Sierra no. 6 vs all

S

spencerdiesel

Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2020
Messages
31
Reaction score
25
While waiting for my Heavy Duty to return from the gunsmith (I’ll update that thread soon as I hear from the smith), I thought I’d pick everyone’s brain on Sierra no. 6 load data, primarily .38 +p & .357 mag. Going back and forth between Sierra and my other manuals, I see consistently warmer charge weights in the no.6 manual vs all others.

I’m most curious about this because to my knowledge, sierra no.6 is current/ modern load data, and a lot of the charge weights resemble that of 40+ year back load manuals.

I wonder, is it possible Sierra is the only current data publisher that is providing true maximum SAMMI charge weights? The only reason I don’t think they’re just using old data is there are new powders like CFE pistol/ BE86 & Power Pistol that are listed with strong numbers.

For example, my Lee manual (2019 I believe) shows 6.6gr CFE for .357 mag & 158gr bullets @ 28,000 psi. The Sierra no. 6 shows 8.0gr CFE as max for 158gr in .357 mag. What’s even more interesting, is that Sierras max charge for .38 +p is the same 6.6gr that Lee shows for .357 mag.

What does everyone think/ know about this? I have tested the 6.6gr .38 +p load (after working up) and have had stellar performance.
 
Register to hide this ad
I'm sure that Sierra developed loads that were safe in their test revolver, but what was safe in their test revolver may or may not be safe in your revolver. Unless the ammo is fired in a test barrel designed to measure operating pressure, you don't really know for certain if a given load is within pressure specifications. Also, there will be variations in pressure and velocity when components are changed and there can be small variations from one production lot to another with the same components. In other words, don't take the maximum safe loads in any manual as gospel. Start below maximum and work your way up using your own firearms.
 
I would use the average charge weight from as many sources as possible. If one source is unusually high or low compared to the other sources, I would disregard it when averaging the powder charge. Be safe and start low and work up.
 
Thank you all for the replies. I would love to someday get Quickload, though unfortunately we don’t have a PC.

I have researched in hopes of finding a place to send ammunition for pressure testing, it appears HP White is no more.

Where can I send handloads in for pressure testing?

Or, is there someone with Quickload who might be able to shed light on their findings with .38 +p (20,000 psi) findings?

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
spencerdiesel said:
Thank you all for the replies. I would love to someday get Quickload, though unfortunately we don’t have a PC.
Thanks!
Click to expand...

I don't know the answers to your other questions. My buddy has a subscription to Quickloads and he does not have a PC as far as I know. He only has a phone which is used to access the internet.
 
Thanks for letting me know, on QL’s site I’ve only seen their listings of compatibility with Windows 10 & 11?

I’m primarily interested in top end data with CFE/ BE86/ 2400/ W231 if anyone has happened to configured such data in the past.

I’m getting 1050 - 1070 fps from a 3” barrel w/ 158 gr LSWC per Sierra no.6 data. I get this velocity avg with their data using BE86/ CFE/ 2400. It would be fantastic if any of these loadings happen to be 20k psi or less.

BE86 is 6.2gr, CFE 6.6gr & 2400 11gr.

1.460” COAL, WSPP, firm roll crimp 158 LSWC w/ BN of 12.
 
Last edited:
spencerdiesel said:
...I thought I’d pick everyone’s brain on Sierra no. 6 load data primarily .38 +p & .357 mag...
I’m most curious about this because to my knowledge, sierra no.6 is current/ modern load data, and a lot of the charge weights resemble that of 40+ year back load manuals.
Click to expand...

Sierra went 16 years between their update from Sierra Edition 5 (2003) to Sierra Edition 6 (2019) but not all of the data is new in SE6.

Having both manuals though I can tell you that all of the .38 Special, .38 Special (+), and .357 Magnum load data is new or changed from SE5.

.
 
Last edited:
Sierra states they actually used real pressure data in their newest manual. First time they actually stated this. A lot of their loads changed. Imo their previously used pressure estimating techniques were very good, but slightly conservative.
 
My view....

When I see Sierra I see HUNTING loads and they are indeed 'warm'. For example. Most reloading manuals give 6 grains of Unique behind a 125 gr. jacketed bullet. My 1970s Sierra manual puts it at 7 grains of Unique for the same bullet. I've ventured upward from the typical 6 grains, but never got near 7 gr. because they were getting more raucous than I really needed. (I see that Alliant now suggests 5.7 gr of Unique now for 125 gr GD)

SO...the takeaway from all this is (to quote Paul Harrel). I'd use those loads with quality, modern firearms that are in good repair. My reasoning is that people used to shoot these loads without blowing up or damaging guns and I see published loads dropping all the time with 'safety' being the watchword. I don't have to shoot fireballs all the time, but being a reloader, I have this data that I will use if I want to.
 
There are many variables in loading ammunition. One of the big ones is the bullet.

Not every 125gr 38 bullet is the same as every other 125gr 38 bullet. Differing construction will have them build pressure differently.

Where possible it ius best to use data developed with the bullet you want to use. Sierra historically has had thinner jackets than most others, meaning it may be easier for the rifling to engrave, thereby suggesting the pressure build is less than a bullet using a thicker jacket.

But, as always, start with the lower charge weights of powder and work up in your gun. Your gun is a variable as well.
 
Reloading Rule #1 - Start below maximum load and work your way up slowly to the maximum ... if you experience signs of high pressure ...
Stop .

I always cross reference load data from 4 published sources ...
I use the average starting and maximum loads from all four sources .
This evens out the numbers ... and gives you a better feel for what is realy going on .
Using load data developed by the bullet maker , or data developed with the exact make of bullet you are using is the best way ... generic load data for generic bullets ... not so much .
Just Load Safe ,
Gary
 
Last edited:
This is all great info everyone, thanks!

That is awesome to hear Sierra used genuine pressure testing methods for no. 6!
 
BLUEDOT37 said:
Sierra went 16 years between their update from Sierra Edition 5 (2003) to Sierra Edition 6 (2019) but not all of the data is new in SE6.

Having both manuals though I can tell you that all of the .38 Special, .38 Special (+), and .357 Magnum load data is new or changed from SE5.

.
Click to expand...

This is good to hear, thank you for checking. With that being the case, then 5.6gr BE86 gets me 970 fps (158gr lead) from 3” bbl at (top end) std pressure!
 
zeke said:
Sierra states they actually used real pressure data in their newest manual. First time they actually stated this. A lot of their loads changed. Imo their previously used pressure estimating techniques were very good, but slightly conservative.
Click to expand...

Where can I read more about this? Good to hear!
 
ReloadforFun said:
There are many variables in loading ammunition. One of the big ones is the bullet.

Not every 125gr 38 bullet is the same as every other 125gr 38 bullet. Differing construction will have them build pressure differently.

Where possible it ius best to use data developed with the bullet you want to use. Sierra historically has had thinner jackets than most others, meaning it may be easier for the rifling to engrave, thereby suggesting the pressure build is less than a bullet using a thicker jacket.

But, as always, start with the lower charge weights of powder and work up in your gun. Your gun is a variable as well.
Click to expand...

The thinner jacket makes sense as it relates to pressure, I was scratching my head some looking at some of the charge weights listed with jacketed bullets!
 
Many, many moons ago I checked a new Sierra manual to see what one of my pets loads stood up to time. I was horrified to find that my load was now WAY off in forbidden territory. So, I called Sierra and the tech's simple answer was "different rifle".

Recent work with new to me powders show that my rifle gets uncomfortable before the pressure barrel does. OTOH, I'm looking for low standard deviation at velocites I can live with.

As to the effect of jackets, the loads in question were with Sierra Match King target bullets. Trying to work up hunting loads in similar bullet weights, I found the loads maxed out at much lower charge weights.
 
Model19man said:
I don't know the answers to your other questions. My buddy has a subscription to Quickloads and he does not have a PC as far as I know. He only has a phone which is used to access the internet.
Click to expand...

I think your buddy must have a different software package or app. Quickload doesn't run on smartphones, isn't accessed on the internet and doesn't offer a subscription.

Quickload is a stand-alone program running on a PC. It's similar to Gordon's Reloading Tool in that regard. Quickload is very useful in my opinion, but it's important to consider what it is and what it isn't. It is not a repository of test data like a load manual or online load reference. Rather, it's an internal ballistics simulator. It calculates things like pressure and velocity. In short, it's useful but no substitute for published load test data.
 
spencerdiesel said:
The thinner jacket makes sense as it relates to pressure, I was scratching my head some looking at some of the charge weights listed with jacketed bullets!
Click to expand...

Another aspect of seemingly similar bullets and resulting pressures is seating depth. The amount of the bullet shank that intrudes inside the case affects the volume of the powder "chamber." It's less of an issue with large cases, but pronounced with smaller ones.

9mm Luger is a great example. It doesn't take much difference in seating depth or LOA to significantly influence pressure. In 9mm it can take only 0.020" or 0.030" seating depth variation to make a huge difference.

This is where Quickload can be interesting. Simply run a simulation with a given bullet, powder charge and case water volume; and vary seating depth. Peak pressures swing wildly.
 
Last edited:
Krogen said:
Another aspect of seemingly similar bullets and resulting pressures is seating depth. The amount of the bullet shank that intrudes inside the case affects the volume of the powder "chamber." It's less of an issue with large cases, but pronounced with smaller ones.

9mm Luger is a great example. It doesn't take much difference in seating depth or LOA t significantly influence pressure. In 9mm it can take only 0.020" or 0.030" seating depth variation to make a huge difference.

This is where Quickload can be interesting. Simply run a simulation with a given bullet, powder charge and case water volume; and vary seating depth. Peak pressures swing wildly.
Click to expand...

Very true. I think very little about using mixed brass with 90% power .38 special. I’ll NEVER mix brass on a 9mm +p load.
 
spencerdiesel said:
Where can I read more about this? Good to hear!
Click to expand...

The description of the pressure testing they did for #6 ia actually in #6 (i read reloading manuals for learning purposes). There is no mention of using equipment in previous manuals, where if they had, am believing they would have stated such.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Accurate No. 2 Differences. Old vs. New
Replies
5
Views
715
243winxb
2
lrrifleman
Sierra reloading App?
Replies
17
Views
6K
venomballistics
venomballistics
elpac3
Range report, unique vs. BE 86
Replies
5
Views
812
Nevada Ed
Nevada Ed
BE Mike
No Space to Reload?
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
Toxophilus
T
J
H110 vs. 296
Replies
10
Views
1K
jarbo
J

Latest posts

Back
Top