Loading data from 1970 Speer manual?

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

I heard that speer used cup measurements in their older manuals, then they got pressure transducers and the lawyers went crazy when they saw the data,

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]

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

 

[rockquarry]

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

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.

 

[WR Moore]

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.

 

[vinn]

i have not had any problems with my speer nimber 11 manual.

 

[Nevada Ed]

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

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..........

 

[zeke]

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

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]

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

 

[shocker]

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.

 

[oldman10mm]

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.

^^^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.

 

[.38SuperMan]

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.

Im not a new reloaded but got away from shooting for twenty years for various reasons and got back in five years ago. The internet and forums were pretty new at the time I got out.

I was completely unaware of the questionable data in this manual until purchasing it and posting on the forum. There are a lot of new reloaded and people like me that have loaded for many years but for one reason or another weren't aware of manuals with published dangerous loads.

Thanks for the information!

 

[rockquarry]

Im not a new reloaded but got away from shooting for twenty years for various reasons and got back in five years ago. The internet and forums were pretty new at the time I got out.

I was completely unaware of the questionable data in this manual until purchasing it and posting on the forum. There are a lot of new reloaded and people like me that have loaded for many years but for one reason or another weren't aware of manuals with published dangerous loads.

Thanks for the information!

There are quite a few loads published in older paper sources that I'm pretty sure would be at least potentially dangerous because they were right on the edge of maximum or slightly over maximum when tested without the benefit of pressure testing equipment. If a different gun was used and/or one or more components were substituted for those listed in the data, this could push the load well past safe. These might not wreck a gun, but they could easily cause a lot of premature wear, not to mention inaccuracy and poor brass life.

Many use the "lawyer" excuse today and really believe it regarding toned down loads, but more accurate testing equipment and methods has a lot more to do with current load data than any other factor. Liability and lawyers probably figure in, but in a much smaller ways than many presume.

 

[4barrel]

I bought #10 new and still use time to time. Lots of target loads for 38 special.

 

[Rogeronimo]

I bought #10 new and still use time to time. Lots of target loads for 38 special.

I cut my teeth on the no.10 Speer, which is why I'm quite fond of Herco. Shoot, I still use International Clays from time to time for snappy pistol loads.

 

[.38SuperMan]

I just ordered a #14 that's a little more up to date.

 

[Gamecock]

I just ordered a #14 that's a little more up to date.

But not up to date. Why not #15?

 

[Greenjoytj]

I just got Speer #15.
I called Speer back on 29 May 2019 to inquire about page 870 & 871 having the exact same data for two different bullets a Gold dot and a lead semi wad cutter. At that time I was told corrections would be in the next printing. I ordered and just received the Speer #15 second printing and the same data errors are in this issue too.
I called Speer again the said they'll make a note of this problem and pass it along.

Speer should issue a recall on their problematic old manuals but then manuals say to only use the most recent data in case there's been changes so I guess there covered by that safety rule.

 

[ddixie884]

For the past 5 years I"ve been liquidating a sizeable handgun collection - say an average of one a week. About one year remaining for sales. Family not interested in firearms. That said, I have a large quantity of reloaded ammo, most done in the 1970-80s. With my guns that fire this ammo going or gone, I realize a sale of my reloads is not likely, and giving it to friends as "component use only" would probably end up with firing likely. So, I sorted through this inventory to review load data. GOOD GRIEF ! When compared to recent sources of reloading data, over 2/3 of the loads were well above the "new" maximum load data. I certainly don't want to just leave it on the shelf and let my estate try to figure out the hazard they have, and what to do about it.

What can I do to destroy or safely dispose of this liability. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Chute-em...........

Or send them to me............

 

[nbedford]

i have not had any problems with my Speer number 11 manual.

From what I have read Speer has disclaimed the information in their manuals published prior to the #11 manual. So as far as I know it is ok.

 

[Erv]

I still use their 6 grains Unique load in a .38 Special case. My gun and I both like it, of course my revolver is a 686 L frame.