Armory Sponsor
Posted: 8/11/2008 9:42:05 AM EDT
|
I just ordered 4k 115 gr JHP bullets from MG. These are just for plinking. I've read that at a given velocity, faster burning powders produce less recoil than slower burning powders. This is contradictory to some loads that I've made. For instance. 4.3 gr of Bullseye under a 125 gr RN have WAY more recoil than 6.4 gr of Power Pistol under 124 gr Golden Sabers. I don't have a chronograph but I'm betting that the Golden Sabers are being pushed faster than the cast bullets. The recoil iof the cast bullets is not unmanageable (it still is only 9mm after all) but what's the point unnecessary, additional recoil. So what do you think? Would I be better off loading the MG bullets over PP or Bullseye for reduced recoil? |
I think you are wrong. In my experience 6.4 grains of PP has way more recoil than 4.3 grains of BE. But this recoil debate is too subjective anyway. I feel that 147 grain loads shoot softer than 124 grain loads (a max load of Universal Clays under a 124 has the most recoil I have ever seen in any 9mm), others disagree. But if you go on BrianEnos.com you'll see that the consensus is that fast burning powders under heavy bullets produce less recoil than slow burning powders under lightweight bullets. That is my experience as well. Try 231. It makes pretty soft recoiling loads with 115/124's. |
|
I'm not claiming to be an expert or anything but I think I can tell the difference in recoil b/w two different loads. For what it's worth, the 125 gr cast RN bullets w/ the Bullseye were seated to 1.115". The golden sabers were seated to 1.135". Both in winchester brass. |
Armory Sponsor