close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

New Solo 1000 Data/discussion

Discussion in 'Reloading' started by Colorado4Wheel, Jan 7, 2010.

  1. Colorado4Wheel

    Colorado4Wheel

    14,937
    166
    Nov 2, 2006
    CO
    I just got off the phone with Accurate Powders. I went over a couple loads I have worked up. First is my 4.1 gr @ 1.130 OAL with 124gr FMJ. He at first said it was over pressure. Then I questioned the new data we all have which list 3.5 GR as MAX but also List 1025 FPS out of a 4 inch barrel. He said he had been quoting me lead data so he redid things. I could hear him typing in the background. Then he said it was a safe load based on my OAL and my FPS using a chrono. So I went on to the 3.6 gr 147gr @ 1.130 OAL load Ron59 has been wondering about so much. He said that I (Ron) was not getting nearly the FPS he should be. BUT, that he was loading very long. All their data is at 1.100-1.114". He ran the numbers again and said "based on the FPS, that is a safe load". I asked him what he meant, because it sounds like he is using FPS as a guide to pressure. He said if you work it up on a chrono and don't try to exceed the FPS they have listed in their guide that FPS is a better indication of pressure in your gun. I am summarizing all this but still find it very interesting.

    Old and New Data can be found here.

    http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=78983
     
  2. robin303

    robin303 Helicopter Nut

    7,755
    439
    Sep 27, 2009
    Austin, TX
    What scares me for being a reloading newb is out of the three books that I have and all the info on the web no one is on the same sheet of music even on the same 3 powders that I have now. :dunno:<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" /><o:p></o:p>
     


  3. WiskyT

    WiskyT Malcontent

    11,682
    1
    Jun 12, 2002
    North Carolina
    I guess the opposite would be true as well? If they list 5.0 of XYZ powder yields 900fps and you get 900fps with 4.6, you should stop there?
     
  4. Colorado4Wheel

    Colorado4Wheel

    14,937
    166
    Nov 2, 2006
    CO
    So it would seem. Except maybe a oversized bullet could cause more pressure and less FPS as well. But assuming the bullets have similiar sizing and bearing surfaces his FPS makes some sence. I don't know really. So many variables. All I know is I have loaded about 10lbs of this stuff. All way over "book" and then I call them about it and they say FPS matters more. Especially if you changed the recipe with a longer OAL.
     
  5. WiskyT

    WiskyT Malcontent

    11,682
    1
    Jun 12, 2002
    North Carolina
    Or it could be that these companies are so busy meowing their data that they have painted themselves into a corner. There is no justification for the huge discrepencies they have, especially when it's from the same company. Only a few years ago Hercules was listing 4.5 with Unique for a 38+P load with a 158LSWC. Now the same company lists 5.2! Or it could be that none of this stuff is able to be determined with any real level of precision. Maybe it's just not that repeatable.
     
  6. Colorado4Wheel

    Colorado4Wheel

    14,937
    166
    Nov 2, 2006
    CO
    My Lyman book does say there is NOT a direct correlation between pressure and FPS. It's in the section about switching primers. It's also in regard to rifle.
     
  7. WiskyT

    WiskyT Malcontent

    11,682
    1
    Jun 12, 2002
    North Carolina
    I'm with Lyman.

    ETA: I'm also with old data and use the old powders that go with it. i think there was a time that the data had the honesty of the old days, with the technology of modern times. Elmer and Skeeter were honest and great people, but a lot of what they did was based on just looking at something and calling it "good". Now we have high tech measuring and dishonesty. Go back about 20 years or so and you have the best of both worlds. You can't use the latest wizz bang powder though because it didn't exist during the time I'm talking about.

    Give me Bullseye, Unique, and 2400. If I can't do it with that and a 20-30 year old book, it doesn't need to be done.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2010
  8. dudel

    dudel

    5,024
    552
    Dec 10, 2008
    Texas Hill Country
    Not to mention the twist rate of the bore.
     
  9. Colorado4Wheel

    Colorado4Wheel

    14,937
    166
    Nov 2, 2006
    CO
    Alright. But how does the twist rate effect pressure? Does a faster twist in pistol = more pressure, does that increase preasure = more fps or is it just more pressure wasted on the higher twist. Does it even matter at these relatively low pressures. 32,000cup vs 32,500. If thats the difference then what does it matter perhaps?

    In this situation, I think your spot on. Old data seems honest. New data seems way off when you compare it to the chrono. Old data didn't have 147gr lead because it wasn't as popular as now. Not because it's not safe.

    LOL. That may be true.
     
  10. Fire_Medic

    Fire_Medic Polymer Butcher CLM

    8,097
    12
    May 19, 2008
    The Gunshine State
    If I stuck to the load data they provide for Solo 1,000 I would go nuts. some of their starting loads don't even cycle the slides reliably. Brian Enos forums has been a great resource to get my 9mm and 40 Solo 1K loads dialed in. And I too load out to 1.130 as you do for both my 40 and 9mm loads. I don't know what happened with them over there but when I first started loading it made my life somewhat difficult not knowing what numbers to start with. It's ridiculous that the numbers the manufacturer provides are so much off base. But it is a good powder none the less and it's reasonably priced and available since not many people know of it and use it.

    :supergrin:
     
  11. GioaJack

    GioaJack Conifer Jack

    10,016
    1
    Apr 14, 2009
    Conifer, CO

    +1 +1 +1 +1 +1, add another 5, that makes it +10.

    Three powders, one book, a .38 and a .45... problems solved. Next.

    Jack
     
  12. coal

    coal

    311
    0
    Dec 20, 2009
    I run my 125gr LRN at 4.2gr and 1.135". 4.0gr barely cycles my G26. 3.8gr won't always. All cycle in my G19, throwing brass varying distance by charge.

    I think the posted loaded data is too light.
     
  13. mteagle1

    mteagle1

    586
    0
    Oct 17, 2008
    Great Falls, MT
    It is almost impossible for any powder company to list a powder value that will be the same in every gun. My 9 and 40 loads OAL is dictated by the magazine while other guns can load much longer. In most cases the load is fired in a pressure barrel so the values will be different. The exact same load fired through a Schuemann AET barrel and a Springfield 1911 and my XD will vary by 50 FPS.

    My car has a 120 MPH speedometer but the manufacturer has it governed to 93 MPH and that was going down hill. Books are starting points to work upward from.