Reload advice--Overpressure?

[CrazyFingers]

I need some advice on my first batch of 9mm and .45 reloads, the goal being a light target load for plinking and range practice. Unfortunately, I do not have a chronograph. Here's the relevant data:

9mm
Brass - once fired Winchester White Box
Primer - TulAmmo Small Pistol Magnum (http://www.midwayusa.com/product/118055/tulammo-small-magnum-pistol-primers-box-of-1000-10-trays-of-100) (all I could find)
Powder - Alliant Bullseye (http://www.alliantpowder.com/products/powder/bullseye.aspx)
Projectile - Remington 115gn FMJ (http://www.midwayusa.com/product/529608/remington-bullets-9mm-355-diameter-115-grain-full-metal-jacket-box-of-1000-bulk-packaged)

.45 ACP
Brass - once fired Federal small primer
Primer - TulAmmo Small Pistol Magnum
Powder - Alliant Bullseye
Projectile - Hornady 230gn FMJ (http://www.natchezss.com/Bullets.cfm?contentID=productDetail&brand=HO&prodID=HO451771&prodTitle=Hornady%20Handgun%20Bullet%20-%20.45%20cal%20.451)

The only primers I could find were small pistol magnum, so I read as much as I could find about the differences, with the general consensus being that they should work, but I should be conservative with the starting load.

For the 9mm, the loading data was...confusing.
Speer #12 (1995) - starting load 4.2 /MAX 4.7 - OAL: 1.135
Hornady 4th (1996) - starting load 4.5 / MAX 5.1 - OAL: 1.105
MidwayUSA's sheet (1998) - starting load 3.7 / MAX 4.5 - OAL: 1.160
Lyman 49th (2008) - starting load 3.5 / MAX 4.8 - OAL: 1.090
Alliant (2013) - starting load 4.2 / MAX 4.7 - OAL: 1.125

Since I was working with magnum primers, I knew I wanted to start below the starting load, so I looked at the wide variation in load data and assumed that the powder manufacturer would be the most accurate. I also assumed it would be best to avoid compressing the cartridge more than necessary. My starting load was 4.1gn, with OAL 1.150, working up from there.

Here's the results of my first batch through a 92fs:
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e309/Richard_M_Nixon/9mm_Reloads_Cropped_zps04bf8ed7.jpg
From top row to bottom row: 4.1gn, 4.3gn, 4.5gn

What concerns me is the raised, rounded edge of the primer strike, as this looks like what people describe when they talk about overpressure signs. Until I looked at the untouched once-fired brass that still had the spent factory Winchester primers in them:
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e309/Richard_M_Nixon/9mm_Factory_cropped_zps46370e1e.jpg

Unless I'm blind, I see the exact same cupping on the factory rounds that I see on my reloads. My plan is to back the load down to the Lyman starting load of 3.5gn (or less, if advised) and see what happens.

.45 loading data:
Speer #12 (1995) - starting load 5.2 /MAX 5.7 - OAL: 1.260
MidwayUSA's sheet (1998) - starting load 4.8 / MAX 5.8 - OAL: 1.275
Lyman 49th (2008) - starting load 3.8 / MAX 5.3 - OAL: 1.275
Alliant (2013) - starting load 5.1 / MAX 5.7 - OAL: 1.260

Again, I went below Alliant's starting load as a baseline, fired through a 1911:
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e309/Richard_M_Nixon/45_Reloads_web_zpsf0b202b1.jpg
Top to bottom row: 5.0gn, 5.2gn, 5.4gn with OAL 1.270

Here's the same brass with the factory Federal primers still in them:
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e309/Richard_M_Nixon/45_Factory_web_zps7ebab10f.jpg

With the .45 reloads, I didn't see what I thought were as obvious signs of overpressure, but this time there are definite differences between the original factory loads and the reloads. Again, I'm considering re-running this test with the Lyman starting load.

All reloads functioned correctly with no failures of any kind.

I know there are quite a few differences here, so I'm hoping someone with more reloading experience can give me some pointers. Obviously I would have preferred standard small pistol primers instead of the magnums, but there just wasn't anything else available, and I should be able to come up with some recipe that works.
Do the primers on the 9mm reloads show cause for concern, even with the same or similar results from the Winchester factory primers?
The same question for the .45 ACP reloads vs. Federal factory primers?
Does Lyman know something about Bullseye powder that Alliant doesn't?
Any help or advice would be appreciated.

[SMJayman]

Well with both of those loads you have loaded longer than book recommendation, which means pressures will be lower. I'd go by Alliant's data on their website, which is most current. For 9mm they list a max of 4.7, so your start at around 4.0-4.1 should be fine, esp. with the longer cartridge length. If your scale is calibrated correctly I wouldn't sweat the primers, as that same occurrence seems to be happening with factory ammo in that gun. Does the recoil on the round seem light/moderate/hard? How is ejection? What sort of shape is the spent brass in? (If you reload it again, is it extra hard to resize? Is the primer pocket loose already?) Obviously a chrono would give you more data, but overall I think you are OK. Double check your charge weight by using check weights with your scale.

[CrazyFingers]

Thanks SMJayman.
I'm using a Frankford Arsenal (http://www.midwayusa.com/product/175512/frankford-arsenal-ds-750-electronic-powder-scale-750-grain-capacity) electronic scale to verify the charges thrown by my Redding 3BR with the match-grade handgun chamber, and I do use the check weight to calibrate the scale before each reloading session.
Recoil seemed about the same as factory ammo, which sounds about right since Winchester White Box isn't known for being a very stout round. Ejection was consistent and matched factory rounds. The brass was a bit dirtier than with factory rounds, but I was expecting that with Bullseye since that seems to be a common observation. I haven't ran that batch of brass back through my press, since I wanted to keep it handy in case anyone wanted more pictures or measurements.
Could something about the pistol itself (92fs) be putting those marks on the primer? The shells on the far right are from my G19 and of course they look different from the striker. I don't know exactly what to look for on those that would indicate overpressure.

Here's a closeup of the Glock fired shells:
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e309/Richard_M_Nixon/9mm_Reloads_G19_Web_zps6cf28d69.jpg

What did you think about the .45 reload brass?

[762xIan]

Those primers do seem to have some odd marks to me. They don't look flattened or cratered though. Maybe odd metallurgy with Tula primers, which I don't use. I settled on CCI's or Federals.

Here is an example I found of "cratered" from hot loads/high pressure:
http://38super.net/Images/primers/Primer-cratered.jpg

Yours don't look overpressured to me.

Watch your primer seating depth and you should be fine.

Bullseye has been a favorite powder of mine for .45 and I have used it for 9mm also. For 9mm I am currently using HP-38/W231, which I think is a little cleaner.

My load for the .45 for 230 FMJ's is 5.0 grains, that is supposed to replicate the old military load. Works well for me in several different .45 pistols.

As for 9mm, for the 115's, 4.5 grains in pistol and 5.0 grains for the carbine. The Carbine (Ruger P-9) has been very accurate with the 5.0 grain load out to 100 yards. 5.0 is a little "stout" in the pistols, but I have seen no overpressure signs.

Good luck.

[esw]

Do some research on clays powder. I love it in my .45 auto. It burns cleanly and with frog lube I have easy clean ups. The recoil is light so you can really focus on aim and trigger pull for target shooting. I have several 5 round one hole groups at 8 yards.

I use bullseye and clays mostly. I'm becoming a huge fan of Clays.

[Coal Dragger]

I have always found Bullseye to be a pretty fast burning powder, and probably not one that will lend itself well to magnum primers that burn a bit hotter and create more pressure. I would look for a slower burning powder that filled more of the case, like HS-6, HS-7, or Power Pistol for use with those primers.

The .45ACP reloads are borderline OK since the case is larger and a small pistol primer usually gives lower pressure in those cases than a large pistol primer, so the small magnum pistol primer is probably not making a lot more pressure than a large pistol primer. Your 9mm's are showing what appears to be a lot of primer flow though. Then again so are the factory rounds. That is a bit strange, does your pistol have an excessively large hole in the slide face/breech where the firing pin protrudes?

My current favorite powder for use in the .45ACP is Power Pistol, since it covers a wide range of projectiles and velocities. Everything from 185gr bullets at normal velocities, to some of my "bad ideas" experiments using a .45ACP cylinder made for my Freedom Arms M83. For example I discovered that if you have a really tight chambered 5 shot cylinder good for 65,000PSI you can use .460 Rowland data in .45ACP brass and push a 185gr XTP to around 1500-1550fps using Power Pistol and it is not only accurate, but produces no excessive pressure signs on the brass or primers. In fact the brass drops free of the cylinder.

I don't reload 9mm for myself, but I help a friend of mine who does load it who is just getting into the hobby/necessity of it. I don't recall what he is using for powder, but I want to say it is HS-6 and he has enjoyed good results with it and standard Winchester Small Pistol Primers.

[CrazyFingers]

Your 9mm's are showing what appears to be a lot of primer flow though. Then again so are the factory rounds. That is a bit strange, does your pistol have an excessively large hole in the slide face/breech where the firing pin protrudes?

This is something I'm going to investigate. The same reloads fired through my G19 don't appear to show any problems, while factory rounds fired through the Beretta have the exact same primer marks (and it may have always done this, I just never paid attention since I was shooting factory rounds). I did some Googling and found several other people with similar issues: reloads that shouldn't be anywhere close to max load, yet showed these alarming primer marks. Most of them turned out to be related to how the breech and/or firing pin channel was shaped, and the manufacturers responded to their concerns with "Yes, we know our firearm does that, it's normal, don't worry about it."
I'm going to try to get a closeup of the breech face of my 92fs for consideration.
I really appreciate everyone's help on this. These are my first pistol reloads, and these marks had me worried.

[SMJayman]

Yeah, I think the marks on your 9mm reloads are simply due to some variance/uniqueness of your Beretta. You can use SPM primers with regular loads if you load on the lower end. Bullseye is a bit dirtier than some other powders, but nothing really bad. I know people who have shot thousands of rounds of it through their guns with no issue.

As far as the Clays recommendation, it works well in .45acp, but I have never found it to work well in 9mm without doing some crazy stuff in terms of pressure. It has never been that accurate in 9mm either. I'd stick with the Bullseye.

[CrazyFingers]

Thanks SMJayman. And yes, as far as "stick with the Bullseye", I'm pretty much stuck with it, since I bought an 8lb jug (which should last me several years). Actually, with the scarcity of components lately, I feel pretty fortunate to have found a powder that produces acceptable plinking/target loads for both 9mm and .45ACP.

[mic2377]

I don't think your loads are over pressure. I have a G34, and my primers look similar.

I also load Bullseye in 9mm with a 115 gr bullet, and I used the Alliant load data, which is very similar to that you see in the other load manuals with a max of 4.7 gr.

My load is:
Mixed brass
115 JHP (Prvi, Winchester, whatever I can get!)
Approx. OAL of 1.125-1.130 (depending on exact bullet)
CCI-500
4.6 gr of Bullseye

I have tried running lower charges down to 4.0, but experienced occasional short cycling until I got to the 4.5 gr range. Also, if Bullseye is loaded to low pressure, it burns very dirty/sooty. When I got up to the 4.6/4.7 gr range, it was much cleaner and seemed to burn more completely at high pressure.

Despite its issues (kind of dirty, doesn't meter super well), Bullseye provides good accuracy and a fairly soft recoil impulse. In addition, it is very cheap - 1 lb is over 1500 rds. 8 lbs is going to last you a long time!

[SteveS]

Stay close to the middle of the powder charge listed on the loading data . I have found the starting data low for reliable functioning in some semis and top loads usually not needed for plinking or target practice. Your primers all look fine.

[bb223]

Yeah, my 92G marks ALL primers the way your Beretta does.

Factory ammo, SP, SPM, SR all get marked like that.

[CrazyFingers]

Yeah, my 92G marks ALL primers the way your Beretta does.

Factory ammo, SP, SPM, SR all get marked like that.

Interesting. That is what I thought was going on, given the consistency of the marks on both reloads and factory (and the normal Glock marks) , but it's reassuring to hear from another Beretta owner on this.

After digesting all the advice here, I think I'm going to bulk-load this weekend at 4.5gr for the 9mm.
Thanks to all for the help.

[goodoleboy]

as long as you are not experiencing excessively hard cycling, excessive muzzle blast, etc, I think you are fine. If you are curious about it, mark some handloads with a marker and stagger them in the mag with factory range ammo and compare the recoil pulse, muzzle blast, and cycling between the two. After shooting, compare the primers to see how they look, it may just be a characteristic of the metal used in that particular primer brand.

I've never used that particular brand of primer, I'm more of a CCI, Federal, and Winchester guy (because that's what most of my local shops carry). For whatever reason, Glocks bugger up primers due to the shape of the pin and the hole it goes through.

The primers don't look flattened at the edges, which is a tell-tell sign of over pressure.