In general it is accepted that using the starting published load data (using powder "X") for a heavier bullet (i.e., in 9mm a 124gr XTP) as a SAFE starting load point for a lighter bullet of the same type/construction (in this example, the 115gr XTP) if published load data is not available when working up a load...?

So, in general, does this also apply when working up a load for rifle bullets under the same set of circumstances? For example, if load data for a 250gr bullet with "Y" powder says 85gr to start, then using that (or very near that?) as the start point for working up a load for a similar 225gr bullet?

Not looking for maximum velocity or pinpoint accuracy at 800 yards, just a starting point for reloading range/practice ammo to familiarize someone with a new weapon (that just happens to be a 338 Lapua Magnum!) and where any factory ammo is ridiculously expensive for mere practice... And not really available!

This is not a case of extrapolating upward but just trying to find an acceptable solution (a SAFE place to START) when magnum powders & magnum primers are so hard to find, where even $5-7 per round ammo is not readily available, and when I have brass, can find bullets under $0.50, primers for a dime and have 2 lbs. of magnum powders (US869 & Ramshot LRT) available but no load data for the lighter bullets.

Your assistance is appreciated.

You should consult a reliable loading manual or look online for loading data from the powder manufacturer or bullet manufacturer. You may also try to call the bullet manufacturer if you can't find published data. If one of these sources do not have the specific load data, then you might resort to extrapolating, but pay attention to the load range in addition to the starting load. A narrow range of acceptable weight means it is easier to have excessive pressures. If someone makes the bullet, there must be load data somewhere. Be safe.

I think IN GENERAL that is a safe assumption, provided there is not a gross difference in bullet shape, etc. or perhaps seating depth based on cannelure, etc.

But like dmy said, exhaust all possible sources of sanctioned data first.

OP,

I would not attempt what you are suggesting. I would first look at the load data offered by the bullet manufacturer. An error either way could be comparable to placing a live grenade next to your face.

__________________
Judge control not gun control!

225-250 gr bullet.........
is that a .30 or larger rifle ?

In the large bore weapons, most bullets +/- 10 grains in weight and the same type of material...........

will be safe with the manual data posted if above starting and below maximum loads.
The slower powders are usually a lot safer than the fastest powders used in the data, if you feel a little nervous with the fist loads.

Just make sure the OAL is correct for the style bullet and the correct primers are used c/o the powder at hand......
to heep the pressures in line with the loading data.

What "Toy" are you playing with?

Ed: It is the Savage 110 Long Range Hunter in 338 Lapua Magnum...

My friend bought it with 200+ rounds of factory Hornady ammo, so we have brass, large rifle (supposedly magnum) primers (going to give the CCI #34s a shot), bullets & the two powders mentioned: we want to see if we can generate some practice loads using some lighter 225gr bullets. Have load data for similar 250gr bullets, but no start data.

P.S. Both powders are pretty slow: US869 & Ramshot LRT.

Norman,

Western Powder has their loading manual free online. Strongly suggest that you download it for these handloads.

__________________
Judge control not gun control!

Of course, I already have done so: thanks!

Same story with Hodgdons for the US869.

Same cup and core construction I'd be comfortable going your proposed route.

It's when using bullets of different construction, Barnes and others using mono metals, etc, that I wouldn't make any assumptions based on traditional cup and core data.

__________________
GOA
USA Shooting Supporter

Please update us on your resolution. With all the shortages of supplies this problem will arise again. Thanks

__________________
Hue 68 noli me tangere

A few years ago I contacted Western Powders via email, asking for load data for bullet/powder combos not given in their manual. The ballistician responded with starting to maximum loads as requested. Obviously, for their powders.
Suggest you try that route first rather than guess.

__________________
To cannon, all men are equal

I am familiar with loading 338 LM in a Savage Rifle. I know nothing about Ramshot. However I am very used to US869. It is a very dense ball powder that burns at extreme temperatures. If you are not careful you WILL scorch and check the chamber of your rifle!

Hodgdon's Magazine gave loadings for high velocity with US869 being the fastest at 2900FPS using 104gr. in Match Brass (I used Hornady's several reloading's and switched to Lapua!)

Much better accuracy will be with H-1000 and/or Retumbo. Powder use will be in the 94 gr area and velocity in the 2600-2700 fps area.

Bullets I used are Berger 300 grain Hybrid and Sierra 300 grain Matching (I did quite a bit of 225 to 285 gr bullet testing and found nothing flew (High BC's) like the 300's.

All of these loads use a great deal of powder (when I buy, I get 8 to 12 pounds of the same lot) I buy primers in 1000's for the same reason. ***The one primer that was designed to ignite all the small arms powder was/is the Federal 215! That is the primer Accuracy designs the load around and the primer that Lapua still loads the ammo with!

What type of accuracy can you expect with your Savage with good ammo? Always THE question! My 110 BA 26"barrel on a good bi-pod @1000 yards will hit a 5" 5 shot group with a 5.5-22x56 NFX scope (when I am in practice) That is 1/2 MOA! The guys with good AI rifles, some are reporting 1/10 MOA! (There gun cost 5 times more too!)


Comment: I love shooting 338 LM! It is not one of the better cartridges to learn how to load rifle ammo, there is a lot more to it than just sizing everything up!

Ivan

Magnum primers are a must use. Starting loads may do better with them. Good neck tension on the bullet will help start pressures. Dont seat bullets with a long COL, trying to get closer to the rifling. The bullets shank needs to make full contact with the case neck.

At worst, soot and dented brass can be seen on the magnums. Cause, low pressure. Slow burn rate powders dont help. Or long throats.

Looks like this-

Attached Images

257Weatherby.JPG (43.1 KB, 33 views)

Lyman #50 has load data for a 250gr bullet. You can safely use that with a 225gr bullet, even the max charge.

The Western Powder manual has load data for Ramshot and several 225gr bullets.

__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437

I read an article on the 338 and it stated that barrel length and twist
had a lot to do with how the rifle shot different weight bullets.

Some rifles shot the lighter 225 ok but on guy said that the 225 SST did lousy as well as cheaper hunting style bullets. Go Target style, or go home, he stated.

One shooter used a 250 Sierra HPBT with 82grs of H4350 but he also stated that at 2,800fps the barrel life might be around 2,500 to 3,000 rounds, depending on the barrel and maker.

Some have 300 gr bullets on the way, however there was no data on this one site, that I looked at.

Many said that US869, might be too slow for the 338.............
I did notice that H4831 starts 20 grs less than US869, though.

Getting only 70 rounds per pound of powder, might get expensive?

Have fun.

Some slow burning / magnum powders get erratic when reduced .
Be sure and check with the powder manufacturer and make sure it is safe to reduce these powders .
Gary

__________________
Certified Cajun
NRA Member

Generally, if one intends to reload using a somewhat lighter-weight bullet for the caliber, a faster burning propellant may produce better results.

Not necessarily germane to your question, but the Lyman reloading handbooks of the 1960s-70s formerly provided "accuracy loads" for each available bullet weight for each rifle caliber. I don't think that's being done any longer.

If you check on the NET you will see suggestions for using "Retumbo, H1000, and US869. At 250-300 grain bullets, Retumbo seems to be the best one to start with."

Look on the NET and check for military replace loads for some good data.

__________________
Freedom is never free!!
SWCA #3437

Working with the pressures in Rifle rounds, I take no chances when changing either bullets or powder. I load for accuracy 1st. Buy a new loading manual that covers your choices, or at least look up on-line.

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

At the moment, MW has MagPro in 8# jugs ... correct speed for your application, load data is available.

The Hodgdon annual loading magazine have very accurate data as far as it goes! The Sierra hard bound manual tell you all the various loads you need with their bullets!

When Burger first brought out the 300 grain Hybrid, they had a recall and replaced them with a second generation with a slightly thicker jacket and a a little lower BC. I took my bullets to their booth at the NRA convention in 2010. They said that at most 338 Lapua Mag velocities their was not a problem. Then had me describe my observations. I told them I was using a Savage 110BA with a 26" barrel Hornady Match Brass, Federal 215 primer, and 104.0 grains of US869. COAL was standard to fit in Accuracy International Mags. My observation was that on 30 to 50 percent of shots under ideal weather conditions the bullets left contrails. and that of the observable bullets over 50% were going 150 to 175 yards the turning at a 60 to 90 degree angle, left, right, up or down, but more left than any other! The Berger reps admitted this fitted right in with their observations! (the 26" barrel and US869 got about 2900 fps, but a 24" barrel was 100 to 150 fps slower)

I have been sticking with the 300 grain Sierra Matching and 94.0 grains of Retumbo or 94.2 grains of H-1000 and getting 2775 0r 2800 fps but the groups have 1/4 MOA versus 3/4 MOA for US869.

A friend of mine was loading a 300 Lapua Mag (on a Savage 110 single shot action) using a solid bronze bullet around 3400 fps and US 869! His targets were at 1600 to 3400 yards. With that bullet/powder combination he was getting 1/2 MOA at 2 miles! The superior accuracy life was in the 300 shot range!

Ivan

Warning: these expensive toys, require that you have either NO Wife! or a very tolerant one, I am blessed with the later! She grew up with a dad that was a Police Combat competitor and 2 time National Champion! So in her opinion, if you merry a real man, he will have guns and will spend time and money shooting them! Most women don't see it that way!

It IS still done in the Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook 4th Edition (cast bullet data only) and also in the Lyman 50th Edition Reloading Handbook (some cast and some jacketed bullet data).
I have them on my desk and just checked ...still there , " potentially the most accurate load " ...shown in bold type .

I always liked that little heads up on what might be best !
Gary

__________________
Certified Cajun
NRA Member

Well, finally got around to loading some 250gr bullets (Hornady SP) that has published data with US 869. The suggested OALs for 250gr jacketed bullets, however, range from 3.550 to 3.565".

When I loaded a test round (at 0.5gr over the Hodgdons START LOAD of 101.5gr) and at the longer 3.565" OAL and then chambered the round (bolt action) the OAL was shortened to 3.532". There are no marks on the bullet but it is obviously being pushed further into the case.

Since most of my reloading experience is with handgun calibers, where variances in OAL can have serious consequences I am looking for additional guidance, please.

Pressures listed at the START LOAD is 47,000 CUP, the MAX @ 108gr is 51,100 CUP. This would lead me to believe that pressure is not really the issue? A reduction of 33 thousandths vs.6 grains of powder?

The bullet is now nearer to the cannelure (well, 0.033" nearer) but I don't believe it should be loaded to actually touch the rifling? The bolt closed smoothly with no unusual resistance on the original test round.

Am I overthinking this? Should I just go a few thousandths shorter at 3.530" so the bullets are not touching the rifling?

Intended to work the load up a bit depending upon acceptable accuracy at the range: this is not designed for long range hunting nor a sniper type application, just practice.

Thanks in advance for your kind consideration!

P.S. Once-fired brass was checked for headspace & length with a Wilson's gauge.

In the interest of full disclosure, I have a LOT of experience in handgun loading… many calibers over decades and a very high round count using many different bullets, many different powders and launched from countless handguns. And that is relevant to say because my experience in bottle neck rifle is probably 5% compared to 95% in handgun.

With that said…

I think it’s worth mentioning that as IMPORTANT as COAL is in handgun rounds, especially smallish, compact, high pressure handgun rounds (9mm, .40cal. etc), bottle neck rifle often acts opposite when it comes to COAL.

In a handgun round, shorter COAL means to absolutely expect higher pressure due to decreased combustion space. However in a bottle neck rifle round, your are reducing the combustion space very little in comparison, percentage wise, considering the volume of a typical rifle case. At the same time, you are pushing the bullet closer to the lands and you are quickly removing the start space for the bullet to move before meeting serious resistance in the lands.

If you have built a load to a COAL where merely chambering the round is pushing your bullet deeper in to the case, you are doing a poor job of building that ammo safely.

You need to start with a shorter COAL, giving your bullet room to travel before smacking in to the lands, which drives the pressure up immediately.

Please fact check me on this:

If you build four different loads, all same bullet and same powder charge, the longer COAL loads should be expected to be higher pressure in your rifle.

This was a 1st time test round: I set the OAL to the longer of the "published" data. I had to start somewhere. I actually was a bit surprised it was still way short of the cannelure?

Loading them a bit further off the lands is what I was suggesting.

The real question was if a 0.035" (or more?) reduction of the OAL from the "published" data using an almost minimum START load would possibly create pressure issues: obviously I was not going to just use the bolt, chamber and barrel to shorten subsequent loads specifically because of the pressure issue detailed in the above post by Sevens (Thanks, BTW!)...

I would think there would be plenty of room to load shorter with 6gr of powder between START & MAX given the 4,000+ CUP pressure difference?

Correct me if my logic is faulty, please?

Cheers!