Speer # 8

[Dew]

I've serched and read about Speer #8 a fair bit.
Are the loads in 8 so hot that many think they are over the limit? Has anyone on this board ever blown up a gun using any of the loads.?
In short, why do you think 8 is or is not a good book to use?

[Dew]

I've serched and read about Speer #8 a fair bit.
Are the loads in 8 so hot that many think they are over the limit? Has anyone on this board ever blown up a gun using any of the loads.?
In short, why do you think 8 is or is not a good book to use?

[akviper]

I recently started loading for my 30-06 and noticed the same thing. The max load listed in the Speer manual for one powder was almost four grains above the max load listed in three other manuals. I decided to stick with the other books for my 06 loads. They all had about the same max load listed.

I keep reading about the companies "lawyer proofing" their loads in recent manuals but Speer's latest has some higher max loads listed than in some of their older books.

I wonder if there has been much change in powder in recent years. Have new manufacturing techniques resulted in different pressures for the same powder?

[BruceM]

Regardless of which manual you use, there is no substitute for for good & safe load development practice. Data in loading manuals does not come from a burning bush engraved on two granite tablets. With most bullet, case, primer & propellant combo's, you must start low and work up to maximum loads which are safe in your particular weapon. What is safe in one man's rifle may not be in yours.

Regardless of what's printed on the pages of some book, you must still use "that lump three feet above your a**" for something other than a hat rack. For example, I have a 1970 vintage M70 in .30-06 which is very accurate for an out of the box deer rifle. My load for that particular gun consists of a WW case, CCI mag primer, Sierra 165 gr SBT and 57.0 grains of IMR 4350. That load will shoot into 1" for five shoots at 100 meters and crono's 2825 fps from a 22" barrel. It is too stiff for my Weatherby Vanguard and must be reduced by a full grain.

The point is that even if a load is listed as max in any loading manual, remember that it was max. in that particular rifle or test barrel. IMHO, it is far less important who's or which edition of a particular manual you have than the technique you use to implement the data in it.

two cents worth.

Bruce

[dennis40x]

This subject is like opening a can of “Worms”.

[Paul5388]

Yep, just like opening a can of worms, especially for those of us who have used Speer #7 & #8 data since it was new, which makes us wonder what all the fuss is about.

[Skip Sackett]

This subject is like opening a can of “Worms”.

As a proponent of some of the older manuals, I like what Bruce said. Nothing wrong with being careful.

While I haven't used ALL of the loads from the Speer #8 (I have Speer manuals from #5 to #8 and #13) but there are some that I have found useful in times past.

We went through all kinds of pages and threads extolling the virtues of the older 38spl data on this forum. Pity, when the forum changed hands some of that was lost. There was a lot of good information in that nearly 40 page thread.

Since the end of that thread I have run on to powders that will give the same results we were looking at from "THE LOAD" with much less pressure and still keep it in the 38spl case.

I'm thinking of doing some testing with those powders and posting the data I get.

Just have too many irons in the fire at present to make it feasible.

[gboling]

Originally posted by dennis40x:
This subject is like opening a can of “Worms”.

Ditto.

Something we may be overlooking is possible differences in the new bullets used and the new test barrels. I consistently get higher velocities from my 629 Classic PP than the velocities posted for a given powder in any of the current manuals.

[Hoptob]

I'm thinking of doing some testing with those powders and posting the data I get.

Just have too many irons in the fire at present to make it feasible.

Well if I were you, I wouldn't push it too far back, Skip. Weather is getting better around here, we had 60+ degs today

How about a new thread to replace our old venerable? I even have a name for it... "THE LOADS!"



Mike

[rundownfid]

Skip,
Those powders wouldn't include Power Pistol and Lil Gun would they?

[Ron H.]

Sir, FWIW, I wouldn't hesitate to use a load from Speer No. 8 if I could corroborate it with current data from at least a couple different sources. I tend to load conservatively and do not like to exceed current listed data.

That said, some strange things go on with "official" load data. For example, Alliant's Web site currently lists a max of 9.5 grains of Unique with a 250-grain lead semi-wadcutter in .45 Colt; however, a year or so ago, Alliant listed only 8.0 grains as max with all else the same. Neither was or is listed as a "Ruger only" load. I doubt that all .45 Colt guns all of a sudden got vastly stronger; it was just the stroke of a pen. [shrug]

All you can do is check as many sources as possible and make up your own mind.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

[Paul5388]

There are a lot of imagined problems with older loads. However, this article from Shooting Times, Cup, psi & Reloading Data, may help a little in understanding what has transpired.

There is about a 96 percent correlation between assigned psi and CUP for rifle cartridges, with the psi value being higher. However, that means that 4 percent of the time, you can't make it work. That's because of some rifle cartridges whose psi assignment is lower than their CUP assignment. It's even more prevalent with handgun cartridges.

Pay close attention to "psi assignment is lower than their CUP assignment" and the fact of it being "more prevalent with handgun cartridges". The "assignment" of a pressure value is the problem, not the old loads.

[Skip Sackett]

I consistently get higher velocities from my 629 Classic PP than the velocities posted for a given powder in any of the current manuals.

gboling,
You have got to be the only one in the world with those results. The closest to posted data that I get is when I use it from Accurate Arms data. Otherwise, it is usually much less.

run,
Probably not Power Pistol but Longshot is on the short list! Lil' Gun may be a bit slow for 38spl too. I know that there are some Vita Vohori powders that have data from their website that list a 160gr LSWC going 1000fps. I think I have one of their powders in the cave ready to load!

Mike,
It is the 6th of April already and when I woke up this morning we had 3" of snow on the ground! This is getting ridiculous! I'm almost ready to believe in global warming!

NOT

[Hoptob]

Skip,

Do you have any loading data for Longshot and lead bullets? All I can find is data for jacketed.

Mike

[Skip Sackett]

Originally posted by Hoptob:
Skip,

Do you have any loading data for Longshot and lead bullets? All I can find is data for jacketed.

Mike

No sir, I called them today too. Looking for something to use in the 38spl. No luck though!

[Hoptob]

Thank you, sir. I looked through Hodgdon manual and did not find Longshot/lead data in any caliber. Pitty.

Mike

[akviper]

Geez Bruce, lighten up, nobody said you had to start with the maximum load. My point was an almost 10% difference between the new Speer and most of the other manuals.

[MADISON]

Speer #8
When published the Speer Manual 8 was blowing up guns then. To use those loads now without cross referenceing them with a currant manual is dangerous.

[canoe on the yukon]

Originally posted by MADISON:
Speer #8
When published the Speer Manual 8 was blowing up guns then. To use those loads now without cross referenceing them with a currant manual is dangerous.

What guns were being blown up?

[Skip Sackett]

Yeah, and you can pick up venereal disease off of toilet seats, and there are extra terrestrials and there was a conspiracy behind the primer disappearance and ..............................

I promised myself I wasn't going to get into an argument over this this time but some people, my word.

They regurgitate stuff from unproven sources with undocumented "facts" (really farces) and expect not to be challenged.

All you have to do is post the proof of your statements from reliable sources with other than Internet blogs being quoted and I will print an apology for doubting you.

I'm not calling you a liar, just misled.

First off, how did the manual get into the trigger housing of any firearm? Secondly, are you saying the "data" caused guns to blow up? At which end of the data? The maximum or minimum? Thirdly, the folks loading from the manual, do they have any responsibility at all with what they loaded?


Did I say, "MY WORD" yet? If not: "MY WORD!"

[BruceM]

When published the Speer Manual 8 was blowing up guns then

I must have missed this. Where was that published because I'd like to know which load blew up which guns.

Generally speaking, guns blow up because of a double charge of fast powders, using the wrong powder by mistake with a safe charge weight or other just silly mistakes. Guns can also suffer cumulative damage such as slightly over pressure loads causing excessive headspace after repeated firngs.

Anyway, I would like to read that information relative to the Speer loading manual #8.

B.

[dennis40x]

Originally posted by smith crazy:
I promised myself I wasn't going to get into an argument over this this time but some people, my word.

I said this subject is a can of worms at the very beginning. Give it a couple more pages and it’ll develop into a full fledged ugly thing. No one is going to change their position on this subject. So what’s the purpose of all this? Simply there is none we’re flogging the dead horse over and over again.

[Skip Sackett]

Originally posted by dennis40x:

I said this subject is a can of worms at the very beginning. Give it a couple more pages and it’ll develop into a full fledged ugly thing. No one is going to change their position on this subject. So what’s the purpose of all this? Simply there is none we’re flogging the dead horse over and over again.

At least I wasn't the one that opened the can dennis!

I have been known to do that you know!

One of my pastors used to say: "If you find yourself beating a dead horse, by all means, dismount!"

I think I will!

[NKJ nut]

Desist from flogging the deceased equine. Dismount carefully. Bury the carcass. Simple solution.

[Paul5388]

In a final flogging, if there had been guns blown up by #8 loads, Speer would have been sued into oblivion. Obviously that wasn't/isn't the case.

[Nevada Ed]

One has to take in the date that this was published and read the fine print.......................

I load 357 mag and the test were done in a mod 27, this is a "N" frame revolver not a little old "K" frame. I onlyhave issues with the SR4756 data...........the book states "X" amount of powder for a maximum load when in my 686,6",
a lower amount not even mentioned (11.0grs) gives me 1148 fps, which is a fac dup load.
With the 158 XTP max in the book is 1254fps with "X" grs of powder and again with a not listed amount of only 9.5grs of powder will give me 1235 fps out of my 686.

Using the 686 "Magnum" for 38 spl loads with the SR 4567 powder also an eye opener vs Hodgdons data that they test with a 7" test barrel. My test were more than their book data so use at your own risk............did I mention I used a 357 mag for the 38 test !! I will only use one test..............
158 XTP 6" barrel 686, 6.0grs 4756@ 870fps and 6.5grs
pushed the bullet at 980fps which was very close to the maximum loading of Unique powder for this bullet with 6.0grs of powder.

Yes maximums are that and maybe MORE, so another reason to start low and even use other books and data to get an idea of whats going on before you start stuffing powders into those cases.

[scattershot]

Bruce M pretty much nailed it. Speer 8 has some pretty steamy loads, but you don't need to start at the top. I have used some of those loads, and they are warm, to be sure, but they ARE listed as max, after all. I am in agreement that the modern manuals are written by lawyers, but the end result of your handloading excursion is that YOU are responsible for your safety.

Work slowly and carefully. Do you really need Mach4 loads for poking a hole in a piece of paper?

[ArchAngelCD]

Another thread brought back from the Abyss... You do realize this thread is 3 and a half years old, right?

[tappedandtagged]

Originally Posted by ArchAngelCD

Another thread brought back from the Abyss... You do realize this thread is 3 and a half years old, right?

Four years is the limit to resurecting old threads.... Or so it seems.

[Rule3]

What comes around goes around, and around. There really is nothing new in the Universe. All questions have been asked and answered, The internet is now closed. That you for visiting, have a nice day and a better tomorrow.

[Skip Sackett]

Speer #8 data is as safe as the reloader using it. P E R I O D !!

If you are a poor reloader, please, don't use it.

[novalty]

Originally Posted by Skip Sackett

Speer #8 data is as safe as the reloader using it. P E R I O D !!

If you are a poor reloader, please, don't use it.

You say that now, but just wait until they come out with Speer #9.

[riverrat38]

Originally Posted by Paul5388

In a final flogging, if there had been guns blown up by #8 loads, Speer would have been sued into oblivion. Obviously that wasn't/isn't the case.

Not if there were no personal injuries involved. Speer could settle up for a $500 gun loss, or several, without much injury to their bottom line. And, then, publish Speer #9.

Fortunately, of the several kabooms I have heard about, I have not heard of any personal injuries. I know there is a big element of luck involved, but, in the cases that I have heard about, the luck was all good. This sort of good luck may have been operating in Speer's favor!
And, yes, I do know I am responding to a 3 year old posting.

Rick

[Rule3]

Originally Posted by NKJ nut

Desist from flogging the deceased equine. Dismount carefully. Bury the carcass. Simple solution.

And on those fine words, the show is over.

[Engineer1911]

I used Midway's LoadMap for 357 magnum to load 148 gr HBWC in mag cases. Trying to avoid the short "38 spl case in 357 masg cylinder gap" to get max accuracy. Made up 18 rounds each of 3 different loads beginning with the "STARTING" load.

Weeeelllllllllllllll, the lightest load was spectacular. Fired 6 rounds and had 10 perfect holes in my target and it was a lousy pattern for a shotgun . It got worse with the next two warmer loads. Really blew the skirts off the HBWC.

Went back home and loaded 3 more test loads going below the "Starting" load. Best accuracy was with a load 0.2 grains below Midway's starting load. NO leading, inside the 10 ring accuracy, and one hole for each bullet.

Just more good juju from the reloading manuals. Continue flogging.

[ChuckS1]

Once upon a time, my dad told me start at at the minimum load listed and work up slowly, looking for pressure signs. Still seems like good advice. Too bad people don't listen. Saved me some aggravation when I experimented with "The Load" from Speer #8.

[SMSgt]

Wait a minute! I've got a Speer #9!

[novalty]

Originally Posted by SMSgt

Wait a minute! I've got a Speer #9!

Far out man! Don't tell anyone, but I have a Speer #10 & #11. Shhh. Inside secret loads start in +P++++++ Range. Not rated for CTGs.