Question for those of you who reload 9mm and 40 S&W

[indymike]

Ok, so I reload 9mm, and reload a lot and shoot a lot....but I'm still less than a year into this. My goal is to get the most accurate load tailored to my guns and I am really close to recipes that almost guarantee quarter sized, 10 round groups at 21 feet when my trigger control and steadying of the gun is near perfect.

The thing is that I was recently shooting and a guy in the next lane offered to let me shoot his .40 after I inquired about accuracy and recoil. Turns out I shot his as accurate as my own, maybe a little better....but it was factory ammo.

My question is...for those of you that reload both 9 and 40, do you find that one caliber, once you nail down your recipe, is more accurate than the other? Is the length/weight or other "mysterious to me" attributes of the .40 inherently more accurate than the 9mm? Or can you get them both to shoot equally accurate so long as you do your part.

I'm using service type and compact pistols right now but the more I move toward bullseyes as my range goals, the more I think I may invest in a quality target pistol like a well-tuned 9mm 1911, S&W 952 or similar but wonder if I can outshoot my 9s with perhaps giving it a go with a 40 caliber pistol and 40 reloading.

Any personal experience thoughts are appreciated.

 

[dtkw]

I don't have the time or place to do reload now. But in the past I tried my best to copy the factory velocity but using a reloading manual to see which powder gives the closest velocity of the factory load that I use for home protection.

 

[YoungGunLover]

I am by no means an expert on reloading or guns, but to give a quick response, I have always heard a high pressure round like the .40 will give a flatter trajectory which would lead to better accuracy at longer distances. Whether this is true or not, I have no clue. All I know is that when I shoot factory ammo from my Glock 22, at 25yds I'm all over the place. With my own reloads ( 165gr Berrys plated over 5.8 grains unique) almost every shot at that distance is within a paper plate. YMMV though

 

[chizzle]

Ok, so I reload 9mm, and reload a lot and shoot a lot....but I'm still less than a year into this. My goal is to get the most accurate load tailored to my guns and I am really close to recipes that almost guarantee quarter sized, 10 round groups at 21 feet when my trigger control and steadying of the gun is near perfect.

The thing is that I was recently shooting and a guy in the next lane offered to let me shoot his .40 after I inquired about accuracy and recoil. Turns out I shot his as accurate as my own, maybe a little better....but it was factory ammo.

My question is...for those of you that reload both 9 and 40, do you find that one caliber, once you nail down your recipe, is more accurate than the other? Is the length/weight or other "mysterious to me" attributes of the .40 inherently more accurate than the 9mm? Or can you get them both to shoot equally accurate so long as you do your part.

I'm using service type and compact pistols right now but the more I move toward bullseyes as my range goals, the more I think I may invest in a quality target pistol like a well-tuned 9mm 1911, S&W 952 or similar but wonder if I can outshoot my 9s with perhaps giving it a go with a 40 caliber pistol and 40 reloading.

Any personal experience thoughts are appreciated.

Are you reloading for any specific games (Steel Challenge, USPSA, etc.) or with any other goals in mind (self defense loads)? Normally I shoot a 115 grain 9mm bullet about 1100 fps for my Steel loads.

 

[indymike]

Are you reloading for any specific games (Steel Challenge, USPSA, etc.) or with any other goals in mind (self defense loads)? Normally I shoot a 115 grain 9mm bullet about 1100 fps for my Steel loads.

My goals are just to have fun doing my own personal bullseye shooting at the range. Not much more than that. So I'm just trying to tighten up my groups firing slow but off-hand.

I've noticed that I'm now good enough of a steady off-hand shot that the difference among factory loads and the variety of my 9mm loads are obvious. Trying to minimize as many variables in the equation as possible to where just human error when shooting result in bad groups.

Just looking to work up the most accurate recipe I can and wonder if the best .40 load a person can work up, you can get more consistent and accurate groups than with the best 9mm loads a person can work up. This may be a more theoretical question than a practical one. But I was just hoping someone with a history of spending a few years loading both found either the 9 or .40 to be more inherently accurate a caliber in their experience.

 

[Sagamore - One]

In my experience neither the 40 or the 9 is inherently more accurate than the other. Shooter factor completely out weighs inherent traits.
I would suggest.. if I may, that you look into joining a local Bullseye club where they shoot at bullseye targets regularly and just absorb some of the multitude of knowledge they have to pass along. I was very , very good at IPSC but found I knew next to nothing as compared to these dedicated souls.

 

[Leo]

I reload them both. The .40 has nothing inherently wrong with it that prevents accuracy. I think it is limited by the firearms. Since it tends to be a caliber that is used for defensive or police use, most of the firearms available for it are conventional combat arms. There are not a lot of people building bullseye .40's like so many of the bullseye built 1911's. I have a Para Ordinance limited 16.40. It is the same premium quality as the limited .45. In addition the trigger has been worked on some and the barrel has been refit for a little tighter tolerance. It shoots very well with the same ammo tweeking as I would use on a target .45. I do not run into many .40's that are purpose built as a target pistol. So it is not the round, but the common pistols that are holding it back. Because of lighter recoil, the 9mm is a little easier to shoot well, so most people do. I forget the model number offhand, but S&W has a target purpose built 9mm in it's lineup. (I remember it being price north of the $1500 mark) The man who had it had to order it and wait a long time. It was very easy to shoot very well. I really did not know the 9mm was that accurate. Most 9mm pistols are not built with pure target shooting in mind either.

 

[bass pro]

I reload and shoot both 9 and 40, I dont think the round or the load has anything to do with accuracy. I think it is all in the equipment and the shooter. I shoot 40 better because i shoot them thru a 1911.

 

[indymike]

Thanks for all the info. I think the gun itself is my limiting factor right now. The S&W mentioned above is the 952-2 and they are definitely in the $1300 used to $1500 new mark. That's the dream bullseye pistol for me. I hear great things about the Sig P210 but those are over $2000 I think, definitely out of range for me.

Again, thanks for the info, looks like I'll stick with 9mm for now and start saving for a true tack driver.

 

[noylj]

There are some cartridges that seem to be "inherently" accurate: .45Auto, .44Spl, .38Spl, 6mmPPC, .22PPC, etc.
There are some that seem to be "inherently" inaccurate: .25 Auto, .380 Auto, 9x19, etc.
In most cases, I think it has to do with the quality of the guns.
However, I can say that a $500-900 .45Auto seems to almost always be more accurate than a $500-900 9x19. However, I can "see" no reason why that should be so.
7 yards is not really a very challenging range for testing accuracy and the fit of the gun and quality of sights and trigger pull probably has a LOT more to do with accuracy at that range.
If you minimize head space, use quality bullets, and watch for case imperfections, you should be able to load more accurate ammunition than factory.
Where do you find a 952 for those prices? I see $1600 to $1800+ for used.

 

[indymike]

There are some cartridges that seem to be "inherently" accurate: .45Auto, .44Spl, .38Spl, 6mmPPC, .22PPC, etc.
There are some that seem to be "inherently" inaccurate: .25 Auto, .380 Auto, 9x19, etc.
In most cases, I think it has to do with the quality of the guns.
However, I can say that a $500-900 .45Auto seems to almost always be more accurate than a $500-900 9x19. However, I can "see" no reason why that should be so.
7 yards is not really a very challenging range for testing accuracy and the fit of the gun and quality of sights and trigger pull probably has a LOT more to do with accuracy at that range.
If you minimize head space, use quality bullets, and watch for case imperfections, you should be able to load more accurate ammunition than factory.
Where do you find a 952 for those prices? I see $1600 to $1800+ for used.

I guess I haven't looked in a while. You are correct, those are getting insanely expensive. Thanks for the other tips. Can you tell me what bullet brands you would consider quality? Do you just mean major brand names and jacketed like Winchester, Remington, etc or do you mean the more expensive ones like Sierra.

 

[judgecrater]

After developing extensive reload recipes for 9mm and 45 I can only conclude that only 1 out of 10 9mm loads shoot very well but 9 out of 10 in 45ACP shoot exceedingly well. This is using three guns in each caliber. While this does not address 40S&W, you might want to look into a 45 for your next pistol. I just don't see 9mms shooting raged one hole groups but see it all the time with 45ACP, and I am not referring to highly modified $1500 guns.