Some time back I bought about 500 of the 200 grain Speer Gold Dot HP bullets. Many thanks the Wade for hounding Speer until they released this as a component.

Despite having them on my shelf for many years, I had not really worked up a load for them.  This weekend I was able to start that journey.  I had 20 loaded up with Longshot.

Specs:
10mm Auto Starline brass, once fired
Winchester Large Pistol Primers
8.0 grains Longshot
200 Grain Speer GDHP
1.260" COAL
Dillon 550 press with powder drop

Test Conditions:
85° F - Sunny
7,400 feet elevation
25 yards
Witness Match 5" barrel
Sitting, two hands, no mechanical rest
Labradar
10 Shots

Velocity Results:

Average	1117.24 fps
Highest	1140.69 fps
Lowest	1082.95 fps
Ext. Spread	57.75 fps
Std. Dev	17.23 fps

Accuracy was not really in scope for this test.  I didn't have time to set up the bench and I am not the greatest shot without a good rest.  Still all 10 shots would have been "A" zone hits on an IPSC standard silhouette.

Brass looked fine.  Hodgdon lists 7.5 grains max with a RN Lead bullet for 1141 fps and 8.2 grains max for a Hornady FMJ for 1172 fps.

I will test the remaining ten for accuracy next time I have the bench set up.  And I plan to load up another 20 rounds at 8.2 grains I expect another 30-40 fps from that increase.

Glad they caught it!  Hope you have a speedy recovery!

All my testing this go was the Ginex primers.  Sorry if that wasn't clear.  The high SD/ES group was with mixed brass Ginex, the low SD was with all Winchester.  I picked winchester as the headstamps were easy for my tired eyes to see in a box of 100.

Last night I sorted out four boxes of 100 - Winchester, Federal, S&B and TZZ. Next week I will load up all these and then get some statistically significant samples of data.

I mean on the one hand I know the answer.  Top shooters don't mix headstamps for a reason. But the data nerd in me can't help but independently verify.

My second son lamented to me last week that "pistols are really hard to shoot".  So, we spent some time in dedicated accuracy training on Saturday. In addition to helping him with shooting, I wanted to figure out an issue with my Witness Stock III in 9X19.

The story of how I got this pistol is out of scope, but it has never run 9X19 quite right.  I also have a 38 Super barrel for it that works very well.  When shooting 9mm it runs the most or all of the first magazine fine.  But always before the end of the second magazine it is hanging up about 1/4" out of battery pretty much every shot.  And it isn't a "bump" the slide situation - It is locked up tight, like the brass is out of spec.  But it's not, brass is fine and if you clear the gun, and reload the exact round that was stuck it loads fine. I think the chamber is on the "tight" side and as powder residue builds up it causes a clearance issue.

Sure enough about half way through his second 5 shot string the issue manifested and by the end his fourth string it was every single shot.  Stripped the gun down and sure enough, factory ammo would not pass a "plunk" test.  Rounds could be pushed into the chamber with minor pressure, but they would not fall in and out. I was thinking the reamer fairy might have to visit the gun. 

Then I had a thought...Swap in the RSA from my Witness Match in 10mm that had a stiffer recoil spring.  A glance in my range bag revealed a 20lb spring just hanging out, so rather than steal from the Match, I just put in the 20 lb spring.

We ran another 150 or so rounds with out so much as a hiccup. It seems it just needed a little extra "help".  And, to be honest a 20 lb spring is probably more appropriate for the 38 Super Comp loads I run.

As far as my son's shooting;  He had a little issue with trigger control.  I feel like a bad coach for not noticing this before, but he took the concept of trigger discipline to a whole new level.  He was keeping his trigger finger on the side of the frame until he was ready for the gun to fire, then trying to move from frame, to trigger to shot in one smooth, nearly instant motion.  I clarified that once his sights were pointed down-range and he was in shooting position, he should gently rest his finger on the trigger, do his final sight alignment and then just increase trigger pressure until the gun surprised him with a shot.  His 6-8" groups that were low-right almost immediately became 3-4" groups clustered around the center of the aim point.  Another couple sessions and he will surpass me.

**Very Preliminary Findings - Limited Data Set**

Saturday I was both doing some training with my second son who wants to shoot pistol better and doing some chronograph testing of some handloads. The test docket included velocity verification for a 45 ACP load.  The load is 5.4 grains of W231 under an NOE 453-197 SWC.  That bullet weighs 210 grains with powder coat in my alloy.  I have used this load for some time, but recently changed from CCI to Ginex primers so I wanted to re-validate.  Loads were produced on a Dillon 550C.

The first 5 shots averaged 927 fps, dev 15.8 fps, spread 38 fps. There was no velocity "cluster".  Gave about a 4" group at 25 yards two hands off a folding table, no bag.  Generally I will measure the "best three" but there really wasn't a best three.

To be honest I was a little disappointed in the accuracy...I am sure the pistol can shoot better than this, and I felt good about the shots, so I didn't think I was the problem.

My son shot a 5 shot string, with similar accuracy results*.  These were not chronographed.

On a whim, I loaded up 5 more shots all with Winchester headstamp.  Turned the labradar back on and gave it another go. This time the average was 953 fps, deviation was 10 fps and the spread was 20.  And this time I had three shots within 4 fps of each other (958, 961, 962) and two that were 942.  Group size dropped to 2.5", with three shots in about 1.25".

Two 5-shot tests do not make a statistically significant trend.  But the results were enough to inspire me to at least re-sort the brass into headstamp groups. And I am planning some more targeted testing by headstamp.

Generally I have considered minute of soda can "good enough" for pistol ammo, so I have not really sorted brass as the juice wasn't worth the squeeze.  But a new game has emerged at the cabin - The Roma Challenge.  When a tomato goes over the edge, it is placed on a stump on the side of the mountain.  The stump is 25 yards from the deck.  The challenge is to hit the tomato standing unsupported from the deck.  A roma tomato at 25 yards standing with a pistol is a small target, so "minute of soda can" isn't going to cut it.

I will report back once I have generated a larger data set.

*After a bit of coaching my son was shooting pretty much on par with me. He needed some coaching on his trigger control and his group size dropped from about 6-8" at 25 yards to 3-4" with 9mm Armscor 115 FMJ.

Not Wikipedia...Our wiki that I admin 

Once I complete the WIKI page it will include a downloadable file.

AA#9 is a great example of delta over time.  800X also had this - the flakes were the same size but the load data changed....Did the formulation change or was the older data just "hot".

I am chasing down dates for the data specifically so I can track changes by publisher over time.

Over the last few weeks I have compiled all the data in this thread into a spreadsheet, along with some newer data sourced from the interwebs.  I wanted it in one place so I could do some data analysis on the information, and then put up a WIKI page with access to the raw data as well as various analysis.  I started the analysis the last couple of days and thought I might share a preview.

If you want a general purpose 10mm powder with lots of data, AA#7 is tops with a total of 73 loads across 17 bullet weights.  Next is AA#5 with 64 loads over 15 bullet weights, then Unique with 55 loads over 12 bullet weights.  The top 10:

|______Powder_____	|___Loads___	|___Weights___|
AA7	73	17
AA5	64	15
Unique	55	12
Blue Dot	49	11
W231	49	11
AA9	47	14
Power Pistol	45	12
HS6	43	10
800X	38	9
Silhouette	27	11
N340	25	6

Note that 800X is no longer available, so I included the 11th spot as well.  Also, rumor is that Silhouette is the same as WAP which might give it a bit higher ranking (or not if all the WAP data is already duplicated as Silhouette).

I ranked each load by speed in a given bullet weight.  Then I checked counts of powder that were consistently in the top 3 spots.  No surprise really that AA#9 was in the top 3 for speed over 13 bullet weights.  AA#7 was second with 11 top three spots.  Blue Dot, Power Pistol and Silhouetted (WAP) tied for third, each with 4 top three spots.

Staying on the speed demon train, the top performing powder by bullet weight:

|___Bullet Weight___	|___Powder_____	|___Max Velocity___|
100	800X	1,665
100	AA7	1,650
115	AA7	1,540
125	Power Pistol	1,520
135	Silhouette	1,575
140	Power Pistol	1,391
145	AA9	1,422
155	Blue Dot	1,450
165	BE-86	1,344
170	AA9	1,340
175	BE-86	1,301
180	Blue Dot	1,295
185	AA9	1,248
190	AA9	1,267
195	AA9	1,193
200	SP2	1,232
205	AA9	1,157

I put 100 grain in twice as 800X is no longer available.

I also, just for fun, ran a pivot on pressure by data source.  Gives a peak into the risk profiles they applied to the ballistics testing.  This view of the data makes it clear why Accurate powders top the velocity charts so often - they publish data that is closer to max pressure:

|___Source_____________	|___AVG Max Pressure_____	|___SafetyMargin_____	|___MAX Pressure___|
Accurate Arms	35,208	6%	37,500
Western Powders 8.0	35,206	6%	37,500
ADI Powders	35,100	6%	36,900
Hodgdon (Web V1)	34,865	7%	36,900
Alliant Print	34,691	7%	36,000
Shooter World Online	34,635	8%	37,415
Hodgdon #26	33,981	9%	36,900
Winchester	33,938	9%	35,700
IMR	33,829	10%	35,800
Western Powders	33,729	10%	35,700
Lovex	33,250	11%	33,600
Lyman #51	31,344	16%	37,500
Lyman #50	29,149	22%	37,500
Lyman Cast Bullet 4th	28,800	23%	29,900
Lyman	28,772	23%	30,000

If I exclude the cast bullet handbook data, which is generally not loaded to max pressures, the average safety margin across all publishers comes in at 10%, not weighted by number of loads. Lyman in general is pretty risk averse - If you removed them the average is 8% safety margin.

For those that frequently opine that data is driven by attorneys, please remember that a 20° F temperature increase in the ammunition works out to an average of a 5% increase in pressure.  Considering that variable in conjunction with factors like bullet seating depth, set back, primer variations, case capacity differences and manufaturing tolerances in firearm chambers and an 8% margin starts to seem prudent.

I will update this thread again with a link once I complete the Wiki page.

I recently read a discussion about striker vs hammer fired semi-auto's.  And then last night for un-related reasons I changed my EDC (more on that later). It got me thinking about the decision tree for choosing a gun to have with you.  And I thought this crowd might have some unique insights since 10mm enthusiasts tend to have more than one or two options.

My EDC choices have varied over the years. For the last several months it has been my Para P16/10mm and before that it was my Glock 20/29 for many years. Last night it changed to my Witness full-size.  And not because The_Shadow bought a cool Witness.

The demographics of my home have changed and now again includes toddlers both as residents and visitors.  While I hope I never leave a gun un-attended, it seemed prudent to choose a DA/SA auto so small hands would have a harder time operating the fire control group.

So, what drives your choices?  Anything stand out as "the reason" for you current or for a past choice you can share?

Seems like I might have put on in my Match a long, long time ago.  I will check later today.  I have not performed any A/B testing to validate their claims.

I also have some bushing guide rods that were sent to me by a forum member. They used a skinny rod which gave access to some spring rates that are different than you can get with the fatter springs.  But they required a bushing on the end of the recoil rod that would fill the extra space recoil rod hole in the slide. Nifty, but they added a part and didn't seem to have a huge benefit to make the bushing worth the added complexity.

FYI, I have found the Henning basepad does indeed take these mags to 20 rounds, but you will want the Grams engineering spring/follower.  If you don't get the follower, don't load the last two round - the factory follower will hang up on the transition between the extended basepad and the mag body.  It can be a real pain to get unstuck.

I have three Witness pistols.

I originally wanted a Witness Match, but they were in short supply and a local shop had a new in box plain Witness for $349.  I bought it.  Excellent gun.

About a month later a NIB Witness Match appeared on GB for a good price.  I bid and won.  It was the first gun I ever bought online.  It is a dream to shoot, but not practical as a carry gun.  Reasons: Single action only with a very light for defensive use trigger, and oh-my-lawd is every edge on that gun sharp as a razor.

Fast-forward to about 4 years ago.  Son-in-law was getting his masters degree and we like to recognize those events with a gift from mom and dad. He wanted a 9mm semi-auto and had expressed a liking for the CZ Shadow 2.  I of course was brand loyal to Tanfoglio, so I bought both a Stock III and a Shadow 2 and let him choose.  He picked the Shadow 2, so now I have a Stock III in 9mm and 38 Super.  It has an SA/DA trigger and a full rail, and is every bit as easy to shoot as the Match.  I do carry it from time to time.  I can also swap the Match 10mm top end onto the frame if I want a 10mm version.

All in all I have been very happy with the Tanfoglio guns.  The Limited Pro you show below is what I would look for if I could only have one. I don't use rails much and the limited pro is basically a Stock III on a diet.

My recent acquisition of a Fusion 1911 sparked some renewed research into 9X23 Win and very heavy 38 Super Comp loads.  I find the 9X23 very interesting as a case study:  Ramped frame design with a very strong cartridge case head to enable 50K psi internal ballistics pressures.

This got me thinking about 10mm Auto.

6.8 SPC offers a potential brass source for a 55K PSI capable case head, with some trimming and reaming. So brass can be sourced for a wildcat experiment relatively easily.

A web search turned up that this was not an original idea.  But, it appears previous endeavours didn't get past the ideation phase.  I would guess that the brass reaming was the first hurdle.

Next came the question of gun strength.  I spent about 10 hours over the holiday weekend dusting off engineering books and collaborating with family members that are engineers. The math says a 1911 barrel would have a safety margin that is acceptable:  1.4 in 4140 (fully annealed), 1.5 in 416R. Most 1911 barrels in carbon steel are hardened and normalized, which would boost that margin to 2.2.

The Tanfoglio guns get a bit more interesting since I don't have good data on there barrel steel.  I assume it is 4140 or a similar arsenal steel, and that it is significantly hardened and normalized. With that assumption the safety margin is at least 1.6 in arsenal steel.  If they are using 416R the margin is below an acceptable threshold at 1.1, unless they are using some trick in the hardening process to exceed the typical 416R yield values.

So, testing in 1911 :-)

Next came the question of the action strength.  Due to the complexity of the geometries in the action, this is really a challenge for software that I no longer have a license for.  As a smoke test I calculated the lbs-force in a 460 Rowland and compared it to a 50K PSI 10mm round.  The 10mm is less but only by about 2%.

I would add here that this is being approached as a wildcat exercise.  A "production" implementation would require significantly more review.  I am trying to ensure I won't blow up my guns if I get to the testing ammo phase.

With this diligence completed, I stepped into a review of the internal ballistics.  No sense in doing this if there is not a meaningful gain in velocity over 10mm Auto.

This is where my excitement diminished a bit.  I was optimistically hoping to see a 20% + gain in velocity for mid-weight bullets and more for light bullets.  Realistically it appears the gains would be 12-13% for the bullets 135 and less, and about 8-9% for mid-weight bullets.  This gives a 135 grain JHP at a probable 1800 fps, and a 155 grain at a probable 1630 fps.

If 20% or a bit more was accessible, then I would be ordering a reamer for Forster.  But 10% is not so exciting given the reward.

You too.

At the cabin with the family.  Watched the race today. Planned on having a family shooting challenge to see who could qualify using the WWII M1911 qual criteria with our CMP 1911's, but it rained all day.

During a break in the rain I shot off some hot 38 super/mild 9X23 in my new to me Fusion.  Tomorrow hopefully the rain will be gone and we can have our shooting game and I can chronograph some loads.