Then, I sheepishly admitted that, upon closer inspection, my caliper was off. I have thrown it away. But note this: It was only off 4 thousandths of an inch - not 4/10 or even 4/100. It measured 1.130 when it was 1.134. That is next to nothing - it was NOT the significant problem causing my handgun to lock up like the proverbial Scotsman's purse.
The esteemed Terry Murbach stated that he has loaded Oregon Trail bullets into many pistols without problems. I would never have any reason to doubt what he says. But when I researched some Handloader articles, I noted that they, too, have loaded Oregon Trail. But definitely not using the COAL that Oregon Trail uses! I suspect that this was the case with Mr. Murbach, as well.
It would have had to be. Take a gander of the bullet as loaded to precise Oregon Trail specs (below) - 3.130 " COAL. As even Mr. Murbach noted, the shank is showing - the bullet is way too long NOT to be caught into the barrel leade as it leaves the ramp!
LEFT TO RIGHT:
1) My first load, 1.134" COAL; Caliper error by 4/1000's of an inch
2) Oregon Trail specs, 1.130" (still jammed tightly);
3) Correct load, way below Oregon Trail listing, from Handloader Mag: 1.045"
Note that the ogive reaches to the case mouth; no shank showing.
I get it that one should fit the handload to the firearm. But for those of us who are now handloading for more than one firearm due to the ammunition shortage scandal, one should expect that a bullet will fit a reasonable amount of firearms using the data supplied by the bullet maker, especially when you have paid for their loading manual. After all factory ammo does! Laser Cast data is wrong for their 124 grain 9mm as loaded into guess what - semi-autos. We, uh, don't usually place the most emphasis on loadings for a less critical platform like a 9mm revolver!
Handloader Magazine Issue Nr 282, Feb/Mar 2013, Pg 57 says:
"When using the Oregon Trail Laser Cast 124-grain roundnose, due to its full-caliber, .356-inch shank, it should be seated to an overall length of 1.045 inches. If the shank is seated too far out of the case, it contacts the leade and prevents the cartridge from fully chambering.
Due to this rather deep-seating depth, powder charges must be used as outlined and cannot be
interchanged with bullets that seat to a longer overall cartridge length."
Loads given on the previous page of the magazine, for that round, show a COAL of 1.045" - considerably less than the expected 1.130" as shown in the Oregon Trail Manual, which (by the way) warns the reader "NEVER REDUCE STATED OVERALL LENGTHS" at the bottom
of each page.
The load range for one of my available powders, as found in the Handloader article, is:
Titegroup 1.045" (much deeper than Oregon Trail's suggestion)
2.2 gr. for 742 fps (Minimum)
2.8 gr. for 930 fps (Maximum)
I checked out the loads' potential to create pressure problems due to the deeper seating of the bullet. QuickLoad verified that this is not a compressed load and pressure is safely within SAAMI suggested limits for the 9mm Luger / 9mm Parabellum load.
Guess what - that bullet with 1.045" fit the S&W mentioned, without a hitch. It chambered again and again. The whole problem had been exacerbated when I called Oregon Trail to confirm their COAL. The lady on the phone, and then the person with whom she conferred, both insisted that this is what I should use. When I quoted other bullet overall lengths and stated that they were from load manuals using their specified bullet, I was told that "other companies aren't necessarily familiar with the formulation of our bullet" or words very close to that effect.
I was finally advised that this bullet won't work with the pistol I am using. Hmmm...500 bullets ending up to be completely useless. Thank goodness I proved them totally wrong.
As a footnote, my problem was not the only one, where Oregon Trail bullets with their specs created a locked up handgun. Other 9mm pistols that will not take this round using Oregon Trail specs are:
Kimber 1911
S&W 5906
Taurus PT917
This info is per one correspondent who started the thread, "Problem with Laser-Cast
9mm 124g RN" at:
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthr ... ?p=3760511
I am sure that there are more out there. All you have to do is just look at the bullets above, as I did, and then as Mr. Murbach did, to conclude that the bullet is too long to load properly into a semi-auto chamber from the magazine.
So, I reiterate my gripe, and a warning to handloaders who use the Oregon Trail data or their book.
With the 9mm 124 grain bullet, and possibly others, you had better look elsewhere for your load data. Seat this bullet, at least, more deeply, taking care to also reduce the amount of propellant. Of course, one needs to use established, reliable data as a guideline. It is out there - in the Accurate loading manual, on LoadData.com, and elsewhere.
Oregon Trail bullets are top notch. But their technical support really let me down.
.***
