Look for a bullet puller and dump al the powder in your garden or across your lawn. I've been told powder is a good fertilizer.
Loading data from 1970 Speer manual?
- Thread starter .38SuperMan
- Start date
Yep, Bullet puller. Gunpowder as fertilizer, yep, BUT takes a long time to break down the nitrogen content to plant useability.
Pulled bullets and primed brass can be sold because of todays' shortages.
Pulled bullets and primed brass can be sold because of todays' shortages.
I've got Speer #7,#8, and #9 my brother loaned me many years ago.
Is that you, Jim?
Load testing back then was done by shooting and looking for pressure signs. For low pressure cartridges, like .38 Special, it is a completely bogus method. You'd have to be way over SAAMI spec to see any high pressure signs.
The other bugaboo is safety. The safety objective of the books was to keep you from blowing your gun up. But the safety of the gun wasn't.
Exactly. You wouldn't blow the gun up, but it wouldn't take long to shoot it loose.
27 Man
Member
I started reloading .38s in 1972 too. My source of information was Speer #8. Still got it with all my notes in it from “back in the day”. Looks like I restricted myself to conservative loads.
"I remember powders made by Alcan, DuPont, IMR and a couple other companies....." quote;
I had a lot of the old powders but finally used them all up by the 1980's and finally got rid of my IMR 800-X that I bought for Steel pellet loading, for ducks, that was replaced by Alliant "Steel" powder.
W540 was the last of the old powders to go, that I had on hand.
I have yet to buy any new "E" powders with the new numbers, with the old new powders still holding out.
CFE-p and BE-86 are the two newest powders that I have picked up, andso far, have worked out, fine.
I had a lot of the old powders but finally used them all up by the 1980's and finally got rid of my IMR 800-X that I bought for Steel pellet loading, for ducks, that was replaced by Alliant "Steel" powder.
W540 was the last of the old powders to go, that I had on hand.
I have yet to buy any new "E" powders with the new numbers, with the old new powders still holding out.
CFE-p and BE-86 are the two newest powders that I have picked up, andso far, have worked out, fine.
Speer #7 was the manual at the time when I started reloading... passed on to me by an Uncle. I bought #8 & #9 when they came out, but having no reason to change the loads that I found in #7, those newer manuals sat on the shelf, largely unused, and then I skipped to #12.
Talk about living under a rock...LOL, until now, I had no idea about the notoriety of Speer #8.
Not only do I get a kick out of reading vintage reloading manuals ( I have Speer manuals from #1 to #12), I still need the data because I still have powder, like Alcan-AL5 and Winchester 630 that were in the earlier manuals.
Talk about living under a rock...LOL, until now, I had no idea about the notoriety of Speer #8.
Not only do I get a kick out of reading vintage reloading manuals ( I have Speer manuals from #1 to #12), I still need the data because I still have powder, like Alcan-AL5 and Winchester 630 that were in the earlier manuals.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 8,782
- Reaction score
- 10,821
I have forty, maybe fifty manuals, many of them from the 'fifties and 'sixties. I'd have to look it up to be sure, but at least one of the Speer books has some heavy duty cast .45 Auto Rim loads using #2400 powder. I can't quote the charge weights offhand, but seems like they were fairly substantial.
minconrevo
Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 919
- Reaction score
- 836
...... I remember powders made by Alcan said:
ReloadforFun
Member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2021
- Messages
- 281
- Reaction score
- 318
Win 630 is not part of the Win 231 lineage. Prior to Win 231 we had Win 230 and Win 230P.
Not that Win 630 was a bad powder, it was simply part of the pattern Winchester had of releasing many powders, and not long after discontinuing many powders.
Not that Win 630 was a bad powder, it was simply part of the pattern Winchester had of releasing many powders, and not long after discontinuing many powders.
ReloadforFun
Member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2021
- Messages
- 281
- Reaction score
- 318
I know of one published load using SR4756 that, when retested while preparing the companies newer manual, tested literally off the chart for pressure.
SR4756 was not included in the newer manual.
SR4756 was not included in the newer manual.
For #8, they did not use CUP. They did not pressure test. The manual is unsafe.
Of course, there are some safe loads in it. The issue is that there are some unsafe loads in it.
Please don't blow up your gun while I'm around. I suppose you could loosen it whenever you want, if you can predict the difference.
cowboy4evr
Member
Good grief , " put it to rest " ! This is an old , very old topic that has been talked to death . There are many different opinions , most from those that don't even own Speer 8 . So let's move on gentlemen . Regards Paul
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 8,782
- Reaction score
- 10,821
I'm not much on the severely re-hashed threads either, but with this one (and it may be the only one), about one out of fifteen or twenty comments is something new not posted previously with regard to #8. I don't see how anyone unfamiliar with the book could post anything worthwhile, only what they've read and that doesn't really count for anything. I agree with you that many comments are probably from these folks.
There have been occasional misprints in data. Back when the 125 gr .357 Magnum load was the New Big Thing, Alliant, nee Hercules, put out a data sheet (available in the LGS) that included new data for these bullets.
A buddy promptly bought a box of bullets and showed up wanting me to load them. I looked at the .357 data for Unique, then consulted a Lyman manual and found it was pretty much the same as the Max load for .44 Magnum. I reduced the load, then thought about it more and reduced it again. The load produced a muzzle flash you could see in bright sunlight and produced severely cratered primers.
My next visit to the LGS I found a revised data sheet with loads that were sane.
A buddy promptly bought a box of bullets and showed up wanting me to load them. I looked at the .357 data for Unique, then consulted a Lyman manual and found it was pretty much the same as the Max load for .44 Magnum. I reduced the load, then thought about it more and reduced it again. The load produced a muzzle flash you could see in bright sunlight and produced severely cratered primers.
My next visit to the LGS I found a revised data sheet with loads that were sane.
As a note, there are other manuals that have errors in them
that have loads that go past a safe "Standard" load for the weapon.
Many are safe in a 38 "K" frame but should not be tried in the little J frame.
I am not going to list them but they are out there and one reason for loaders
to work new loads up when using "New" data for the first time.
Next page..........
Apparently not, since it is the subject of the post? Over the years, have seen this discussion get resurrected repeatedly by those rehashing the use of #8 data for 38 special.
This post is an excellent reminder of the precautions necessary when using older manuals, especially Speer # 8 for sr-4756 in 158 gn 38 special.
gwpercle
Member
I bought the then brand new 1970 Speer #8 Manual to go along with my brand new 1970 Ruger Blackhawk 357 Magnum , RCBS reloading dies and Alcan #5 powder ...
I believed Speer knew what they were doing ... it was published data !
I thank Bill Ruger for building a hell for stout S.A. revolver and the Good Lord for looking out for ambitious young reloaders !
In the midst of the recent powder shortage I found two cans of Alcan #5 on the top shelf of my closet ... pulled out Speer #9 and used the data for mid range 158 gr. LSWC 38 special loads and they shot great ... wish I had more .
Waste not , want not !
I haven't heard of any other powders being the same as any of the old Alcan Powders but that would be interesting to know ... like HP38 and W231 now being the same .
Gary
I believed Speer knew what they were doing ... it was published data !
I thank Bill Ruger for building a hell for stout S.A. revolver and the Good Lord for looking out for ambitious young reloaders !
In the midst of the recent powder shortage I found two cans of Alcan #5 on the top shelf of my closet ... pulled out Speer #9 and used the data for mid range 158 gr. LSWC 38 special loads and they shot great ... wish I had more .
Waste not , want not !
I haven't heard of any other powders being the same as any of the old Alcan Powders but that would be interesting to know ... like HP38 and W231 now being the same .
Gary
Last edited:
Compare with Hornady, 1973. I assume they used case head expansion of less than 0.0005".
38 Super (5" Colt Government Model) 125 gr jacketed, 6.5 gr Unique, 1250 fps. Kind of like 357 Sig.
38 Spc (Smith 6" Model 14) 158 gr lead, 10.9 gr 630) 1150 fps.
Must be considered that when testing is done with real guns, there are fast guns and slow guns within the same model and barrel length.
630 shows up as the top velocity load in numerous pistol loadings. IIRC, it was prone to pressure spiking (temperature sensitive?) which is why it was discontinued.
38 Super (5" Colt Government Model) 125 gr jacketed, 6.5 gr Unique, 1250 fps. Kind of like 357 Sig.
38 Spc (Smith 6" Model 14) 158 gr lead, 10.9 gr 630) 1150 fps.
Must be considered that when testing is done with real guns, there are fast guns and slow guns within the same model and barrel length.
630 shows up as the top velocity load in numerous pistol loadings. IIRC, it was prone to pressure spiking (temperature sensitive?) which is why it was discontinued.
^^^agree.
For instance, a 'newbie' reloader (and there are many 'newbies' now) is given/acquires an old manual, maybe this thread will have them tread carefully.
