRN data for the Remington bullets. Is that correct?
Which 9mm data to use
- Thread starter jojo4711
- Start date
Not totally familiar with both of those bullets but aren't they both FMJ, not lead or plated? Just use any data for FMJ, but you are right, there isn't a lot for Autocomp. I'm using loads of 5.3 and 5.6 for 115 FMJ bullets, you'll just need to experiment a little bit. Just stay in a safe range. It has become one of my favorite powders for 9mm, much better than HP38 or Bullseye.
Well if Autocomp is better than HP-38 or Bullseye for 9mm, that's certainly saying something. I've never used it.
Yes, you'll want to use the data for the Gold Dot HP's for the XTP's. You'll need to plunk test with the gun's barrel to get the correct OAL; and do the powder charge tweeks necessary in your work up, etc. But yes, the GDHP's data should be your starting point. Assuming your firearm is a modern piece in good condtion, I see no need for further caution (i.e. reducing below the published minimum).
Yes, you'll want to use the data for the Gold Dot HP's for the XTP's. You'll need to plunk test with the gun's barrel to get the correct OAL; and do the powder charge tweeks necessary in your work up, etc. But yes, the GDHP's data should be your starting point. Assuming your firearm is a modern piece in good condtion, I see no need for further caution (i.e. reducing below the published minimum).
Use the data for the bullet weight and jacketed or cast. Who made the bullet or its exact construction(as in FMJ or HP. Both are jacketed. So is an MC. Means Metal Case.) doesn't matter. In this case, use the Speer Gold Dot data. Really makes no difference which powder as they're very close to being identical velocity wise. Don't use HP38 data in place of the AutoComp though. Pressures are different.
The LRN is a Lead Round Nose. As in cast.
"...(i.e. reducing below the published minimum)..." Don't even think about it. Below minimum can be as dangerous as above max loads.
The LRN is a Lead Round Nose. As in cast.
"...(i.e. reducing below the published minimum)..." Don't even think about it. Below minimum can be as dangerous as above max loads.
Shotgun Slim
New member
Just a side note: I think that for shooting steel the jacketed bullets are the worst for splatter. Your other choices include cast,coated cast and plated,all of which cost less than jacketed stuff. I have shot a lot of steel and have seen a lot of splatter(yes even off downward deflecting professionally made targets.) All bullets will send splatter back at you. Non-jacketed stuff tends to send back extremely light wafers of lead which don't seem dangerous but you would not want to catch one in your eye. Jacketed bullets will send back very light yet very jagged shards of jacket material which have been known to do harm(skin penetration with attendant blood flows). Imagine standing 15 yards from a steel target,standing sideways talking to your buddy about the great run you just had when here comes some copper splatter and enters your eye from the side because you don't have side shields on your glasses like clay target shooters use. It has happened.
Well if Autocomp is better than HP-38 or Bullseye for 9mm, that's certainly saying something. I've never used it.
Yes, I know. A bold statement and there is certainly nothing wrong with HP38 or Bullseye. My favorite for a long time has been Accurate #5 but almost impossible to find but I did see Autocomp at a gun show. Really is nice, if you run across some give it a try.
Yes, I know. A bold statement and there is certainly nothing wrong with HP38 or Bullseye. My favorite for a long time has been Accurate #5 but almost impossible to find but I did see Autocomp at a gun show. Really is nice, if you run across some give it a try.
I have the Lee reloading book and I printed a bunch of data from hodgdon since I'm using autocomp. That's what is recommended, but I have also read that u can start ur loads at 10% less than what's recommended as a starting load. Just wondering if I should start at 5.1 like the manual says or drop it by 10% and work my way up?
Mine too. Especially with 124's. If I'm loading 115's, I like Accurate #2 - makes for good middle-velocity range shooters under the lighter slugs. But I usually load 124's and a bit pumped up at that - so AA5 gets called to duty. I actually don't shoot a lot of 9mm. My carry gun is a 9 and so I load for practice with it. But that's really it. I mostly use AA5 for 10mm - makes good middle-of-the-road range shooters under 180's.
You got that right! I last purchased AA5 (and AA2) in June '13, and haven't seen either since. Fortunately, at that time, I made a decent sized purchased, so I'm not hurting for either. Overall, I don't shoot a lot of semi-auto's - I'm a revolver guy. I use AA2, & AA5 for semi-autos only. Not sure why - it's just my loading habits, I guess. I have other powders for wheelguns (Bullseye, W231/HP-38, Unique, Power Pistol). There's always some "cross-over" of course, but I tend to use certain powders for revolvers, and certain other powders for semi's.
Well if you have the data for the bullet being used . like I gave for the XTP & auto comp that's where you start . If not , there are many factors to consider like bullet profile , powders , jacket hardness and seating depth but that goes to bullet profile . The other thing to consider in all that is how much powder charge do you have to work with from min to max . If that number is less then 1gr I'd likely start at the lower charge . You should use at least 3 different sources of data of similar bullets with the same profile length , baring surface , and jacket hardness using the same powder . There is often a common charge with two of the three .
Now this is just me so don't treat this as what you should do .
I often start my charges at the .0 or .5 weights so if "I" had your 4.7gr or 5.1gr conflict I'd start at 5.0gr . It's much easier to do this in rifle loads because you often work up in .5gr increments . That's not the case with handgun loads . Remember that's also considering the other factors above . Depending on what I saw in all information I had look through . I may start at 4.5 but that doesn't happen a lot .
Now this is just me so don't treat this as what you should do .
I often start my charges at the .0 or .5 weights so if "I" had your 4.7gr or 5.1gr conflict I'd start at 5.0gr . It's much easier to do this in rifle loads because you often work up in .5gr increments . That's not the case with handgun loads . Remember that's also considering the other factors above . Depending on what I saw in all information I had look through . I may start at 4.5 but that doesn't happen a lot .
I agree nick with all that . Keeping good notes of all your load development is a great way to have another source of info . That goes to the more experience you have the easier those choices become .
I'm pretty new to loading handgun rounds but have loaded thousands of bottle neck rifle rounds with quite a bit of load development . When I started loading my first 45acp , I felt like I had never loaded anything before . I was going back through my books looking for answers . Starting threads as if I was a complete noob . Don't sweat it , ask away we were all new to reloading once even when we weren't
Wait until you have to start a load that has no data for it really . That's when the leap of faith comes in
I'm pretty new to loading handgun rounds but have loaded thousands of bottle neck rifle rounds with quite a bit of load development . When I started loading my first 45acp , I felt like I had never loaded anything before . I was going back through my books looking for answers . Starting threads as if I was a complete noob . Don't sweat it , ask away we were all new to reloading once even when we weren't
Wait until you have to start a load that has no data for it really . That's when the leap of faith comes in
That's were I was exactly 2 months ago with Vithavouri 310 and 148gn plated DEWC's (38 Special). I had NO data to go on. But I shortened the "leap distance," so to speak, by using "relationship inference" between VV310 and VV320. I'll spare all the details - as it does not contribute to the scope of this thread - but I ended up starting with lead DEWC (they have less barrel friction than plated) and loading just 5 rounds each (0.1gn increments) from 2.5gn to 3.0gn. But chronographing that first batch of rounds gave me a bunch of data to bring home and establish a strong baseline. The remainder of the work up was just a matter of process then.
Ok, so ill get another book, probably Hornady and start somewhere between 4.7 and 5.1 with Autocomp. I also picked up some Titegroup today along with 500 X-Treme plated bullets to try out. Thank you for all the replies and the help, this forum is truly helpful and nice not to get treated like an idiot because ur new lol. That happens in a lot of places and its a big turnoff. Ill probably be back with more questions, but for now I think Im good. Thanks again.
