Manual vs website

[cryogenic419]

I've been using a load I worked up from Hornady's 8th manual, .40SW 180gr XTP with 5.9 of Longshot. Hornady's starting load is 4.8. No problems with this load whatsoever and very accurate for me. I was just digging into Hodgdon's new reloading data webpage and its showing that same combo with a starting load of 6.5 gr. Mind you Hornady's data shows a considerably lower fps for the lower powder charge. Just wondering why there is such a huge spread between starting loads. Hodgdon just trying to get people to burn through more powder?

[Brian Pfleuger]

It is quite common to see a wide spread from one source to another, including starting loads listed by one that are higher than max loads listed by another.

Every source uses different barrels, primers, brass and powder lots, not to mention environmental conditions and pressure test equipment.

The standard safe practice is to start at the lowest starting load and work toward the highest max, looking for pressure signs along the way.

[nemesiss45]

Any starting load will be safe. You can start with the lowest you can find if you want, but these companies are very cautious when it comes to load development, and no companies starting load will present any danger unless there is something seriously wrong with your gun or you make some serious error in your loading.

Also bear in mind, as far as starting loads go, plenty of people have worked down from starting loads to develop gallery loads for purposes like low recoil competition loads and for shooting antique firearms with lower pressure to avoid damaging them. These loads can be well below starting. As you drop below the safe starting load though, you increase your risk of a squib, and if you shoot even a gallery load into barrel plugged with a squib, you will get a dangerous pressure spike that will damage or destroy your firearm and could seriously injure the shooter and people in the vicinity.

[JimDandy]

Additionally, was Hodgdon's load with Hornady Bullets? Or another company's, say Berger or Speer? The bullet construction in theory makes some level of difference as well given different hardnesses etc. I will say Hornady appears to have lower ranges than other load data sources from what I've seen. My .45 numbers have surprised people on here before.

[cryogenic419]

Hodgdon's website shows using the XTP which is why I initially questioned it. I know there are going to be variables like primers, brass and the test barrel, it just kind of threw me as I don't ever recall seeing such a wide jump before. I'm sure its not the first time that kind of thing has happened, just the first time I've ever noticed it.

[kerreckt]

I tend to favor the data I get from powder companies websites. My reasoning is that it can be more up to date and it can can take into account any differences in powder lots. Don't know if this is true but it is what I think. I never use just one source with a new load but always check them against each other. That's my two cents worth.

[Jay24bal]

I take a combination approach from Brian and kerreckt.

When I find conflicting data like this, I start at the lowest listed start load from all my resources, and work up to the powder manufacturer's listed Max, for the same reason as kerreckt mentions.

[sig220mwxxxx]

This is why it is good to have more than one manual. If someone quotes you a load you have more than one place to go take a look and see if it may be off the wall in high pressure. Different companies are in different parts of the US and the world for that matter. As someone earlier said, weather and components make a difference. Add to that distance above or below sea level. Many variables come in to play. The books have starting loads for a reason. I have read posts from handloaders that say they only get their information from the internet. If it is an individual posting these loads they are unlikely to have pressure measuring equipment. It is still prudent to check what you read against the manuals. Some people may not be so prudent and have been stressing their guns for too long and it wll come back and bite them. One of the nicer things I like about the manuals is that unlike computers, they don't lock up or go down. They just sit there on the shelf waiting for me to open them.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Just because a load comes "from the internet" doesn't mean it's not from official data.
I get virtually all my data "from the internet", there are a ton of official sources online.

[Clark]

Published loads are neither science nor well designed engineering, they are recipes.

To get a sense of perspective, the recipe for chocolate chip cookies can vary in the amount of Salt from 1/2 teaspoon to 1 teaspoon, when one goes from Hershy's to Nestle.

In cooking and handloading, I may have started off with someone else's recipe, but after a while I changed it, and that became my recipe.

Now that I think about it, I have seen some engineering designs that tasted bad.
And then there is the bad smell of what some are now calling science.

[BOOMST1CK]

I look at all load data as "guidelines".. Even my own. I have tried published loads that are hot at the starting point, some that exceed the max load, and still show no signs of pressure.
As far as reloading manuals, you can not have to many, I get a lot of info on line to, but like some else said,, manuals do not go offline.

[jwrowland77]

I generally tend to favor the manufactures data.

What I normally do is look in all 5 of my manuals and the manufactures data and I take the avg starting load and that's where I start then I'll work up to the avg max load. If I want to go higher than the avg, then I'll go up to the max listed on the manufactures website. It's kept me safe so far.

It just really all depends on what I want to accomplish. If I just want to plink, then I'll look in the bullet manufactures manual and go with something in there. If I'm say working on a load to reach 1k yards then I'll workup (starting at min) to close to max or max and see what I get and go from there.

[Unclenick]

I think the data in Hornady and Sierra's manuals is all developed in production firearms while watching for pressure signs and is not pressure tested. They then throw in a big safety margin, and as a result their loads tend to be low. Hodgdon uses pressure test barrels. They also have access to reference data powder, which is powder at their exact average specification for the type. What they sell can vary ±3% in burn rate and several percent in bulk density. The reference powder keeps them in the middle of the load range. We have no idea whether the powder used by Hornady or Sierra was near one of the extremes or not. That's just luck of the draw when they purchase it.

It wasn't always that way. I have an old Hornady manual (seventies) that has some very warm starting loads here and there. Some loads in Speer's manual still seem to be pretty warm, even though they have Alliant pressure test their loads after they've developed them. I think liability concern has caught up with Hornady and Sierra.


Brian,

I wonder why we never stuck your official load data source thread. I've stuck it now.