Posting Loads Above Current Maximums---PLEASE READ!

[Johnny Guest]

THIS IS IMPORTANT- - - - -

In the spirit of advancing knowledge and encouraging the open sharing of information amongst The Firing Line forum members, the near-unrestricted posting of handloading information, and specific loads is allowed.

HOWEVER---
We owe it to one another to include proper cautions whenever we post ANY load in excess of published information. To fail in this duty may well endanger our forum associates, either their firearms or their health.

In most of the other forums, if someone posts information in error, or in rash disregard of courtesy or propriety, little or no lasting harm is done. When dealing with high-powered firearms and the care and feeding thereof, though, someone could easily get hurt.

I am well aware that many loads have been acceptable in the past, and have been published in older loading manuals and magazine articles. I still happily use certain of these loads in MY own firearms, and do not feel I am at risk. Do as you wish with YOUR firearms and when you are placing only YOURSELF at risk.

If you wish to share such OLD loading data, please specifically quote the exact source, with the note that it is now considered over max. With NEW data you have worked up and which is beyond currently published maximums, PLEASE heed this admonition:

At the beginning of your message, insert in BOLD type a no-uncertain-terms cautionary note, such as:

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

You are not constrained to use this exact language, but please feel free to cut and past it into your message.

As a forum moderator, I feel very strongly about this, and will not hesitate to completely delete, or heavily edit any post which I believe violates the spirit of this procedure.

Please understand: I am not attempting to restrict what you send in a private e-mail, nor anything you wish to put on YOUR private web site. But I feel this procedure is important to protect one another, the TFL staff, and Rich Lucibella.

Thanks for your cooperation in this regard.

Johnny Guest
Handloading & Reloading Forum Moderator
The Firing Line

[Edited by Johnny Guest on 04-30-2001 at 12:24 PM]

[WESHOOT2]

Any load data I pass on is "USE AT YOUR OWN RISK", but almost always it's below maximum in any gun.

There's a saying I read in an older Speer manual "...but not always...". Please remember that phrase when loading ammo, because it remains true.
And wear safety glasses when handling ammo, or around loading equipment.

Common sense will save you........

[Johnny Guest]

Common sense will save you........

WESHOOT2--
So true, so very true.

Johnny

[Art Eatman]

Gee, Johnny, does this mean I can't tell folks about my secret load for the '06 of 75 grains of Bullseye behind a 220-grain bullet? (It's a bit compressed, of course--but how else to get 4,500 ft/sec, B.V.*?)

, Art

* B.V. is bolt velocity, toward the rear...

[Poodleshooter]

One problem we're going to see is the WIDE difference in load data between loading manuals. I mean, looking at different manuals I have can show great differences. For example, I recently loaded 27 grains of 748 for my .223. One manual showed it as a safe, but hot load. It was 1 grain over in another manual, and .5 grain over in yet a third. The old Winchester data I had showed it as a grain under. You just HAVE to use common sense. Even following puublished data with identical components doesn't ensure safety. An extra heavy crimp or deep seating can change those published results. It's too bad that common sense doesn't exist anymore and that we have to post disclaimers

[nwgunman]

Good point. I never load beyond maximum charges, but as poodleshooter mentioned, there's a lot of variation in reloading data out there. Some of my posted loads have been just under max in one manual, but at mid range in another. I only post loads which I have personally fired and which have not blown up my gun and killed or seriously maimed me. Now, my disadvantage is that my dad really WAS a rocket scientist as well as a handloader and so I learned a cautious, meticulous style of reloading. Who can only say how some less-than-sharp individual will assemble a cartridge? Maybe measure the OAL with a 10 cent Kmart ruler? Stay safe.

[Johnny Guest]

Art--Thank you for sharing that one with us. As you know, I greatly love the .30 USGovt 1906 cartridge. It's a great shame that I am unable to utilize all the wonderful loading data available for it. In which regard, I am concentrating on loads in the 150--180 gr bullet range, so I think your exciting-sounding load is outside my area of immediate interest. I'll bear it in mind, in case I ever feel the need to remove bolt lugs.

Poodleshooter--
Interesting that you comment on .223 and 748 powder. My favorite load for 50 to 55 gr bullets is right around 27.5 gr, which, in my Speer Reloading Manual Number 12 is a half-grain under maximum. And the Hornady Handbook, Fourth Edition, shows 27.5 gr of 748 as THEIR max for their 55 gr bullet.

I understand that max varies from book to book, but am not too scared if a load in published in a fairly-current manual.

I mentioned my affection for the .30-06 above. My most commonly used load, the 165 bullet with IMR 4350 powder, was a full grain under max in the Speer No. 8 manual when I adopted it. But in the No. 12 Speer, it IS max, and a few tenths OVER max in the Hornady Fourth Edition. This is possibly my favorite quandry, other than some .44 Special LSWC loads. I have loaded and fired literally thousands of those loads, and now the most modern manuals say we are running on the ragged edge with them?

I really have no problem if someone wants to quote a load that was well within standards a few short years back. Due to subtle alterations in powders, or possibly because of better pressure measuring methods, someone now thinks the load is a little too hot. Good enough. I just believe that, as long as we're taking the time to post actual load data, we should toss in the little cautionary note, just to let our friends know that someone else is uneasy with the data.

The situations that really frighten me are those where someone rolls out a list of loads that are clearly WAY over max, for no better reason than to let folks believe he/she is a really advanced experimenter. And, so we worry about a combination of hot primers, max-plus powder, deep seating, hot weather, and too-tight crimp comiing together at the wrong time. And we are forced to worry about what some East Dallas shyster might do to our happy little band.

nwgunman, you make the point well, and set a very good example with your style of hand loading. If I felt that all who read on this board were so meticulous, I wouldn't be particularly concerned. But we must all admit that some novices come shopping for loads with nothing in mind but hyper velocity and huge booms.

As we all know, is DOES boil down to exercise of good judgement and a modicum of common sense. Someone once asked, "Why do we term such a rare commodity, 'COMMON?'"

Thanks for the cooperation and for the excellent observations, friends.

Best,
Johnny

[Southla1]

Thanks Johnny for tht reminder, every now and then we need a wake-up call like that. I haven't counted but I guess I have over a dozen RL Manuals here, and I use all of them, and cross reference all of them. The oldest is a 1965 edition of the Speer #7 up to an almost current Hodgdons #26. In some cases there is a difference of as much as 6 grains in the listed maximum loads with the same powder in some calibers. One such caliber is one of my favorites the Quarter-06 or the 25-06. There are lots of reasons for this such as chamber size, bore diameter, powder lots, bullet types, free bore, ambiant air temperature, lawyers, and one could go on and on. I try to remember to mention these maximums when I do post a load (which is kinda rare) but at times it slips and I, like others need a reminder.

[WESHOOT2]

I didn't say I practice it.......but I really truly ALWAYS wear safety glasses if I intend to touch ANYTHING in my shop that isn't something that I'm reading.

Always.
Not 'almost always'.

PS all my loads are stupid; it's what I do.

[BigG]

would anybody ask somebody else (who they don't know!!) for a recipe when there are beaucoup loading manuals by the MANUFACTURERS of components available for very little, probably no more than a box of factory rolled ammo.

Hell, I won't even accept loads from some of my friends as I know their habits!

[Poodleshooter]

Poodleshooter--
Interesting that you comment on .223 and 748 powder. My favorite load for 50 to 55 gr bullets is right around 27.5 gr, which, in my Speer Reloading Manual Number 12 is a half-grain under maximum. And the Hornady Handbook, Fourth Edition, shows 27.5 gr of 748 as THEIR max for their 55 gr bullet.

I understand that max varies from book to book, but am not too scared if a load in published in a fairly-current manual.

That's a case in point-my 1x7 HBAR spins the jackets off of 55gr Sierra SP's with anything over 27 grains of 748. Failure rate is about 80% on a warm day loaded to 2.250" OAL!!!!

[Bogie]

Disclaimer: I shoot benchrest

A few folks I shoot with have more than once joked about "how to work up the perfect PPC load."

"Keep adding powder until you start to blow primers. Back off a tenth of a grain."

Okay - so we tend to shoot a bit on the "hot" side... 68 gr. custom bullets moving out at 3400 fps. Saw a 300 yard 5-shot group yesterday that was under a half inch. That was no BS...

This is NOT recommended for "normal" rifles (or "normal" folks for that matter...). My match load of 29.5 grains of H322 is about two grains over the published max, and it's safe and accurate in my gun, and was generally safely arrived at... I start popping primers at 29.9, and that is NOT a fun thing to do. Hot gas coming back through the bolt, chunks of primer IN the bolt (instant cleanout time), and it cuts into your firing pin. I definitely wear safety glasses. Just letting my barrel get dirtier than normal increases pressures such that I'm getting cratering, and eventually primers popping. It doesn't take a lot.

I've got a Savage .243 that shoots very well at a grain over published max. And it does so with minimal cratering of primers. I feel comfy shooting it that way. But I know what I'm doing, and I arrived at these loads in a safe manner. FWIW, I've got a .223 that maxes out at the published max loads - that's just the way it is...

If you get REALLY stupid, you're going to either have your rifle seize up (the bolt embeds itself in the receiver due to the pressure), have your chamber blow sideways (do you like being able to see how many fingers you currently possess?), or you're going to shear the lugs off your bolt, and your family is going to have a closed casket funeral for you...

We are NOT playing with toys here. This is serious stuff.

Heck - I saw a .44 magnum that some idjit thought they'd load up - They didn't have any W296, so they substituted an equivalent amount of W700... Whole top of the thing was G-O-N-E...

[Gewehr98]

Here's a couple real quick and dirty answers, especially when there's no factory ammo available:

1. You're reloading for an obsolete cartridge, which so often get dropped by the wayside as current loading manuals go through their latest iterations. Examples include the 6.5x53R Dutch Mannlicher, .32 Remington, 7.62x45 Czechoslovakian, .310 Martini Cadet, and many others that still are quite popular.

2. You're working with a wildcat cartridge for whatever reason, benchrest, target, tactical, hunting, varminting, plinking. You're totally on your own there, as I was with my 6.5-06. That's where you start to query others who have done the same chambering, but obviously with ultimate caution, perhaps even a call or two to the folks at Sierra for starting data, and some software like Load From A Disk to figure out where in the ballpark you want to start.

[Steve Smith]

In addition to Art's load, I guess I can't tell my x-tra special .22 Rem load either. Aww what the h@ll...

CAUTION: The following post includes loading data beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information. It could also make your palms get hairy.

I use a rolling pin to roll out my H110 x-tra fine, then use about 40 grains of the stuff in a .223 Rem case. Sure, it's hard to fit...that's why you roll it out. Then I use a .243 bullet (after belling the case) to make a double X tight gas seal down the barrel, and seat 'er deep and tight. Note, I've had to resort to using my wife's fingernail glue on the primer holes so the primers will stay in....they keep fallin out when I'm shooting. I worked up this load in the winter, but it works great in 100+ degree heat. I typically use this load in one of those "Carbon" AR's because they're so light.

Good Shooting!

[griz]

CAUTION: The following post an attempt at humour. READ AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

OK Steve, I tried your load but can not get a hammer inside the action to seat the bullet into the lands. What's your secret?

[Kframe]

I say forget the "routine warnings" on every questionable post.

Anyone that comes here and reloads bears the responsibility of their own actions, and injury if that's what it takes.

To add a sentence or two to every load-related post would get annoying, both to type, and to have to look at all the time.

Furthermore, to only request it on over-max loads is useless.
So, when someone forgets to add the warning to their post about a great target batch of 9.0gr Bullseye under a 148gr HBWC loaded backward with a crushing crimp, some yahoo will see that there is no overmax warning and figure it's a common load he just has to try!!!
Okay, so I'm being dramatic, but are the moderators really going to check every loading and make sure the appropriate disclaimers are spelled out?
What a pain!

Yes, I understand everyone needs to CYA, but let's just handle it differently.

When you sign up to be a member here, why don't y'all just insert a little disclaimer in a dialog box that we need to X before you get a login name.
Stating that we is right smart folk and if'n we do sumpin dum, its are own durn fault.
And, on the home page for TFL, have a little disclaimer in the corner absolving this site of responsibity.

Problem solved.

That's my $.02, -Kframe

[Southla1]

Steve I was gonna try that load you talked about but in a 22-250 cause I figured I could get more of that powder in it, but when I went looking around in the wife's drawers (KITCHEN drawers dammit ) looking for the rolling pin she done went and took that rolling pin to my head!!!!!

[Steve Smith]

When closing the bolt on a bolt rifle, try pounding it (the bolt) with a hammer....that'll usually get it in. On those Carbon ARs, you have to take the rear pin out, put a punch on the rear of the bolt, andd then smak it with a hammer.

[HankB]

Johnny Guest has a point. For example, the Speer Number 8 reloading manual had a lot of loads for the .357 Magnum that are above current maximums, and in fact, started showing pressure signs in my guns well BELOW the listed maximums. For example, (The following load data is way beyond currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability if you're stupid enough to use this load and end up damaging yourself, your gun, or a bystander.) with a 125 grain JHP, the Speer Number 8 manual listed a maximum load for the .357 of 14.0 grains of SR4756.

Speer is in Lewiston, so maybe they developed this load in winter when it was 30 below zero?

[QA Commando]

This seems like a good thread for this question. I'm loading .223 Rem using Reloder 7 for a 16" barrel AR-15. Alliant, the maker of the powder, shows a maximum charge of 20 gr. with a 55 gr. bullet while the Lyman manual shows the max to be 22 gr. The Speer doesn't describe their test firearm, but the Lyman shows their test rifle to have a 20" barrel with a 1 in 12 twist. My Bushmaster has a 1 in 9 twist. Is there any reason to expect higher pressures simply because of the faster twist rate in the Bushmaster? By the way, I've used a 21.5 gr. charge with little to no primer flattening and no other signs of overpressure. This load gives me real good accuracy, and I'd like to stick with it.

[sw627pc]

HankB,

The .357 cartridge can be tricky. The original SAAMI loads (1930's and 40's vintage) were hotter than anything loaded today (or the SAAMI specs now). But the only guns available were N frame S&W's. With the cartridge now chambered in everything from derringers and J frame sized guns to N frames most books have gotten VERY conservative (so has most factory ammo). My normal load is within spec by one book, over by another, and max in a third. But I only shoot it in either a M27 or a M627. No problems in either of them. In fact, I did play around with some of those 1940's loads once in the M27 (carefully!!!). The last few sets of six (hottest) showed no pressure signs, gun was perfectly happy, MY HAND wasn't!!! Neither were the shooters beside me at the range - they all insisted that I had to be shooting .44 Mag, because a .357 just couldn't be that loud!

[BigG]

I can see how you might want to know about obscure cartridges like 32 Rem or 6.5 Dutch Mannlicher, but most of the questions I see hear concern: Any good 45 ACP loads? Any good 40 S&W loads? Does anybody load 30'06? and so on ad nauseum. I wish I could remember the last time somebody asked about 32 Remington (if ever).

[HankB]

sw627pc, you're right on that. I still use SR4756 with a cast 158 SWC-GC in my M27's, my M28, and my "pre-M27" S&W, using just a hair less than the DuPont handloader's guides USED to recommend, and it seems to be a nice, mild load, less than Speer's #8 manual listed, with none of the pressure signs you'd expect from the latest IMR reloading guide, which indicates its well over max.

I tried it in a Model 686, and got pressure signs! Now, the L-frames ought not be as durable as the N-frames, but, the factors that contribute to pressure like chamber dimensions, throat size, barrel dimensions, etc., should be the same, and the pressure indications should be the same.

But they're not! Which shows the wisdom of the old, old advice that says you have to work up to maximums in EACH INDIVIDUAL gun you're loading for.

[Johnny Guest]

K-Frame---

You certainly have a good point, sir.

I will try to get with systems administrators to let me post a "Standard Disclaimer" that comes up at the top of H&R Forum ALL THE TIME, and to do away with the individual needing to do the extra typing. I understand it is a pain, especially for those who are not-particularly good typists--like me!

Until that time, though, the procedure stands. No, I can't check EACH AND EVERY load written about on this forum--But I see most of 'em, and check a lot.

Please, friends, work with us on this, huh?

Best,
Johnny

[Johnny Guest]

I have been a little remiss about keeping this caution message toward the top of this forum in recent weeks.

I became a little worried about it this afternoon, when a fairly new participant posted some load data concerning .357 magnum with Alliant 2400 powder. It was WAY beyone maximum shown in the first manual that came to hand. I wasn't too personally worried, because the data included the EXACT same load that I used fairly recently. But, I went to the Alliant powder web page, and found the member's load (and mine, remember) was under the maximum listed for that bullet and powder.

Just goes to show you: Not all loading manuals agree. But it sure doesn't hurt to check two or three sources before galloping over to the ragged edge of safety.

BTW--I also got pressure signs when using the load mentioned.

Best regards to all,
Johnny

We can't be