Blue Dot vs VV 3N38

Discussion in 'Reloading Room' started by YamahaWR200, Aug 31, 2011.

  1. Hey all,
    I am just curious what you guys think about blue dot compared to 3N38. I just got some (3N38) but haven't shot it yet. I saw someone post some data he took with a chrono using blue dot out of a carbine and it was STAGGERING!!!

    I just wanted to know what your opinions on this were. Because blue dot is like half the price of 3N38 (I think) and blue dot is MUCH more available. I looked on the burn charts and they are like right next to each other. So what do you all think about these number? Real? Fake? +P??


    Quote:

    I have just finished testing some of my 9mm reloads in my Hi-Point 995 carbine. I wondered if a person could improve the performance of the 9mm by using slower powders in compressed loads to take advantage of the longer 16" barrel. From what I have found out the answer is yes, and quite a dramatic improvement as well. Here is the chrono data. I recorded the chrono output with my video camera and wrote down the numbers afterwards. Made for much faster testing.

    My reloads: CCI small pistol primer, 115 grain Winchster HP bullets, and range pickup 9mm brass. (All numbers are in FPS.) Temp was about 15F. Chronograph was about 4 feet from the muzzle.

    7.5 Blue Dot

    1599
    1640
    1640
    1620
    1650
    1569
    1549
    1580
    1608

    8.0 Blue Dot

    1590
    1735
    1687
    1653
    1607
    1673
    1691

    8.5 Blue Dot (Max non +P load)

    1838
    1719
    1817
    1763
    1694
    1724
    1649

    Quote:

    Thanks
     
  2. zombiekiller

    zombiekiller Member

    1,208
    12
    I've never used 3N38 but have gone through several lbs of Bluedot. I'd say those numbers are pretty accurate. I don't use that heavy of a charge and I shoot cast 9mm bullets at about 130 grain getting a FPS of about 1,330 from the 995. I find that the larger cast bullet compresses bluedot too much for my comfort at the charges noted but may be fine with the 115 grain bullets. Also, I highly doubt any decent accuracy out of a 9mm going 1,800 fps.
     

  3. Ha I agree. And the guy later on in his post said the accuracy was not good and he backed it off a substantial amount. (Maybe to around 1500 i think??) I was just surprised at how high those numbers were. I want to get a 995 and try pushing the 147gr bullets. I would be happy with around 1500ish... Just wondering if that is even reasonable.

    And again about the powders for anyone that has tried them..
     
  4. And, how the heck do I turn notify on.. I can't figure it out now that it has been changed.. It says I am subscribed... But I am not being notified..
     
  5. zombiekiller

    zombiekiller Member

    1,208
    12
    147 grain fmj at 1,500 fps would be close to if not over max case pressure. You might be able to get there safely with fair accuracy if you can find 147 grain lead cast bullets due to the automatic bump in fps from the lead bearing surface. 1,300-1,350 would be doable for 147 jacketed. Using bluedot I find I can pretty much add 300-330 fps to the load data when going from the pistol to the carbine. Most pistol powder is 200-250 but it's a bit higher with the slower burning bluedot.
     
  6. And if you look at VV 3N38 (And I assume blue dot is right therewith it), there is a 1207 fps 147gr Hornady XTP load out of a 4" barrel. Which, adding 300-330 to that, would run right around 1500..
     
  7. zombiekiller

    zombiekiller Member

    1,208
    12
    Actually, bluedot is right at 1,000 fps with max recommended powder charge for a 147grain bullet. So if you're looking at max fps for a heavier bullet 3N38 may be the way to go as long as it also nets the addl 300fps from a carbine like the bluedot does. Give it a try and let us know the results because I've never used VV 3N38 so you could be on to something here.
     
  8. As 3N38 was designed for 9mm high vel loads it should work great. Personally I'd try both std primers & mag primers and see if there was a difference in vel.
     
  9. Also, I would use the Lee FCD on both Blue Dot & 3N38.
     
  10. Yeah. But that doesn't make any sense. Because Power Pistol loads are up to 1095 with a 147gr. And Blue Dot is a slower burning powder which should decrease the pressure. (I would imagine) So I am thinking that for some reason Alliant didn't actually put in the same effort for loads using it as they did for PP.

    I want to, but don't own a FCD. I use the bullet seater die to seat the bullets and then run it in another half turn and crimp. It does a really nice job the way it is. (Although i'm sure a FCD would be better) I pulled a plated bullet a couple weeks ago and the crimp groove on it was perfect..


    Oh, and I don't own a 995. (YET!!) So I couldn't get those numbers for anyone.. I was just showing everyone those numbers from another site. And I was curious if (out of a 4" barrel) I could expect the same performance from Blue Dot as 3N38.. Cause as I said, it is like half the price...
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2011
  11. Most likely not. Ain't much new in reloading. One has to stop & think:

    1. Both Blue Dot and 9mm have been around for a long time.
    2. A lot of guys reload.
    3. A lot of guys like high power load.
    4. If it ain't been done yet, there is a reason.

    FWIW:
    Just looking @ the data that was listed in the 1st post of this thread one can see that there is something wrong with those loads. The 1st hint is you have to have 32 shots of each load.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2011
  12. What do you mean you need 32 shots of each load?
     
  13. You need 32 to be able to do SD, extreme velo spread, etc. Needing 32 samples is a basic rule of math.
     

  14. I will have to disagree with you there.. Because someone that wants to be more accurate with results will do more. That sounds to me to be an arbitrary number that someone "chose" as a good number. Definitely not a basic rule of math... You can have as many or as few numbers as you want and still be able to get all the information..
     
  15. Take a college math course. It is indeed a basic rule of math. Also, test it for yourself with a your chrono.
     
  16. The other powder that may work for you & is cheaper is Accurate #7.
     
  17. I am currently enrolled in Calc II in college.. How high in calculus do I need to go before I see this? I will be taking calc III next semester and differential equations the semester after that. And as I said, I have never seen that. You can determine all of those figures with 2 or more readings.. As I said, the only thing is, the larger the sample size, the more precision and less % error. But it is not "required." If that is a "general rule" for ammunition testing, then also please let me know.

    I don't own a chronograph, but maybe that is how a chronograph calculates that? (If it even can) But again, as I understand it, it is not necessary..

    And if I am wrong, please point me in the direction of where to find that so I can learn something new.

    No hard feelings either buddy. I am asking so I know..
     
  18. And I have looked into the Accurate powders, but they all seem too... I guess the best word would be "specific." Most of the load data I have seen for them, seem to be fairly bullet weight specific. (Although I am focusing on the 147gr bullet hauling a** anyway, so I guess I am not asking for a multi-purpose powder) ha ha
     
  19. Jungle George

    Jungle George Member

    1,110
    0
    As Mark Twain said, "There are three types of lies: lies, darned lies (PG version) and statistics.

    There is nothing magical about the number 32 where standard deviation is concerned. Standard deviation is simply a tool that can help you do things such as help you determine if there is an adequate amount of precision in the data set that has been generated.

    The sample size is in large part dependent upon the population size as a whole. For example utilizing 32 data points to determine the median income of a country would be woefully insufficient. On the other other end of the spectrum, it is way more than enough to determine if a certain load or loading procedure is producing consistent results.

    As a real life example of what I am talking about you can go to the Federal Register and look up 40 CFR Part 136 Appendix B and you will see that the sample size required to determine the Method Detection Limit for Analytical methodologies using a 99% confidence level utilizes a population of 10 or less data points and incorporates a student t value that varies with the population size.

    You don't have to understand a single word of the previous paragraph other than 10 data points is much less than 32 and is perfectly okee dokee to use. This is a promulgated regulation that has undergone the scrutiny of a national peer review.

    That all being said, I found the data in the original post to vary more than I personally would be comfortable with. If I had generated data like that I would examine my process control. I would want to make sure that my charges were consistent. If I was measuring X grains of powder I would weigh each charge and determine what sort of variation I was getting. I would then work my way through the entire process looking at one variable at a time until I obtained data that demonstrated to my satisfaction that my process controls were effective in making consistent ammunition.

    Only then would I move on to a variable such as differing powder charges. Finally when I could get consistent data within each set of charges is the time that I would draw inferences as to what was going on by varying the charge amount.
     
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2011

  20. Yeah.. I agree with you. And I believe that he was mentioning that in his posts on the other forum (Whichever one it was. I don't remember) I thought I remembered him writing that his numbers, the harder he pushed it, the more variation he was getting. So he ended up backing it off.