I find that there is no ryme or reason when it comes to comparing loading manuals.

Personally, I find the Hodgdon manual to be far and away the most conservative, while Lyman seems to be the most liberal.

What do you guys think?

What do you mean by "conservative"? Do you mean hich ones recommend lighter loads, or maybe ones that adhere to loading standards (i.e. proper bullet letout)?

I have what I think is the original Hornady manual (1977 copyright). For many calibers, its max. loads are considerably hotter than those I've seen in other manuals, such as the Speer manual I also have (I think it's from the early 80s). I think that Hornady loads have been made more conservative -- meaning giving lower charges as maximum -- in subsequent editions of their loading manual(s).

The Lyman manual (47th ed.) tends to be the most interesting because it lists loads for numerous bullets and numerous powders. But none of these list loads for VV or other European powders, nor for the more recent Hodgdon ones.

Hodgdon. What is interesting, is they list mild max loads with their powders, then they list hot loads for other companies' powders that produce more velocity. Weird.

GAHUNTER,

I have four reloading manuals Speer, Honardy, Lyman and Accurate.

I have from Wolfe Pub. a book--> Big Bore Rifles and Cartridges. An old gunsmith who helps me in reloading field. And of course forums like this one.

I can advice you to purchase a software called Quickload in add.

I find that there is no ryme or reason when it comes to comparing loading manuals.

Personally, I find the Hodgdon manual to be far and away the most conservative, while Lyman seems to be the most liberal.

What do you guys think?[/QUOTE]

------------------
BER007
Keep the faith in any circumstances
------------------------
BBER007@HOTMAIL.COM

I think that as chronographs, pressure testing equipment, and lawyers get more common, that the loading manuals are are definately siding on the safe side. Not that this is a bad thing. Keep in mind, they're just loading guides. FWIW - Dan

Be careful with those older manuals. I have been reloaading for over 30 years so I have accumulated several reloading manual, one being the #7 Speer. I generally fine a good load and stay with it forever ie: same powder bullet etc. A couple of years ago I bought a new S&W629. I was going to use it as a tent gun on an Alaskan drop hunt that I went on. I started looking for a load to start with on this gun and found a recipe for a 240 grn bullet using Hodgdon powder #110. Althought I had newer reloading books including a Speer #12, I elected to start with a load listed in the #7. I loaded up approx 50 rounds and by the time I shot #15 which stuck a jacketed speer 240 about midway down the 6 1/2" barrel I had one squib that stuck the bullet in the forcing cone, a jacket separation which left the jacket in the barrel and the dirtiest gun I ever seen I was thoroughly confused. I used an Electronic measure and double check the casing prior to seating the bullets. When I returned home after removing the lodged bullet which is a story in and of itself, I disassembled each of the remainding loaded rounds to recheck the charges. I then wrote an e mail to speer, (bullet and reloading data) winchester Western (primers) and Hodgdon Powders (propellant#110) I micrometered the speer bullets and recorded the diameters. I explained in detail what and how I loaded these rounds and what I had experienced. Speer stated their bullets diameters were within specifications, Winchester stated a primer either goes off or not and doesn't half ignite the propellant. Hogdon stated the old data that I used from the Speer manual #7 should not have been used since each new recipe in fact cancels out any previous propellant data. They also stated thet the 110 propellant should only be used at max loads. I never heard this before but I guess it makes sense. I then used the more current data and none of the previous problems were ever ex-perienced.

[This message has been edited by raamw (edited 01-30-2002).]

The A-Square reloading manual "Any Shot You Want" is the most conservative.

I say this because they show pressure data for loads that exceed the maximum average as specified by the governing body, and shade them with a pink bar to point out that they are too hot. There is considerable other information on pressure and how it is measured as well.

jim dodd

------------------
"if you are to busy to
hunt, you are too busy."

Depends on the particular gun the writers of the manual used to develop the data, and the methodology involved.

Time and again, I've cautioned my fellow shooters that EACH GUN IS A RULE TO ITSELF! A mild load in one barrel/chamber combination may be excessive in another of the same caliber. Therefore, the "Accurate" manual may be more "conservative" with a .270 Winchester than the "Lyman" manual, while the situation may be reversed with a .22 Hornet or a .375 H & H.

So, when an old "Hornady" manual cites a load worked up in a Model 721 Remington in .244 with a 26" barrel as using 3 more grains of powder and giving 200 fps more velocity than a Ruger 77 in 6mm Remington with a 22" barrel that was used in a newer "Sierra" manual, remember, the guns are different, as are the powder lots, primers, cases, and methodology.

As a young squirt, I used to revel in finding something like the super high velocity loads in the Speer Manual Number 8 with Norma 205, thinking it was now okay for me to load THAT much powder, and presumably get THAT much velocity, just because somebody had written it down in a book. What foolishness.

Data manuals can only tell you what a particular set of components did in the gun (or pressure barrel) that they were using, and list a load that they consider maximum IN THAT GUN. Interpreting their data as a basis for where to start with your gun is a job that only YOU can do.

I have a few guns which won't digest the maximums in most manuals without sticky bolts and enlarged primer pockets, and have other guns which need 5% more powder than "maximum" to reach a desireable operating pressure.

One thing I've done that helps clarify the situation--

I got a Loadbook for each of my calibers. That collects reloading data from many sources in one book.

Then, I make a matrix for each bullet weight... first one of interest for me was 180 grains from an '06. For that one bullet, I put the sources of the loads across the top (Speer, Accurate, Hornady, etc.), and the specific powders down the left side. Then, I fill in as many cells as I can with the recommended powder charge and advertised muzzle velocity. When I get actual chronograph data, I replace the published data with my own, and mark it with a red dot. It is very helpful, since I can look across several published loads for one type of powder, and pick one that is not an extremely hot load.

You do have to be careful, because some bullets are harder to engrave than others. Partitions, for example, require a slightly reduced charge, because they are a "stiffer" bullet.

I think they are all lame.

The most current Hornady manual is the lamest of all. For example, it's max .30-06 loads with the 180 grain bullet is 2700 fps I believe, and the same for the .308 Winchester with 165 grain bullet.

Isn't that odd when you can buy FACTORY ammo of the "Light Magnum" or "high Energy" style and get 2900 fps from the .30-06 and 2880 fps from the .308.

And that original Hornady manual was nice - - good safe loads that had some juice.

These manuals are now written by lawyers. I am suprised that reloading components are even sold given the lawsuit-minded nature of everything.

Just look at how factory ammo is watered down 10 or 20 years after a cartridge is introduced. Everyone is afraid.

I like Handloading for the American Hunter, by Bob Hagel. It's out of print, but if you look around you can find one. It's a great book, and by today's standards he looks like a psycho-maniac. A refreshing contrast to today's timid souls.

Yes, that Alphin book is a joke. If you were new to reloading and read that first, you probably would never load a single round. And if you did, your .300 Win Mag would be shooting at .30-06 levels out of fear of blowing yourself up. He won't even list data for the .35 Whelen, but of course his proprietary goof-ball rounds are listed.

The old Hodgdon manual was a good resource. It listed pressures from start to max so you could get a feel for how a powder/bullet combo acted. It wasn't perfect, but it got you started and sort of let you knew where things were headed.

For example, all these manuals load the .30-06 to around 48,000 CUP. That's fine for your old converted Springfield. But my Weatherby will handle 55,000 CUP. Why should I be limited?

www.rifleshooter.com

[This message has been edited by KuduKing (edited 01-30-2002).]

A lot of good information on this thread and I would like to add this as well. About 15 years ago learned that when working up a max load at 35 degrees will get very ugly at 95 degrees! The next summer took the rile out to the ranch set everything up in the shade mind you and tried 2 shots with both times the bolt was very difficult to open! Had to pull all of those bullets and drop the charge by 1.5gr in my 30-06.

DWM