miracle loads?

filmmaster

Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2021
Messages
26
Reaction score
4
standardized classic loads, x grains of bulls eye wit a HBWC in your 38 and your good to go.....

Do you REALLY truly believe them, or do you understand not all guns will shoot alike?
 
Register to hide this ad
when it comes to reloading nothing is written in stone, just to many variables. the "standardized" loads are a just good place to start, if it works for you, great, if not try something else...
 
All firearms are a rule unto themselves, that is what I heard long ago and I think there is a degree of truth in the statement. There are some tried and true standards, like 2.7 grains of Bullseye under a 148 grain HBWC in 38 Special. It is a remarkably accurate load across a large number of firearms, but that's not to say that a particular firearm will not be even more accurate with 3.0 grains of Bullseye.
 
Yes I do. Mostly because I think it's wrong to dismiss the experience of thousands of shooters over many decades.

You may find an individual gun that does a little better with a slight modification. From a practical standpoint I haven't found a significant enough improvement to warrant the effort in most cases. Unless your goal is the experimentation in and of itself.

At the worst they give you a really good place to start. But I've found that across multiple guns the traditional loads are often the best performers overall. I'm not interested in having different loads for different guns unless I have too. I just want to shoot.
 
I agree there are some good starting points.

For example in .45 ACP a 185 gr XTP or HAP seated to 1.240 OAL on top of somewhere between 4.0 and 5.0 grains of bullseye will work well for bullseye shooting. The key here is finding the sweet spot for accuracy at 50 yards in your gun, and it’s usually in the 700-800 fps range.

However it will work just as well with 5.0 t0 5.6 grains of Win 231/HP38, and I’m some guns it’ll work, better.

Similarly, the 185 gr Sierra JHP is just as accurate as the Hornady bullets, just seat them a little deeper at 1.200”.


For practical pistol completion, I liked 200 gr LSWC bullets (usually the Saeco #068 or the similarly long nosed RCBS 45-201-SWC) with 5.0 grains of Red Dot. It gave me about 950 fps and a power factor of 190 - comfortably above the floor and with plenty of punch for poppers that might be set a bot stiff or hit a bit lower than optimum. It fed and functioned well in all my 1911s.

But then again 5 grains of Titegroup also works well.


For .38 Special and bullseye shooting, 3.5 grains of Bullseye under a 158 gr LSWC has long been a favorite. But it’s not sacrosanct. Your 50 yard groups might be better with say 3.6 grains, or anywhere in a range from about 3.1 to 4.0 grains.


——-


Finally, canister grade powders used by hand loaders are a lot more consistent than the bulk powders used by ammunition manufacturers. Faster burning canister grade pistol powders are even more consistent than slower burning pistol and rifle powders. But there is still some variation.

You’ll find load data for both H110 and HP38 in many manuals even though Hogdon has clearly stated they are the same powders packaged in different containers.

For example the Hornady .45 ACP 200 gr data in their 11th edition still shows a max load of 6.3 gr of Win 231 and a max load of 6.6 gr of HP38, both with the same max velocity of 900 fps.

That’s a 0.3 gr and 4.5% difference in max charge weight for the same powder listed in the same table in the same reloading manual. In other words that’s a 4.5% variation due to differences between lots of powder.

The take away there needs to be that when you see a “magic” load like “3.5 grains of Bullseye and a 158 gr LSWC” you need to take it with a big grain of salt and recognize the charge weight is just a nominal charge weight, not an exact weight. Yet I see people take that nominal weight as an exact weight all the time.

It gets even worse when you see handloaders start talking about replicating military loads.

For example someone might breakdown an M72 .30-06 and claim it has 47.5 grains of IMR 4895. Someone else might point out that the U.S. Army technical manual of cartridge data TM 43-0001-27 lists it as 50 grains of IMR 4895 with an uncrimped 173-grain bullet and uncrimped primer.

Neither is actually correct. The TM data os just a nominal weight and the pulled round’s charge weight is just what it took to meet the specifications with that lot of IMR 4895.

What mattered to the army is that it met the required average velocity of 2640 fps, a maximum average chamber pressure of 50,000 psi, and the required accuracy.

That 50 gr nominal charge in the TM was almost never encountered as most lots of IMR 4895 met the specifications with a charge around 48 grains.

Then when you add in a bullet substitution with the 175 gr SMK (a much more consistent bullet than the later 173 gr bullets made on very tired Lake City tooling) you’ll find you might need around 46.o to 46.5 grains of IMR 4895 to achieve the same velocity.

Yet I am sure there are morons out there bending M1 Garand op rods every year with someone’s quoted load of 48-50 grains of IMR 4895 under a 175 gr SMK or 173 gr surplus bullet.
 
As for the aforementioned 2.7 of BE with a 148 WC, I have never seen a 38 caliber revolver that didn't like it. Like My 1911 load of 5.7 W231 and the 200 gr H&G WC. As for rifle, it's a lot different. I have one load that has shot excellent accuracy and velocity wise in all My 300 Weatherbys and some of the club members also. Same for My 264 Win Mag. Load shoots sub .5MOA for 5 rounds in every rifle I have put it in, including Browning, Sako, and Remington. Chronograph varies with barrel length, but accuracy never does.
 
Ive done a smallish amount of reloading in the last year compared to any of you. Been borrowing a friends 6" 357 magnum, and well that classic load of BE, cant hit worth **** at 20 yards. I honestly cant get accuracy out of it until i flip it hollow base forward, stick it roughly an 1/8" out of the case mouth,,,,, and then its a 5 " circle grid of hits at 5 YARDS.

yet at 20 yards equivalent loading of green dot or even red dot keeps it in a 4" by 2" strip because i have hand issues holding steady. burns twice as clean too.
 
There is always room for experimentation in fine tuning a handload, but some have little interest in load development. Regardless, some loads do seem to shoot well in many guns. Some such handloads have already been mentioned here.

With regard to rifle cartridges, I've found (and so have many others) that a near max or max load of H4350 powder and several 130 grain bullets in the .270 cartridge or the same with several 180 grain bullets in the .30-06 will often provide excellent accuracy. Of course, that's not taking into account overall cartridge length/ bullet seating depth which may or may not have to be worked out for individual rifles.
 
Some guns might have a wee bit of difference in their chmbers or barrels..........

so you might have to "cheat" just a little to make the "the load" work
in your gun.

Heck, the 148 is lousy in one of my 38's and only the 158 lead is accurate.

Don't even get me started with JHP's in my 38 revolver !!

Pass the popcorn........
 
Finally, canister grade powders used by hand loaders are a lot more consistent than the bulk powders used by ammunition manufacturers.

Y'all need to pay careful attention to this entire post. BB57 is a man who knows what he's doing, and knows how to explain it.

I wanted to add something that might clear up a misconception.

There are some who believe that reloaders buying their little pound or jug of powder, are getting the "dregs" of the manufacturer's lots, which were rejected by the big ammo makers.

The exact opposite is true.

The big ammo manufacturers, e.g. Federal, Hornady all have labs that can test the bulk powder lots they buy. They can test chemical make-up, burn rate, pressures, whatever they need. If a lot is a bit out of spec, they can adjust it.

Handloaders have no such capability, save for a chronograph. We depend utterly that the next pound of AA#9 we buy is just like all others, and all others in the past, and will do what Accurate Arms says it will do. Accordingly, canister powders are the best and most consistent powders you can get.
 
This thread should have originated in the handloading section, but since it didn't, I guess there's no harm in leaving it as is...with regard to several of these posts, including one of mine, there is an assumption that the experience and competency of the handloader is at least adequate. That's not always so, especially with those who may have never read and understood the material in at least a couple of handloading manuals. Perhaps they get their handloading education from the Internet.

Industry standards for consistency in the powders available to handloaders shouldn't vary more than about 3% from lot-to-lot; at least that used to be the case. Based on my own chronographing, the lot-to-lot variance seems to often be less than that.

Even with alleged "universal" loads that generally work well, safe and prudent load development is still part of the process.
 
Back
Top