Which Reloading Manuals? - Page 2

wncchester · October 1, 2010, 09:04 PM

"For a medium load to be hot enough to drop primers, well it smells fishy."

Extruded the head into the ejector slot as well as blew his primers! And my mind too.

I can't verify his charges but he had the three swollen cases and two of the primers in a pill bottle. As a new loader with a new rifle and a problem he had gone to the local gun shop to ask for explaination; the counter dufus had no idea. I took his obviously over loaded cases, went to a store manual, opened to his cartridge and read his stated charge, right in the middle of the range. Not skilled, but clearly an intelligent man, he swore he had weighed the charges correctly so he had felt the first must be an anomoly, ditto the second. But when he got the third he quit and went to find help; I believe him, and I don't believe much of what I hear and read.

Why? Combination of a tight chamber, tight bore, little hotter than normal cap, slightly large bullets, slightly thicker cases, a little faster lot of Varget, long OAL, hot day, could add to do the deed. But, had he started on the low end it would not have happened.

TXGunNut · October 1, 2010, 10:31 PM

So true, wncchester. Recently tried to use loads developed for a loose-chambered WW M670 in a very tight WW M70. Old rifle likes max loads, new one likes mild. Old rifle likes powder X, new rifle likes powder Y. Old rifle likes...you get the point. New rifle had other issues, but it definitely has a unique personality. New rule: new rifle, new load, clean sheet of paper. Reloading is about tailoring a load to a certain rifle; start low, work up to optimum loads.
The more I load, the more I'm amazed at how well factory loads work.

RWBlue01 · October 1, 2010, 10:39 PM

Quote:

"For a medium load to be hot enough to drop primers, well it smells fishy."

Extruded the head into the ejector slot as well as blew his primers! And my mind too.

I can't verify his charges but he had the three swollen cases and two of the primers in a pill bottle. As a new loader with a new rifle and a problem he had gone to the local gun shop to ask for explaination; the counter dufus had no idea. I took his obviously over loaded cases, went to a store manual, opened to his cartridge and read his stated charge, right in the middle of the range. Not skilled, but clearly an intelligent man, he swore he had weighed the charges correctly so he had felt the first must be an anomoly, ditto the second. But when he got the third he quit and went to find help; I believe him, and I don't believe much of what I hear and read.

Why? Combination of a tight chamber, tight bore, little hotter than normal cap, slightly large bullets, slightly thicker cases, a little faster lot of Varget, long OAL, hot day, could add to do the deed. But, had he started on the low end it would not have happened.

That is just wild. I have never seen anything like it with a proper medium book load.

I have been told that factory ammo falls in the middle to high end of the load data.

If it is the rifle, he should have issues with factory ammo. (On a hot day with one box of ammo, my Steyr with it's tight chamber has a sticky bolt.)

If it is his load or components, factory ammo should be no problem.

Brian Pfleuger · October 1, 2010, 11:04 PM

I have heard (read, really) multiple reports from well-respected individuals of manual starting loads being badly over pressure. It is rare. Very rare, but it does happen.

TXGunNut · October 1, 2010, 11:15 PM

The Hodgdon site lists max loads that are indeed max, IMHO. Their max loads are in my experience loads that should be approached from a long ways off and with extreme caution. Not all rifles like max loads, may be safe to say most don't. What's important is determining what your rifle likes.

wvshooter · October 3, 2010, 01:25 AM

I like the Sierra book. Of all the manuals I have it has the most complete information regarding the various reloading tools and the techniques for using them that I have found.

Crashbox · October 3, 2010, 02:30 PM

I agree with others who say it is best to start at the minimum published load and work up from there.

However, if you have more than one manual then I believe more objective discernment is in order. For example, I have both Lyman's 49th and the latest Hornady manuals. When I look at published data for the .357 Magnum, IIRC (I'm at the coffee shop so I do not have the books in front of me) the MAX load for H-110 behind a 125-grain JHP in the Hornady manual is lower than the MINIMUM load in the Lyman 49th. Which one do I use? Hmmm... well, for example, if I have an older gun which may not have the durability of some newer ones, I would use the least charge from whatever manuals I have at my disposal and work up carefully from there. On the other hand, if I have a new, reputably stout gun, I may *elect* to start with the minimum from one of the lesser-conservative manuals and carefully work up from there. Therefore, I must also conclude that having more than one manual does give some (perhaps necessary) degree of flexibility, in my opinion.

I must note that in the example above I wouldn't even THINK of running such a round in a gun that was built like anything less than a tank!

Just my opinion.

Brian Pfleuger · October 3, 2010, 03:17 PM

One more reason why I think QuickLoad is better than any manual....

I want to find the powder that gives me maximum performance from the bullet that I choose. While the ranking system might be slightly out of order in exact ranking, no other method exists for producing a performance based list.

Two examples:

I chose IMR 3031 to go along with the Barnes 110gr TTSX bullet for my deer load in 7mm-08. I chose it based on QuickLoads prediction of muzzle velocity with relatively low muzzle pressure. There does not, as far as I can tell, exist official load data for that combination.

I wanted to load a lightning fast bullet for woodchucks in 22-250. I chose the Nolser 35gr BT bullet and used QuickLoad to find the highest possible muzzle velocity. It says Win748 is king. Once again, official load data is non-existent for this combination but QuickLoad is dead on. This bullet and powder combination is sub-MOA accurate and is like a laser beam, point blank range is pushing 330 yards, and I would never have discovered it with "official" sources. It chronies at over 4400fps, within 30fps of QL predictions, and is still below max load.

QuickLoad is not always precisely right, does have a fairly steep learning curve and a number of "tweaking" requirements, but there is simply no other way to gather so much information for virtually every cartridge and bullet combination ever conceived and virtually all modern powders. Muzzle pressure, barrel time, velocity, peak pressure, pressure rise time, various real-world and theoretical combinations, best velocity predictions, recoil calculations, direct output to a trajectory program..... on and on....

You can't beat it.

TXGunNut · October 3, 2010, 11:26 PM

Guess I need to learn a few new tricks. Quickload could be useful in future bottleneck cartridge projects. I'll still use my stack of manuals but can't have too much info, IMHO.

October 1, 2010, 11:04 PM	#29
Brian Pfleuger Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 25, 2008 Location: Austin, CO Posts: 19,694	I have heard (read, really) multiple reports from well-respected individuals of manual starting loads being badly over pressure. It is rare. Very rare, but it does happen. __________________ https://ecommercearms.com I am the owner/operator! Ask me for custom prices! No sales tax outside CO!

October 3, 2010, 03:17 PM	#33
Brian Pfleuger Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 25, 2008 Location: Austin, CO Posts: 19,694	One more reason why I think QuickLoad is better than any manual.... I want to find the powder that gives me maximum performance from the bullet that I choose. While the ranking system might be slightly out of order in exact ranking, no other method exists for producing a performance based list. Two examples: I chose IMR 3031 to go along with the Barnes 110gr TTSX bullet for my deer load in 7mm-08. I chose it based on QuickLoads prediction of muzzle velocity with relatively low muzzle pressure. There does not, as far as I can tell, exist official load data for that combination. I wanted to load a lightning fast bullet for woodchucks in 22-250. I chose the Nolser 35gr BT bullet and used QuickLoad to find the highest possible muzzle velocity. It says Win748 is king. Once again, official load data is non-existent for this combination but QuickLoad is dead on. This bullet and powder combination is sub-MOA accurate and is like a laser beam, point blank range is pushing 330 yards, and I would never have discovered it with "official" sources. It chronies at over 4400fps, within 30fps of QL predictions, and is still below max load. QuickLoad is not always precisely right, does have a fairly steep learning curve and a number of "tweaking" requirements, but there is simply no other way to gather so much information for virtually every cartridge and bullet combination ever conceived and virtually all modern powders. Muzzle pressure, barrel time, velocity, peak pressure, pressure rise time, various real-world and theoretical combinations, best velocity predictions, recoil calculations, direct output to a trajectory program..... on and on.... You can't beat it. __________________ https://ecommercearms.com I am the owner/operator! Ask me for custom prices! No sales tax outside CO! Last edited by Brian Pfleuger; October 3, 2010 at 03:32 PM.

October 1, 2010, 09:04 PM	#26
wncchester Senior Member Join Date: December 1, 2002 Posts: 2,832	"For a medium load to be hot enough to drop primers, well it smells fishy." Extruded the head into the ejector slot as well as blew his primers! And my mind too. I can't verify his charges but he had the three swollen cases and two of the primers in a pill bottle. As a new loader with a new rifle and a problem he had gone to the local gun shop to ask for explaination; the counter dufus had no idea. I took his obviously over loaded cases, went to a store manual, opened to his cartridge and read his stated charge, right in the middle of the range. Not skilled, but clearly an intelligent man, he swore he had weighed the charges correctly so he had felt the first must be an anomoly, ditto the second. But when he got the third he quit and went to find help; I believe him, and I don't believe much of what I hear and read. Why? Combination of a tight chamber, tight bore, little hotter than normal cap, slightly large bullets, slightly thicker cases, a little faster lot of Varget, long OAL, hot day, could add to do the deed. But, had he started on the low end it would not have happened.

October 1, 2010, 10:31 PM	#27
TXGunNut Senior Member Join Date: January 16, 2010 Location: If you have to ask... Posts: 2,860	So true, wncchester. Recently tried to use loads developed for a loose-chambered WW M670 in a very tight WW M70. Old rifle likes max loads, new one likes mild. Old rifle likes powder X, new rifle likes powder Y. Old rifle likes...you get the point. New rifle had other issues, but it definitely has a unique personality. New rule: new rifle, new load, clean sheet of paper. Reloading is about tailoring a load to a certain rifle; start low, work up to optimum loads. The more I load, the more I'm amazed at how well factory loads work.

October 1, 2010, 11:15 PM	#30
TXGunNut Senior Member Join Date: January 16, 2010 Location: If you have to ask... Posts: 2,860	The Hodgdon site lists max loads that are indeed max, IMHO. Their max loads are in my experience loads that should be approached from a long ways off and with extreme caution. Not all rifles like max loads, may be safe to say most don't. What's important is determining what your rifle likes.

October 3, 2010, 01:25 AM	#31
wvshooter Senior Member Join Date: October 20, 2007 Location: Charleston, WV Posts: 302	I like the Sierra book. Of all the manuals I have it has the most complete information regarding the various reloading tools and the techniques for using them that I have found.

October 3, 2010, 02:30 PM	#32
Crashbox Senior Member Join Date: November 3, 2009 Location: Lynden, Washington Posts: 199	I agree with others who say it is best to start at the minimum published load and work up from there. However, if you have more than one manual then I believe more objective discernment is in order. For example, I have both Lyman's 49th and the latest Hornady manuals. When I look at published data for the .357 Magnum, IIRC (I'm at the coffee shop so I do not have the books in front of me) the MAX load for H-110 behind a 125-grain JHP in the Hornady manual is lower than the MINIMUM load in the Lyman 49th. Which one do I use? Hmmm... well, for example, if I have an older gun which may not have the durability of some newer ones, I would use the least charge from whatever manuals I have at my disposal and work up carefully from there. On the other hand, if I have a new, reputably stout gun, I may elect to start with the minimum from one of the lesser-conservative manuals and carefully work up from there. Therefore, I must also conclude that having more than one manual does give some (perhaps necessary) degree of flexibility, in my opinion. I must note that in the example above I wouldn't even THINK of running such a round in a gun that was built like anything less than a tank! Just my opinion.

October 3, 2010, 11:26 PM	#34
TXGunNut Senior Member Join Date: January 16, 2010 Location: If you have to ask... Posts: 2,860	Guess I need to learn a few new tricks. Quickload could be useful in future bottleneck cartridge projects. I'll still use my stack of manuals but can't have too much info, IMHO.