ADI data for handguns

[bluerob]

Guys, don't know about you, but, getting frustrated with the ADI reloading data and having sent countless emails over the years (never get a response and I'm asking nicely) to "look after their customers with what we actually need data."

Might have to look at changing powders (I've used ADI from day one as I like to support local firearm industries) where they show load data, predominately for lead projectiles and not hunting or self defence.

Most shooters in my club are using lead projectiles in centre fire handguns with the ocassional box of factories to clear cobwebs.

I'm predominately loading .9mm, .38/.357 and using lead in various shapes (round nose, waddies, conny's etc) and in various weights.

We can't use our handguns to hunt in NSW and we most certainly cannot use them in self defense with the current gun control nonsense going on. Not sure on the situation in other states. I understand that pastoralists that run huge stations are allowed to carry a decent sized calibre hand gun because of the cranky cattle they are mustering, that may attack the drover.

Why are the importers bringing in "personal defence" etc type factory ammo (hideously expensive) when we are only putting holes in paper and knocking plates over. I know of some ranges that frown upon using jacketed ammo in handguns.

It would be great if ADI released data purely for lead projectiles. I won't be shooting a service match with XTP or hollow points, so, why the load data for this type of ammo? Sure,have it, but, more lead data please!!!!

I might try a different powder brand instead of referring to various manuals (Lyman Cast, Lyman standard, ADI manual, Nick Harvey's) and then calculating the safest load for matches. Making hot loads is easy, but, when your attempting to develop loads, having to buggerise around ain't fun.

If your using ADI powder in loading lead pills, what are your methods to ensure safely (you can't use the same load for a 158gn hollow point .357 as a 158gn round nose)?

[Chronos]

Have you looked at the adi load data? Seems the info you want is there.



Chronos

[bluerob]

Thanks for the reply.

Sorry, I may not have explained myself properly.

For example (a popular lead projectile brand made in Sydney).

150gn cast lead round nose for .357 data - nope.
158gn cast lead round nose for .357 data - nope.

Most reloaders that I know prefer using AS30N for .357 (quite a few books recommend this also), but no data?

I thought that AR2205 was more suitable to rifle loads? If I'm wrong, please say so. Don't mind learning more.

I don't want to start an argument, but, the AP50, AP70 & AP100 etc is more for 9mm, .38 Super? If I'm wrong, again, happy for you to say so.

There's quite a few other pills that are commonly sold, simply for paper punching, but, no data? It looks as though most data is for the hunting/defence use?

I'm finding that The Lyman Cast book usually is more helpful than the ADI data as I'm using cast lead 100% of the time. I don't have a need for hollow points or any other of the tricky pills (XTP) for target shooting.

Won't a 158gn Hollw point will require a different load to a .158gn cast lead round nose projectile?

Thanks for your comments. Greatly appreciated!



My point is that it seems that the ADI data is weighted towards the pills that paper punchers wouldn't normally use.

[Chronos]

I'd guess that the reason is because ADI use data from their US partner to write their manuals. ADI do no testing here i'm told and they simply take the data supplied from their powders and write the loading manual using the data supplied. this would mean that much of the data tested would be done with the highest selling bullets in the US of A

I use 240gr top scores in my .44mag and i asked around and the consensus was to just use the jacketed data as the coating was very good. the same won't apply to uncoated cast bullets

Chronos

[cavok]

Thanks for the reply.

Sorry, I may not have explained myself properly.

For example (a popular lead projectile brand made in Sydney).

150gn cast lead round nose for .357 data - nope.
158gn cast lead round nose for .357 data - nope.

Most reloaders that I know prefer using AS30N for .357 (quite a few books recommend this also), but no data?

I thought that AR2205 was more suitable to rifle loads? If I'm wrong, please say so. Don't mind learning more.

I don't want to start an argument, but, the AP50, AP70 & AP100 etc is more for 9mm, .38 Super? If I'm wrong, again, happy for you to say so.

There's quite a few other pills that are commonly sold, simply for paper punching, but, no data? It looks as though most data is for the hunting/defence use?

I'm finding that The Lyman Cast book usually is more helpful than the ADI data as I'm using cast lead 100% of the time. I don't have a need for hollow points or any other of the tricky pills (XTP) for target shooting.

Won't a 158gn Hollw point will require a different load to a .158gn cast lead round nose projectile?

Thanks for your comments. Greatly appreciated!



My point is that it seems that the ADI data is weighted towards the pills that paper punchers wouldn't normally use.

Ap 50, 70, 100 is perfect for 9mm, .38 super and .357 sig. The correct powder to use depends on what power factor you need to achieve, IF any?
Ap 70 is harder to get then hens teeth, hence ap50 & 100 are great, again P/F> Also in .357 sig, small rifle primes in some instances are recommended, 9mm is the easiest to load for as is .38 special and .357 Mag & .357 sig. Projectile weight is a critical factor, so go from there.
The ADI manual is a great guide which is a to cover them. I load 9mm major, ap100, 7.45 grains, hate to know what pressure, never misses a beat, I am one of many who load what we load because IT IS safe and works. Pistol type if shooting major loads in also a factor, just for plinking at paper, loads are very easy.

[Chronos]

Not true, I bought 3kg of AP70 a week or so ago just for when I get my next pistol. Most gunshops around here have it at the moment.

Chronos

[cavok]

Not true, I bought 3kg of AP70 a week or so ago just for when I get my next pistol. Most gunshops around here have it at the moment.

Chronos

In Victoria here I know very high ranking shooters who would kill of just 1 tin, sorry, plastic containers. I have switched to ap50 easier. Possibly some ap70 goes interstate to NSW some others stays here. AP70 comes in 500grm and 2kg containers, ap 50 works just as well. No big deal, glad you have your supply.
And yes, depending on who you are when the big dealers get their share, they know exactly who gets the powder, it's not first in gets it, you must be at the top of the list, all I got was AP50 & 100..

[Chronos]

Not true, I bought 3kg of AP70 a week or so ago just for when I get my next pistol. Most gunshops around here have it at the moment.

Chronos

In Victoria here I know very high ranking shooters who would kill of just 1 tin, sorry, plastic containers. I have switched to ap50 easier. Possibly some ap70 goes interstate to NSW some others stays here. AP70 comes in 500grm and 2kg containers, ap 50 works just as well. No big deal, glad you have your supply.
And yes, depending on who you are when the big dealers get their share, they know exactly who gets the powder, it's not first in gets it, you must be at the top of the list, all I got was AP50 & 100..

Nope, just walked in and asked, they said "yep how much do you want?" I said "give me 6 500gr bottles" and the guy went out the back and got it.

I didn't ask how much it was because I haven't bought it since I sold my 9mm but hopefully next year I'll have a 38super and a .357mag in the safe with my .22 and my air pistol

Chronos

[cavok]

As at 12 December I purchased 2kg ap50 & 100, $145.00 each last me about 6 months. In 500grms I am advised as I have never purchased 500grm is around $50.00, ++ this = $200 for 2kg. It is mostly what we shoot with 2kgs, I have never asked for 500gms, its to expensive, hence if you check with your supplier, 500gms is OK. It's 2kgs that is impossible to find.

[Chronos]

Well I certainly didn't pay $300 for 6 500g tubs

Chronos

[bluerob]

I'd guess that the reason is because ADI use data from their US partner to write their manuals. ADI do no testing here i'm told and they simply take the data supplied from their powders and write the loading manual using the data supplied. this would mean that much of the data tested would be done with the highest selling bullets in the US of A

I use 240gr top scores in my .44mag and i asked around and the consensus was to just use the jacketed data as the coating was very good. the same won't apply to uncoated cast bullets

Chronos

Sorry, again haven't explained myself fully. I am using predominately commercially made cast lead, not home made pills, which are coated. I use the popular brands available.

I've been told that Hodgdon propellant is the same as ADI. Is this correct?

I'd be more than happy to shoot jacketed factories, but, as I practice a fair bit, the cost is outrageous.

Having a projectile that mushrooms perfectly to cause serious physical damage isn't needed when I'm shooting say Service or NRA matches.

Ballistic wise, a round nose 158gn round nose coated projectile and a 158gn hollow point (in .357), which do you think would perform better over 25m. Or is this too short a distance to see any difference.

Both projectiles (lead and hollow points) weigh 158gn, but, because of Murphys Law, could there be much chamber pressure difference?

Thanks again for the comments.

[Hatter]

Why are the importers bringing in "personal defence" etc type factory ammo (hideously expensive) when we are only putting holes in paper and knocking plates over.

One can only guess it's for the Tacticool crowd.

[Korkt]

I'd guess that the reason is because ADI use data from their US partner to write their manuals. ADI do no testing here i'm told and they simply take the data supplied from their powders and write the loading manual using the data supplied. this would mean that much of the data tested would be done with the highest selling bullets in the US of A

I was just going to say the same thing.

Data is just copied/pasted from the US with the name of the power exchanged.

So we get data with popular US bullets which has a rich market for self defence, and I guess to a lesser extent hunting with pistols.

[cavok]

I'd guess that the reason is because ADI use data from their US partner to write their manuals. ADI do no testing here i'm told and they simply take the data supplied from their powders and write the loading manual using the data supplied. this would mean that much of the data tested would be done with the highest selling bullets in the US of A

I was just going to say the same thing.

Data is just copied/pasted from the US with the name of the power exchanged.

So we get data with popular US bullets which has a rich market for self defence, and I guess to a lesser extent hunting with pistols.

ADI in Australia publish a hard copy and have their website for load data. The projectiles are in these types: FOR Pistols. So forget the "they get data from the US".

"Relevant Bullet Acronyms:
FMJ Full Metal Jacket
GDHP Gold Dot Hollow Point
LCN Lead Conical Nose
LRN Lead Round Nose
RN Round Nose
XTP Extreme Terminal Performance

Relevant Brand Acronyms:

BAR Barnes
BERB Berry's Bullets
HDY Hornady
SFIRE Sinterfire
SIE Sierra
SPR Speer

So they include lead conical and round nose of the same weight we have here. H/river, Westcasting, Black widow, etc. HENCE the data is totally relevant and in some cases even accurate. Trial and error or start at the lowest given IF UNSURE, increase till you are happy. OR if you are smart ask a shooter from your club as many use ADI powders, local and reliable. 9mm, .38 special, .357 mag, .357sig, .45, are all standard loads, most people know a good safe and reliable load, using Berry's or lead projectiles, easy as.

[Chronos]

ADI do not have any data and ALL the data they provide comes from the US.

There is no testing done in Australia other than a gentleman known in some circles that receives samples from each batch for comparison to previous batches.

Chronos

[cavok]

Chronos you have a great Christmas. ADI in America where all their loads are tested they use ADI powders, using projectiles we use, same weight, they use the same handguns we use, what loads and pressures, muzzle velocity they publish using ADI powders and projectiles is VALID, rely on it. USE their powder to work uploads for what you want. THRE is no published from data from here, I have a Winchester manual, load data, I use their product sometimes, I use their load data BECAUSE its also valid and useable.

[Chronos]

Chronos you have a great Christmas. ADI in America where all their loads are tested they use ADI powders, using projectiles we use, same weight, they use the same handguns we use, what loads and pressures, muzzle velocity they publish using ADI powders and projectiles is VALID, rely on it. USE their powder to work uploads for what you want. THRE is no published from data from here, I have a Winchester manual, load data, I use their product sometimes, I use their load data BECAUSE its also valid and useable.

LMFAO, ADI in America eh?

You have a good break too Cavok, i think you've earned it

Chronos

[Pom]

Why are the importers bringing in "personal defence" etc type factory ammo (hideously expensive) when we are only putting holes in paper and knocking plates over. I know of some ranges that frown upon using jacketed ammo in handguns.

I guess it's something new, different... Everyone gives it a try once or twice and they make a fair bit of scratch from it.