Jump to content

Reloading 38 special 125 gr Hornady XTPs

Recommended Posts


          Am working on Hornady 125 gr XTPs  in different powders to see the difference in accuracy, if any or much. Once fired Starline brass (soft original load) and the load data I find asks for a COL of 1.455". That seems to have the crimp hit just a scad short of the cannelure on the projectile. (the bullet seems to wants to be set deeper into the case to have the crimp centered in the cannelure) Suggestions, comments?

          And a general question,  I was taught to use as little crimp as possible on 38 special cases. Some reloaders don't crimp them at all if they are soft loads. How drastically does a heavy crimp effect the pressure of the discharged round? I would imagine a heavier crimp would tend to retain the projectile more and cause a higher pressure inside the case? Is that significant?



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hornady 9th is showing 1.450” COL for the 125 XTP.  0.005” difference from your load data, which I would think is no big deal.  Also showing 1.145” and 1.155” for trim and max case lengths, respectively. What are your sized case lengths?

On the crimp issue - Heavier crimp usually goes along with higher initial pressure to get the bullet moving, but I haven’t seen anything that suggests the difference would be drastic.  If you’re looking for slight differences in accuracy due to changing powders, then you need to keep all other variables constant - like primer, case volume, crimp, case length, and seating depth.  Use enough crimp to keep the seating depth fixed if you’re loading and firing multiple rounds or go with no crimp and load/fire one round at a time to make sure recoil isn’t corrupting the seated depth on rounds 2, 3, 4….  The amount of crimp will change with variations in case length also. So, make sure all cases are the same length before crimping.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I only crimp my .38's enough to remove the case flair, but I shoot them in a S&W 686, which is a heavy gun and being a 357 mag has some room in the cylinder if a bullet tended to walk out a little.

While I go nuts with case prep, measurement, powder, distance to lands, etc. for my rifle loads.  I tend to pick a near bottom load with whatever powder I have and stick with it for my target/plinking loads for my pistols. 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • olight.jpg

    Use Promo Code "NJGF10" for 10% Off Regular Items

  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Posts

    • Does this apply to existing NJ FID holders? Or does one still need to renew our current FID card 4 years from today?
    • When did this start? I know its been on the books for years, but they've also circumvented it for years via a camden judge ruling public safety supersedes it (if investigation not complete in that 60 days), and using that as precedent. Is it now being enforce?
    • Thanks I followed up with resolution to the immediate problem, which doesn't seem to reflect well on Identogo. I have my ORI (Woodbine SP). Regarding the CCN (I'm not to that point yet) should I try calling NJSP Firearms DIv, since my local NJSP contact refused to give me any information about id numbers for SP 642?
    • I'll be DAMNED (or perhaps NJ and/or Identogo should be). After failing at electronic enrollment, I went to the "PRINT-N-GO" enrollment section, which I had previously used for fingerprint cards for out-of state CHP applications. I received the same "Multiple matches" error. I started playing around with my personal information fields, and discovered that the apparent culprit is my phone number! I supplied my mobile phone number, since I plan to use that on my SP 642 (and since my land-line number may be going away soon). My mobile service is through Ting, which is a pay-as-you-go T-Mobile reseller. When I changed the PRINT-N-GO form to use my land line number, I was allowed to proceed! So, I went back to the electronic fingerprinting enrollment form, entered the land-line number, and it look slike all is good to go (I am up to the point where I am prompted to enter my ORI - I will update if I encounter more obstacles). But how effed up is that restriction? I must assume that sometime in the distant past (I have had the number for 4 - 5 years) my number was assigned to someone else who created an Identogo record. Um, in spite of the option to keep a number when changing providers, mobile numers get reassigned ALL THE TIME. Unless my assumptions are incorrect and there is some alternative explanation, this would seem to be biting a significant number of people in the a$$; not just applicants for concealed carry, but people applying for government jobs, etc. If I did not have my other phone number, I would  be stuck with no recourse except possibly to try to contact someone at Identigo who could conprehend and rectify the matter, and I suspect that would be an extremely long and frustrating process, if even proved to be possible. If you intend to enroll for fingerprinting by Identogo as part of your SP642 applications, you should be aware of this potential glitch. SHEESH!!!!
  • Create New...