Why are practice loads light?

S

saands

New member
I went to the range yesterday and fired 100 handloads out of my USP40C. I use a 95% of max load with Power-Pistol to keep the pressures really low, but the rounds still end up considerably hotter than most of the factory loads (around 500 ft-lbs of energy). After shooting these handloads exclusively for several weeks my groups have really tightened up, especially in double (triple, quadruple, etc) taps. Well, yesterday I ran out of handloads and went back to the (lighter) factory loads. It seemed that I had almost perfect control no matter how rapidly I fired ... didn't feel like a .22, but you get the idea. It's not the factory loads are inherently more accurate ... I've routinely slow fired equivalent groups with both ... it's that the lower recoil allowed me to acquire the target much more rapidly. Why wouldn't people routinely train with a hotter load than they carry? Or is that common, and I just finally figured it out for myself :)
saands
 
You`re right, it makes no sense. We practiced with WW .38 148 gr. WC and qualified and carried Remington or Winchester 158 gr.+P SWC. The scores in practice were usually better than qualification. It`s sometimes a question of money but more often comfort. Can you imagine shooting .38 WC all day in your Model 19 and then qualifying with .357 ammo? Or being used to carrying non +P .38 SWC and then having to shoot .357 ammo all day in school? The S&W Academy years ago when I attended was "run what ya brung" and you shot the ammo the gun was made for. Don`t get me wrong, I`m guilty of using lighter loads too. I try to use as close as I can but I`ve cheated on occasion.
 
When beginning training, light loads allow newbies to learn to fire the gun without being scared off by the recoil and blast of full charge loads. They also make for a less stressful "fun day" at the range. But for serious training (LEO or CCW carry), full loads should be used. Otherwise, when/if push comes to shove, the shooter is not discombobulated by the noise and blast of his own gun. (I know one is not supposed to notice in a tight situation, but I can find people who have been there, done that, who will say different.)

There is a difference between 2.7 grains of Bullseye in a target .38 wadcutter, and a full charge .38 +P+ or .357 load. The differences in autos are not as great, since there has to be at least enough pressure to function the gun, but IMHO, serious practice should be done with the "street" load, even if you have to (horror!) actually buy the ammo. This should be done if for no other reason than to make sure your gun functions with that ammo.

Jim
 
When I first started IPSC, I practiced with full-house 230-grain loads. The lighter "major" loads were then much easier to control, at the matches. I always thought that the minimum load to make major with the .45ACP was really a good plinking load...

I'm more prone to punch paper for accuracy with a revolver, and light loads make concentrating on trigger-control a bit easier during a long session. Often, I'll finish up with a couple of cylinders or even a box of full-house stuff.

Whatever system lets you develop the most skill and the least flinch or other bad habits is best--for you, and that's all that counts.
FWIW, Art
 
Saands:

Are you saying your practice ammo is heavier than your carry ammo? Good grief, you gotta be kidding. I carry 230 grain Hydra-Shok or Corbon +P.

If I was to handload stouter ammo for practice I would be flirting with disaster. I do practice with my carry ammo, but for the sake of my safety and handgun longevity I wouldn't even dream of loading above factory specs.
 
What appears can be "power" doesn't always show up that way on the chronograph. You can have some nasty muzzle blast but little power as the powder is burning outside the gun.
I fired some Fiochi recently and anything from the has excessive blast in my book. I can often tell when a student is using it.
But on the chronograph it is equal to the others.
If you got 20 various brands of 230 grain .45 Auto FMJ, and you put them through a chronograph you'd find very little difference. I've chronographed a ton of it and it is pretty close to 830-850 fps on average.
I did get a box of military contract stuff from IMI several years ago. It ranged from 810 to over 1,020 fps from the same box. That was a result of a factory problem.
Unless you measure the velocity you can't be sure.
 
In my 6" M66 .38 spl. wadcutters (770fps) shoot to same point of impact as 158 gr .357

Weird? Dunno, but as long as that's the case, I use the 38's to practice.

125's shoot to different point.
 
Ankeny,
I'm not talking about loading beyond SAAMI specs ... that would be flirting with disaster, I agree. I am only saying that in my case, .40S&W, the factory loads from Fiocchi, which are reasonably high velocity and energy loads, are not as high a velocity as the loads that I make ... which are, in theory, about 10% below max pressure. PlusPInc has a good point ... some loads only SEEM like higher performers, perceived recoil, muzzle flash etc. This is actually my point ... why not practice with (and learn to control) the most difficult load for your gun ... even if it isn't the best performer, so that your carry load is appears to be tame by comparison. I've read that, especially in long barrelled revolvers, some low pressure (usually with slower burning powders) loads offer increased performance with less perceived recoil. It seems that you could enhance the perceived recoil by going the other direction and produce a valuable training aid. But, hey, it's only an observation.
saands
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top