"BEST" Reloading manual?

The thing about Min OAL is just a safety thing, to never go below that with the listed powder charge or bad things can/will happen.

Never took it as argumentative, just us talking (typing here) :)

When I first started loading, I used dippers and made a lot of custom ones by grinding down shell casings and gluing on little handles.

It seems for the auto discs the finer powders are a lot closer to the chart then the flake. Powders like Blue Dot, Unique are probably 2-3 discs different in my batches.

I tried the micrometer thing but for small charges it's useless.

I just find a disc that is close to what I really want and live with it. If the max load is 6.0 grs and all I can get is 5.5 it works for me. The paper can't tell.:)
 
Over All Length and Seating Depth…

I still don’t get it. I don’t see why they don’t tell you that you need X amount of case volume remaining with Y powder amount for Z named powder. I can only assume there is enough “give” to work with since it doesn’t seem to be a problem.

But then some guys say not to use .44 special data using magnum cases since the case volume is different. If that is the case then why not just seat the bullet a bit further in the case??? A slight crimp at the edge should hold in most any .44 bullet loaded at .44 special pressures. But this isn’t done.

It just seems that you should really know the “Maximum Seating Depth” for any powder used since that has more influence on pressure in a bad way. Seat deep and pressure jumps up, seat too far out and there may be not enough pressure and leave a bullet in the barrel.

But again, I guess there is enough tolerance worked into the load data to cover this. And deep down I really do know I’m being OCD about it.
 
I try to use a current manual by the manufacturer of the bullet I am loading. When possible I back that up with info by the powder manufacturer.

I do not use data posted by individuals on the net. They do not have proper pressure testing equipment and most of the time they don't have anymore experience than I do.

I find the reloading articles in Reloader magazine and Rifle usefull and I keep all issues of both for reference material. I have Pet Loads, but because it is dated I only use the starting load data.

I have seen some pretty serious injurys due to reloading mistakes in my 40 years of reloading. I have also seen a good many wrecked firearms where there were no injuries. All this has me convinced that there is a reloading angel that watches over us as a group. I am much more fussy about the data I use these days and if I find myself wanting more performance from a gun than the manuals show, then I buy or trade for another gun that will give that performance to me, without the risk. My eyes, fingers, hands etc...are just too darn valuable to risk them like I did back when.

Choose your reloading data sources carefully.
 
Maximumbob54 said:
Over All Length and Seating Depth…



It just seems that you should really know the “Maximum Seating Depth” for any powder used since that has more influence on pressure in a bad way. Seat deep and pressure jumps up, seat too far out and there may be not enough pressure and leave a bullet in the barrel.
Click to expand...

Isn't that just another way of saying Minimum OAL??

Don't seat your bullets lower than the Min OAL or you will kabom!;) Anything over, up to Saami Max is OK.

Look at Hodgdons data for say the 230 gr bullet in 45 ACP every dang one of them is 1.200 for every powder.

I asked them about this and was told for testing, keeping them all the same to determine a safe length no matter what bullet so everything is consistent and we do not blow ourselves up (not in those exact words):)

Same reason they use Mag primers for any mag load even though the powder does not require it.
 
I like the Lee, because I find it to be the most comprehensive, & because they list powders in order of most likely accuracy.

Some cartridges like 45-70, are broken down into multiple levels, such as old time, Marlin 1895, & Ruger No.1.

They also list a fair amount of applicable cast bullet data.

I load a lot of Nosler rifle bullets, & find that their manual can be helpful - but not the last word. Their 5th, does not even list the best to date (IMHO) bughole accuracy powder, RL-22, for 25-06. Had to go back to Lee, for that one.

Lyman always gets a look, but I always compare their data to Lee (& others) - for starters.

W/ regards to COL, conventional wisdom for rifle loads, is "close to the lands". I've found that the ammo manufacturers have done a good bit of the work for us - w/ their "premium" ammo lines. Federal Gold Match 308, & WW Supreme are good examples. The 25-06, WW Supreme (Nosler 117CT) shoots well in a variety of rifles. Couldn't tell you what powder they use, but I "stole" their COL of 3.185" (way off the lands), & use it for Nosler 100BT, 115BT, & the older 120SB.

If I ever break down & buy a couple of boxes of their .257" 110AB, 3.185" will be my starting point. I'd be willing to bet lunch that in the end, it will be the magic number for that Nosler bullet too.

There is no "last word" for loading data. Too many variables. As always, no matter who's data, the best policy is to start low / work up slow, think things through FIRST, & pay very close attention to the details...

Now, let's go burn some powder!
 
One cannot have too many manuals. Lee's is very useful but some powder makers were publishing horrible wimmpy loads when itr was compiled. Lyman's is very good especially for those of us who love cast bullets. Single most useful with usefull comparisons ofpowder performance taken in the same barrel? I'd vote for Hodgdon #26.
 
I've got several different manuals, but they're all used as starting points. I only have 1 firearm, out of the last 20 I've loaded for, that came close to duplicating what the load books would state.
Not to be rude to anyone on this board, but it is quite comical to read about different loads that people assume are +P just because that's what the manual states. I've developed loads for my 44 and 357 that would scare some of these folks if I shared them. But, the loads have been tailored to my gun while very carefully looking for pressure signs. With that being said, load books are nice starting points.
 
Rule3 said:
Isn't that just another way of saying Minimum OAL??
Click to expand...

Nope, the two are not the same thing, not even close UNLESS you are talking about the same, exact bullet.

Same weight bullets can be VERY different in length.

These two bullets are the same weight and have the same "type" of nose. With the same OAL, which is going to have the deeper seating depth?


RainierBerry230grbullets.jpg


Okay, say you build your load with the shorter bullet, the one that gives you less in the case and your load is a "real" maximum (not one from a book). Say you seat to the same OAL but use the longer bullet AND your thought process is "Aren't they the same".

You are flirting with a problem friend and someone that is loading ammunition, needs to understand the difference. :eek:

FWIW
 
smith crazy said:
Nope, the two are not the same thing, not even close UNLESS you are talking about the same, exact bullet.

Same weight bullets can be VERY different in length.

These two bullets are the same weight and have the same "type" of nose. With the same OAL, which is going to have the deeper seating depth?


RainierBerry230grbullets.jpg


Okay, say you build your load with the shorter bullet, the one that gives you less in the case and your load is a "real" maximum (not one from a book). Say you seat to the same OAL but use the longer bullet AND your thought process is "Aren't they the same".

You are flirting with a problem friend and someone that is loading ammunition, needs to understand the difference. :eek:

FWIW
Click to expand...

Well since the "Maximum seating" depth is not published anywhere that I know of (this is all for naught) and we are talking about the Lee published loads which do not list a specific bullet in many cases, then you do not want to go shorter than their published min OAL.

In the Lee data only the bullet weight is listed other than a few XTP's. The Min OAL is shown to change based on the powder.

In your two bullets shown, not knowing or even knowing what bullet it is (say one is Berry and one is Rainer) show me where the data for those exact bullet is???

As I mentioned, look at Hodgdons 45 ACP 230 gr. It just says 230gr bullet either FMJ FP or Lead RN and they are ALL 1.200, regardless of powder.

Now, are all those bullets the same length??????????
 
Rule3 said:
In your two bullets shown, not knowing or even knowing what bullet it is (say one is Berry and one is Rainer) show me where the data for those exact bullet is???

As I mentioned, look at Hodgdons 45 ACP 230 gr. It just says 230gr bullet either FMJ FP or Lead RN and they are ALL 1.200, regardless of powder.

Now, are all those bullets the same length??????????
Click to expand...

The "EXACT" data is known for very FEW bullets, unless you want to go down the "Speer Manual" trail again! ;)

Those are a Ranier and a Berry as you have well guessed and what does each site say to use for their bullets? Right, lead bullet data, the EXACT data for that EXACT bullet! (Don't go OCD on me here!)

This is where the loader has to be smarter than the published data! If you loaded one bullet and then switched, YOU aren't going to find that information in ANY manual! YOU have to know what you are doing and how x affects y. Otherwise, you are always going to be held captive by book loads that keep getting weaker and weaker.

Just my rant.................done now...................:D
 
I was told by a tech at Sierra bullets that their manual was not a recipe book but rather a report on how different loads performed on a particular day. Sounded good to me, and made me look at loading manuals in a different light.
 
snake charmer said:
I was told by a tech at Sierra bullets that their manual was not a recipe book but rather a report on how different loads performed on a particular day. Sounded good to me, and made me look at loading manuals in a different light.
Click to expand...

Semantics. What did they use on that day? The recipe they printed for us to look at! :rolleyes:
 
Rule3 said:
Well since the "Maximum seating" depth is not published anywhere that I know of
Click to expand...

Well, I used to have limited knowledge in this area too! ;)

Just because WE don't know something, doesn't mean that it CAN'T be known or SHOULDN'T be known.

Check out Phil Sharpe's book on reloading and remember what I told you: "We used to know things but now, since we didn't pass them on, we think we are smarter and don't NEED to know them."

With that in mind, history will always be repeating itself! ;)


Seriously, in Phil's data, one portion of it, "SEATING DEPTH"!

FWIW
 
Show me the DATA.:D

Lets take lead SWC bullets with a cannelure. There are lots and lots of them out there. All kinds of different molds and different folks making them.

Now unless it is some odd ball, how many re-loaders actually measure the OAL or seating depth of those Boolits??

Or, do they just seat them to the cannelure, crimp and if they fit the cylinder all is well?? Now are all those in what ever caliber the exact length boolit?? No they aren't.

In the Berrys, Rainer example, IMHO the slight difference in total bullet length would not make a dangerous difference, even up to a max listed load for lead or 1/2 the fmj depending on what you believe. I have shot thousands of Berrys at FNJ loads and had no problems. I do not have either so can not measure the few mil variance

No, I do believe that is why so many think that the load manuals and powder companies have anemic load data.

I believe in their wisdom they have developed the loads and used certain OAL (like 1.200) for all 230 gr 45 ACP so their fine customers do not blow themselves up.;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Hodgdon Reloading Data Center VS Hornady Reloading Handbook
2 3
Replies
48
Views
42K
jag22
J
T
357 Magnum / Win 231 / 158gr LSWC
Replies
11
Views
15K
rbswede
rbswede
C
New to reloading
Replies
18
Views
3K
dmar
D
HAWKEYE10
Rifle reloading, where do I start?
Replies
11
Views
2K
trulyapostolic
trulyapostolic
J
Need to fine tune 38 load with HP-38
2
Replies
26
Views
6K
jim8115
J

Latest posts

Back
Top