Why do so many people brag about Lyman's manual? - Page 2

Kevin Rohrer · June 12, 2012, 02:47 PM

is Da Bomb for both new and experienced reloaders. Which one did you get?

TennJed · June 12, 2012, 02:48 PM

I have both the lyman and the lee. Both are good. The lee has more but i find the Lyman sufficient. I actual use it mire because it less stuff to flip through.

dickttx · June 12, 2012, 04:11 PM

From the back of the title page of Modern Reloading, Second Edition:

"Load data was assembled from that published by suppliers of the powder with their permission"

I always look there for a starting place, but then usually go to the powder manufacturers site for final data.

As it says somewhere in the book, it is compiled for your convenience. Does anyone really think that any of the manufacturers would NOT want their data included in the Lee manual?

steve4102 · June 12, 2012, 05:02 PM

No, of course not, but why buy it when you can get it for free? Not only free, but more detailed data with actual bullet manufactures etc.

johnjohn · June 12, 2012, 05:05 PM

I have the Lee and the #47 Lyman, and use the Lyman much more.

rclark · June 12, 2012, 05:18 PM

I use Lyman, Hornady, Speer and Lee. Then there is handloader magazines, and others.... Never hurts to cross check loads when using a new (to me) powder. I just don't trust on-line sources (even powder companies) as gospel. I need several sources to feel 'comfortable' before using a load.... That's just me...

I personally like the Lyman manual. It has a good beginner reloader reference in front and plenty of good loads... I shoot mostly lead though as it meets my needs for most everything in revolvers. But again, it isn't the 'only' source. Of course now that I found loads I like for my guns, the manuals are gathering a bit of dust

. For example, .44Spec it's 7.5g of Unique/Universal under 240g SWC.... Not going to be changing that anytime soon! In .357, I have a Red Dot load that I use for all my loads now.

Seems to me the last time I looked there were several loads for .357 and .38 in the Lyman manual...

Paul B. · June 13, 2012, 04:14 PM

Well, as we are addressing loads for the .357 mag. for one,loads in the manuals and in factory ammo have been downloaded for some time.

it wasn't that the loads were dangerous, but that they were shaking the S&W M19 and M66 loose. They were never meant to be shot exclusively with full power .357 mag. loads. Supposedly, you practiced with .38 Spl. ammo, then maybe a cylinder full of the "real stuff" to remember the difference.
I still have a box of .357 mag. ammo made aroun 1960 and shooting that stuff will rapidly get your attention The max load back then when loading your own was 15.5 gr. of HERCULES #2400. Today the max load is 14.0 gr. of ALLIANT #2400. I capitolized the company names to highlight the difference.
The same this has happened with the .44 magnum. It used to be the go to load was Elmer Keith's pet load of 22.0 gr. of HERCULES # 2400. Today it's 20.0 gr. of ALLIANT #2400. Why? Because the M29 and M629 get shot loose in a great big hurry. I ought to know as my 629 has been back to S&W twice The last time it gave up on 250 rounds. These days it gets warmish .44 Spl. level loads and I save the serious stuff for a Ruger Redhawk. I only use my own home cast bullets in my handguns.
Frankly, I think it would not be a lot of fun shooting a 1960's era .357 mag. load in those lightweight snubbies they now sell chambered to the .357 mag. For all I know, they'll probably gut that fine cartridge some more because it hurt the shooter's hand.

However, that load never was a problem in my S&W M28 of my buddies Colt .357 Magnum.
Paul B.

SL1 · June 13, 2012, 04:57 PM

Paul B.

Please don't confuse the excessive loads of Herco in the Lyman #44 Manual with the much more recent down-grading of the SAAMI presssure standards for the .357 and .44 Magnum cartridges. The old SAAMI CUP standard was 46,000 CUP, which was probably less than 50,000 psi. Most modern steel guns like Rugers can shoot those safely, although some of the more recent ultra light weight plastic and aluminum guns might not be able to handle them so well.

In contrast, the ancient Herco loads mentioned here probably produce something like 70,000 psi (based on QuickLOAD estimates). That would be well over proof pressure for the old CUP standard, and WAY beyond proof load for the new SAAMI psi standard. The fact that these loads did not blow-up the Lyman "test" pistol is testament to the quality and margin in the S&W construction of that day.

SL1

snuffy · June 13, 2012, 05:35 PM

Quote:

marklyftogt

We're still waiting for Markly to tell us which Lyman manual he's so upset with.

marklyftogt · June 13, 2012, 05:49 PM

Lyman Reloading Handbook 49th edition...is there one for just pistol which is better?

steve4102 · June 13, 2012, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Lyman Reloading Handbook 49th edition...is there one for just pistol which is better?

How much better can you get than 240 pressure tested loads for you choice of cartridges? How many loads do you want?

m&p45acp10+1 · June 13, 2012, 07:23 PM

Try the Lyman Pistol and revolver 3rd Edition. It has more than twice as many listed loads as any of the others that I saw. Also the one for all load books are great as well. I try to buy one for every rifle caliber that I reload for to have multiple sources to cross reference check in one book.

steve4102 · June 13, 2012, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Try the Lyman Pistol and revolver 3rd Edition. It has more than twice as many listed loads as any of the others that I saw.

No it does not. The Lyman 48-49 lists 117 loads for the 38 Special. The Lyman Cast Handbook #4 lists 118 load for the 38 Special.

tkglazie · June 15, 2012, 09:55 AM

I was also sorely disappointed in the Lyman's 49th. When I first opened it to the section for .38 caliber handgun loads I thought mine had pages missing. There are under 50 loads, total, for 5 different .380 bullet types. For 9mm, there is not a single load using N320.

But hey, who uses N320 for 9mm loads anyway, right?

snuffy · June 15, 2012, 10:17 AM

Man, some people won't be satisfied unless they're hung with a new rope!

Quote:

But hey, who uses N320 for 9mm loads anyway, right?

Apparently only you! There's a reason they didn't list it. They tried it, found it too fast for 9mm!

Or just not accurate.

I came up with 155 loads for 38 special. That's counting the +P loads, if you can't find something with that selection, then maybe you should give up reloading, shoot factory.

Salmoneye · June 15, 2012, 12:38 PM

Quote:

But hey, who uses N320 for 9mm loads anyway, right?

You can probably find what you want by downloading the free VV load manual...

http://www.eabco.com/VihtaVuori01.pdf

tkglazie · June 15, 2012, 01:59 PM

I can get the data elsewhere, but to omit one of the more popular and effective powders for 9mm is just stupid.

mikld · June 15, 2012, 03:12 PM

Regardless of the amount of .38 Special load data, Lyman manuals are suggested to new reloaders because of the "how to" sections and the other info in the front of the book (3rd Edition Cast Bullet Handbook has info on sizing, lubes, alloys, and how to cast articles)...

BTW; what's N320?

Salmoneye · June 15, 2012, 03:17 PM

Quote:

I can get the data elsewhere, but to omit one of the more popular and effective powders for 9mm is just stupid.

I don't suppose that they did not include it for the very fact that the recipes are so easily available elsewhere...

For free...

Nah...

tkglazie · June 15, 2012, 05:38 PM

Quote:

BTW; what's N320?

The cleanest powder you will find for 9mm, and accurate. Try 3.3-3.5gr under a 147gr LFP at 1.150-1.160". 900fps of pure buttery goodness. Works extremely well with 124gr Berry's HBFP as well, 3.9-4.0gr will get you 1000fps at 1.100". Shoot this load all day and you will barely know you fired a shot by looking at the barrel.

tkglazie · June 15, 2012, 05:45 PM

Quote:

I don't suppose that they did not include it for the very fact that the recipes are so easily available elsewhere...

I know, because the W231 data is SO hard to find. How did they ever come up with those exotic loads? Not to mention they dont even bother to put the W in front of the 231, nor do they indicate that HP38 is the same powder, or make any reference to it at all for that matter.

Lyman's 49th load data is incomplete and lazy, period. As others have mentioned, it is a good reference for a new reloader, but as a load data manual it is way, way down on the list.

snuffy · June 15, 2012, 06:31 PM

Quote:

The cleanest powder you will find for 9mm, and accurate.

You didn't answer his question, at least not completely. It's Vihtavuori N320, a powder from Finland.

As to how it works, I don't know, it's not available locally, I'd have to order it and pay hazmat on top of it being much more expensive to start with.

If you already knew those loads, why whine about them not being in the Lyman manual? It costs tall dollars to completely test any given powder bullet combo. With all the other powders available, they either elected to not include it, or as I said, it didn't work well for them when tested.

http://www.sinclairintl.com/.aspx/pi...ri-N320-Powder

JerryM · June 15, 2012, 06:56 PM

I suppose if one was a dedicated cast bullet guy he would like the Lyman. I have used is some, but not much. I have most of the current crop of manuals, and if I did not have the Lyman I would not miss it.
Jerry

Salmoneye · June 15, 2012, 08:36 PM

Quote:

I know, because the W231 data is SO hard to find.

I'd love to have a copy of the free load data from Winchester listing W-231...

Link?

BDS-THR · June 15, 2012, 09:08 PM

Here you go (starts on page 26 of pdf) - www.hodgdon.com/PDF/Hodgdon%20Basic%20Manual.pdf

June 12, 2012, 02:47 PM	#26
Kevin Rohrer Senior Member Join Date: May 19, 2010 Location: Medina, Ohio Posts: 1,049	Lyman #49 is Da Bomb for both new and experienced reloaders. Which one did you get? __________________ Member: Orange Gunsite Family, NRA--Life, ARTCA, and American Legion. Caveat Emptor: Cavery Grips/AmericanGripz/Prestige Grips/Stealth Grips from Clayton, NC. He is a scammer

June 12, 2012, 04:11 PM	#28
dickttx Senior Member Join Date: May 29, 2011 Location: Fort Worth Posts: 500	From the back of the title page of Modern Reloading, Second Edition: "Load data was assembled from that published by suppliers of the powder with their permission" I always look there for a starting place, but then usually go to the powder manufacturers site for final data. As it says somewhere in the book, it is compiled for your convenience. Does anyone really think that any of the manufacturers would NOT want their data included in the Lee manual? __________________ Education teaches you the rules, experience teaches you the exceptions (Plagiarized from Claude Clay)

June 12, 2012, 05:18 PM	#31
rclark Senior Member Join Date: February 12, 2009 Location: Butte, MT Posts: 2,622	I use Lyman, Hornady, Speer and Lee. Then there is handloader magazines, and others.... Never hurts to cross check loads when using a new (to me) powder. I just don't trust on-line sources (even powder companies) as gospel. I need several sources to feel 'comfortable' before using a load.... That's just me... I personally like the Lyman manual. It has a good beginner reloader reference in front and plenty of good loads... I shoot mostly lead though as it meets my needs for most everything in revolvers. But again, it isn't the 'only' source. Of course now that I found loads I like for my guns, the manuals are gathering a bit of dust . For example, .44Spec it's 7.5g of Unique/Universal under 240g SWC.... Not going to be changing that anytime soon! In .357, I have a Red Dot load that I use for all my loads now. Seems to me the last time I looked there were several loads for .357 and .38 in the Lyman manual... __________________ A clinger and deplorable, MAGA, and life NRA member. When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Single Action .45 Colt (Sometimes colloquially referred to by its alias as the .45 'Long' Colt or .45LC). Don't leave home without it. That said, the .44Spec is right up their too... but the .45 Colt is still the king.

June 13, 2012, 04:14 PM	#32
Paul B. Senior Member Join Date: March 28, 1999 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 3,802	Well, as we are addressing loads for the .357 mag. for one,loads in the manuals and in factory ammo have been downloaded for some time. it wasn't that the loads were dangerous, but that they were shaking the S&W M19 and M66 loose. They were never meant to be shot exclusively with full power .357 mag. loads. Supposedly, you practiced with .38 Spl. ammo, then maybe a cylinder full of the "real stuff" to remember the difference. I still have a box of .357 mag. ammo made aroun 1960 and shooting that stuff will rapidly get your attention The max load back then when loading your own was 15.5 gr. of HERCULES #2400. Today the max load is 14.0 gr. of ALLIANT #2400. I capitolized the company names to highlight the difference. The same this has happened with the .44 magnum. It used to be the go to load was Elmer Keith's pet load of 22.0 gr. of HERCULES # 2400. Today it's 20.0 gr. of ALLIANT #2400. Why? Because the M29 and M629 get shot loose in a great big hurry. I ought to know as my 629 has been back to S&W twice The last time it gave up on 250 rounds. These days it gets warmish .44 Spl. level loads and I save the serious stuff for a Ruger Redhawk. I only use my own home cast bullets in my handguns. Frankly, I think it would not be a lot of fun shooting a 1960's era .357 mag. load in those lightweight snubbies they now sell chambered to the .357 mag. For all I know, they'll probably gut that fine cartridge some more because it hurt the shooter's hand. However, that load never was a problem in my S&W M28 of my buddies Colt .357 Magnum. Paul B. __________________ COMPROMISE IS NOT AN OPTION!

June 13, 2012, 05:49 PM	#35
marklyftogt Senior Member Join Date: March 11, 2012 Location: Salinas, CA Posts: 138	Since you asked.......... Lyman Reloading Handbook 49th edition...is there one for just pistol which is better?

June 12, 2012, 02:48 PM	#27
TennJed Senior Member Join Date: September 26, 2010 Posts: 1,536	I have both the lyman and the lee. Both are good. The lee has more but i find the Lyman sufficient. I actual use it mire because it less stuff to flip through.

June 12, 2012, 05:02 PM	#29
steve4102 Senior Member Join Date: December 23, 2005 Location: Minnesota Posts: 2,955	No, of course not, but why buy it when you can get it for free? Not only free, but more detailed data with actual bullet manufactures etc.

June 12, 2012, 05:05 PM	#30
johnjohn Senior Member Join Date: November 6, 2009 Location: Baton Rouge La. Posts: 122	I have the Lee and the #47 Lyman, and use the Lyman much more.

June 13, 2012, 04:57 PM	#33
SL1 Senior Member Join Date: November 8, 2007 Posts: 2,001	Paul B. Please don't confuse the excessive loads of Herco in the Lyman #44 Manual with the much more recent down-grading of the SAAMI presssure standards for the .357 and .44 Magnum cartridges. The old SAAMI CUP standard was 46,000 CUP, which was probably less than 50,000 psi. Most modern steel guns like Rugers can shoot those safely, although some of the more recent ultra light weight plastic and aluminum guns might not be able to handle them so well. In contrast, the ancient Herco loads mentioned here probably produce something like 70,000 psi (based on QuickLOAD estimates). That would be well over proof pressure for the old CUP standard, and WAY beyond proof load for the new SAAMI psi standard. The fact that these loads did not blow-up the Lyman "test" pistol is testament to the quality and margin in the S&W construction of that day. SL1

June 13, 2012, 07:23 PM	#37
m&p45acp10+1 Senior Member Join Date: May 3, 2009 Location: Central Texas Posts: 3,930	Try the Lyman Pistol and revolver 3rd Edition. It has more than twice as many listed loads as any of the others that I saw. Also the one for all load books are great as well. I try to buy one for every rifle caliber that I reload for to have multiple sources to cross reference check in one book. __________________ No matter how many times you do it and nothing happens it only takes something going wrong one time to kill you.

June 15, 2012, 09:55 AM	#39
tkglazie Senior Member Join Date: December 3, 2011 Posts: 558	I was also sorely disappointed in the Lyman's 49th. When I first opened it to the section for .38 caliber handgun loads I thought mine had pages missing. There are under 50 loads, total, for 5 different .380 bullet types. For 9mm, there is not a single load using N320. But hey, who uses N320 for 9mm loads anyway, right?

June 15, 2012, 01:59 PM	#42
tkglazie Senior Member Join Date: December 3, 2011 Posts: 558	I can get the data elsewhere, but to omit one of the more popular and effective powders for 9mm is just stupid.

June 15, 2012, 03:12 PM	#43
mikld Senior Member Join Date: February 7, 2009 Location: Southern Oregon! Posts: 2,891	Regardless of the amount of .38 Special load data, Lyman manuals are suggested to new reloaders because of the "how to" sections and the other info in the front of the book (3rd Edition Cast Bullet Handbook has info on sizing, lubes, alloys, and how to cast articles)... BTW; what's N320? __________________ My Anchor is holding fast! I've learned how to stand on my own two knees...

June 15, 2012, 06:56 PM	#48
JerryM Senior Member Join Date: April 4, 1999 Location: New Mexico Posts: 1,889	I suppose if one was a dedicated cast bullet guy he would like the Lyman. I have used is some, but not much. I have most of the current crop of manuals, and if I did not have the Lyman I would not miss it. Jerry __________________ Ecclesiastes 12:13 ¶Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. 14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

June 15, 2012, 09:08 PM	#50
BDS-THR Senior Member Join Date: June 12, 2010 Posts: 479	Here you go (starts on page 26 of pdf) - www.hodgdon.com/PDF/Hodgdon%20Basic%20Manual.pdf