Is the Lee Reloading Manual Accurate?

[PolarFBear]

Is the Lee Reloading Manual Accurate? I started reloading under the Lee equipment and guidelines. Did OK. I now have some experience and a better "library". Since the cooler weather prevails it is back to the garage for my "indoor" hobby; reloading. My "library" now has Hornady, Speer, Lyman, Nosler, and Winchester manuals as well as various magazines and internet data. I find a LOT of inconsistency between Lee and the other sources for load data. Lee seems to always be a very mild load. I consult lots of resources before "dumping" powder and I find Lee's recommendations for MAX loads to be near the starting recommended loads from other sources. Opinions please. I usually use the load recommended by the bullet manufacturer when possible. I have never loaded to a maximum for anything. But sometimes I do like a strong "plinking" load.

[Mauser69]

There has ALWAYS been significant variations in load data from one source to another. Even within sources. In particular, Speer manuals back around the #8 - #11 editions had numbers going wildly all over the place. I cannot remember the specific one that was really wonky, but a little research should point it out real fast. I seem to remember one new edition that had max .357 loads actually LOWER than the previous edition's STARTING load!!

But as to your question about Lee data specifically - the issue ain't Lee. They do not publish their own load data, only data gleaned from other sources. If you look closely at their data for a specific powder or bullet and compare it to published sources from one of those manufacturers, you can often find the exact source they used for a specific load.

[buck460XVR]

I've too have always been under the impression that Lee does no load testing of their own and that he recipes in their load manuals are just copied from other sources.

[849ACSO]

The recipes in Lee's manual are from the powder manufacturer, the bullet manufacturer, or both.

[cwall64]

I do not have the Lee manual, but I do have several bullet companies manuals (Hornady, Nosler, and Sierra). My process, whether right or wrong, is to look to the powder companies online data as the definitive data for max load (as I assume they are doing the testing) , then look at the bullet manufacturers as a secondary resource. Some of the manuals like Sierra and Nosler actually have a recommended accuracy load in the data and that normally is well within the powder companies data. I still workup to that load to find my accuracy nodes.

And there are definitely discrepancies between bullet manuals and powder company data, sometimes it is wildly different, sometimes it is very similar...

[Unclenick]

Lee says his data is from powder companies, which are a better source than bullet company data because the powder companies have nominal characteristic reference lots to test with and SAAMI standard pressure/velocity guns to test in, in most instances. Info from other sources often is developed in production guns then the maximum load is sent for independent testing afterward to make sure it doesn't exceed the SAAMI MAP, but I don't think they usually adjust it upward if it is below SAAMI MAP. Also, bullet companies have a habit of listing one set of data for several bullets of the same weight, and you know from the different shapes and seating depths that they won't all behave exactly the same. So you can guess that the bullet that caused the most pressure probably governed the load limit for them all.

However, the above factors and allowances usually (but not always) mean the bullet company data is wimpier than the powder company data. So I think Lee's low load levels must indicate that they took the powder company data and reduced it by a fudge factor. Possibly this was done because a lot of Lee's measures use powder VLD numbers (cc's/grain) to get loads by volume. That would mean they had to allow for lot-to-lot bulk density variation, which can exceed 5%. I think they may have erred low in some cases where a charge fell between their available powder measure bushing or powder scoop sizes, too.

I don't really know the above without asking Lee to confirm it. I usually do look at bullet company loads for their bullets, then see if I can find something like it in a powder company's data. I usually use the powder company's starting load and see, after allowing for any difference in barrel length, how my expected velocity from their data compares to what I actually get. If my velocity is lower, due to difference in the gun, case, and primer, then I'm pretty confident I am operating below their starting load's pressure, and vice versa.

[jwrowland77]

The Lee manual takes it data from other sources (i.e. Bullet, powder manufactures). They do no independent testing.

So any inconsistency you may see, they're out there somewhere in a bullet manual or somewhere.

[bluetopper]

You're learning that published reloading data is little more than a guide, it is in no way the gospel.

[sghart3578]

All of the answers that you have received so far are good. I will add that in my chronograph testing, the manual that comes closest to the actual velocities that you will see is the Sierra manual. I have compared loads in 14 or 15 different calibers and I now have enough faith in Sierra that I can take their word for it.

That's not to say that others are inaccurate, but there are certainly discrepancies.

The Lee manual is invaluable, not in the accuracy of their posted muzzle velocities, but in the fact they they publish a wider variety of products since they get the info from the companies themselves.

[higgite]

Originally Posted by sghart3578

I will add that in my chronograph testing, the manual that comes closest to the actual velocities that you will is the Sierra manual. I have compared loads in 14 or 15 different calibers and I now have enough faith in Sierra that I can take their word for it.

Rifle loads? Pistol loads? Both?
Thanks.

[FrankenMauser]

In general, the Lee manual is just as good as any other.
I am not a fan of their aggregate approach (republishing old data from other sources, but without the original details that accompanied that data). Even so, it's still a fairly comprehensive data source.

But, there are a few instances in which it can be a problem. 8x51mmR (8mm Lebel) is a good example. The 8mm Lebel load data provided by Lee is well known for being exceptionally 'safe' in that you don't have to worry about blowing up your rifle, because even some of the maximum loads are going to leave a bullet in the barrel.


I have a copy of the 2nd Edition. I reference it on occasion. But I always reach for other manuals first.

[buck460XVR]

I've probably said this a thousand times on this forum already, but the inconsistencies within reloading data is why I always reference at least three published sources when developing a new load or using new components. If one of the sources is extremely high or low compared to the other two/three/more, then I pretty much disregard them...altho I still consider them safe(for most firearms). If two or more sources have similar recipes and have done their own testing of such, I tend to start there. One also has to remember that some bullet manufacturers are connected(directly or indirectly) to powder distribution. I've come to the consensus that bullet manufacturers and powder maker/distributors are both seeking the same thing, maximum performance. The difference is, their definition of maximum performance is different. Powder companies generally give hotter loads and faster velocities even with similar recipes. Bullet companies loads are generally milder because I believe the maximum performance they are seeking is accuracy. Most of us acknowledge for the most part, our best accuracy is achieved before we reach maximum powder charges. Which is the better source then? What are you trying to achieve, maximum velocity or maximum accuracy?

One also has to remember that the equipment and the conditions, temps, barometric pressure and humidity of when the testing was done will make a difference also, another reason data is conflicting. This is why when the same powder with different names(such as H110/W296 and HP-38/W231) are tested, many sources show a big difference in load recipes to get the same results. What one needs to remember also is, that the max in your firearm is not necessarily the max in the load manual.....or vice versa.

[T. O'Heir]

The Lee Reloading Manual accurate is a copy of the assorted bullet and powder maker's manuals. Lee does no testing of anything themselves.
Speer, RCBS, Federal, Alliant, CCI, Blazer and a bunch of other 'name' brands are all owned by the same holding company too.

[243winxb]

http://castpics.net/dpl/ Older data from Alliant, Speer, Lyman, others.

[Mobuck]

"The recipes in Lee's manual are from the powder manufacturer, the bullet manufacturer, or both."

The LEE manual is a compilation of data from other sources except for the comments regarding reduced loadings.

[243winxb]

So is Steves Pages http://stevespages.com/page8a.htm

[Huffmanite]

Have often referred to Steve's Pages for load data on a cartridge. Find it useful. However, It's not unusual for me to be perplexed when his start load is much lower and his max load is higher than what I find in the four reloading manuals I own.