I am reading some interesting stuff out there concerning load data. It seems that I have it all wrong. I was under the impression that load data is merely a guideline and not a recipe. Substituting components such as primers, brass and bullets(same weight) was acceptable as long as I started low and worked up looking for signs of pressure along the way. Lots of fellow reloaders out there telling me that I cannot deviate from the components listed in the load data. I have several manuals and I don't recall any of them saying that their data should be considered a recipe. Maybe it's in there I just missed it?

Question:
Is published load data a Recipe or just a set of Guidelines?

Choices:
Recipe, Cannot Swap Components
Guideline, Swapping is OK

 

I've been under the same impression as you for the last 30 or so years and have yet to experience any adverse results. Where are your "fellow reloaders" getting all their wisdom?

32-two so far.....apparantly we all read the same forum!!!!!

Well, for us who live in other countries, have discovered from day one that published loading data should be used as a guide line only.

For the simple reason that many of the actualy components in any published data has not been available to us. So we had to make substitutions.

And wonder of wonders! They worked!

In fact, one should bear in mind that ANY powder can be USED for ANY caliber with ANY bullet.

But, one has to use at least SOME of that jelly normally found between the ears.

If I list all the things we actually do while reloading our ammo, I might get voted into the nearest mental institute.

And by talking to others who live in other countries where loading components are not widely available, it seems we are not alone.

Add me to the list of guiedline guys.
I can't remember ever using the exact recipe for any load. (Since 1948)
But, to keep the barrel and action as an integral unit , I start low and work up.

Don

Hey Steve, I believe "both" are correct, it depends on what you are loading for.

When talking "Shotguns" it is really best to follow the Recipe exactly. Small changes can create unique fluctuating Pressure Spikes that can easily damage shotguns.

With Rifles, the term Guidelines is appropriate, because of the unique variabilities found in each firearm. Developing the Load by starting on the Low (listed) end and working up while watching for ALL the various Pressure Indications is the way to go.

Some of the older Pistols and Revolvers just can't handle the Loads that some of the newer models can. The only thing that works here as a real Pressure Indicator is to measure Pressure Ring Expansion(PRE). Case Head Expansion(CHE) simply won't work at some of the Low Pressures listed for these cartridges.

Chronographs only indicate Velocity, they do not indicate Pressure, and many good intentioned, but wrong, folks have mislead reloaders into thinking so for years.

As for the Haphazard Strain Gauge Systems(HSGS), a person can use a Hodgdon Manual and "guess" as accurately at a Load's Pressure as you can with them. That is because the HSGSs operate, by design, on Guesstimates, Fudge Factors and Non-Calibrated Set-Ups. A total waste of money for anyone outside a recognized Ballistics Lab.

All persons fall somewhere on the authoritarian - anarchist spectrum.

Those who desire to control others and be controlled will likely follow the path of load book fundamentalism.

I have had posters on the internet state that I was "crazy and dangerous" for posting some load. When I found the same load in some obscure load book, the reaction changes to, "Oh, well it's ok then."

The feeling of self righteousness does not come from science, it comes from the brain stem, where other base instincts like going to the bathroom originate.


The reality is that there is great diversity in handloading abilities, and some will just have to follow the recipes. Others, who know what they are doing, can just make up loads.

Shotgun/recipe. Rife and pistol guideline in most cases. But with 296 powder in some calibers, 357, 44 mag. the Winchester loading manual (1999) had loading data/components, that was not to be changed in any way. Even now if you look at the Hodgdon website, you will see a warning, not to reduce powder charge by more than 3 % using ww296 or warningH110. But yet there loading data give a starting load much lower than 3%.

I think the poll is too simple: It forces you to choose between 2 and only 2 positions. In reality, I suspect most of us vary between them. E.g., a person new to reloading would be better served by following a recipe exactly, particularly if max. loads will be used. That's also a good idea for old hands when using milsurp/exotic powders. Does IMR 7383 ring a bell? As one gains experience, you learn what to expect from the various components (rifle & pistol) and veer away from the strict adherence to a "recipe," particularly if a chronograph is used. In fact, I still follow a recipe when I've not seen much published data on say the use of a particular powder, in this instance CLAYS (original formulation) in a given cartridge, the .44Mag., with a given bullet, a .240gr. home-cast bullet.

The various reloading manuals are dead on accurate; EVERY ONE says "If any component is changed, start low and work up ONLY if no pressure signs are evident."

Those following that advice will be ok, those who ignore it are working for a Darwin Award.

My 0.02 worth. I think a lot of guys are looking for a "pet load" and cant be bothered or dont have the time or skills to develop loads.

Thats the kind of query that regularly appears on this site.

They just want to grab a recipe and assemble it. Thats ok if the recipe is conservative. I think these guys are reloading for economical reasons. They will never get the most out of their rifles but if they are happy so be it.

The experimenters who are striving for performance or accuracy will follow procedures and work up loads and keep records etc.

Most of the posters on this thread appear to fall in that last category including me.

Years ago, we built a 416 Rigby Improved on a Dakota 76 action.

After we finished it, I thought of developing loads for it with both the Trophy Bonded Bear Claw bullet, and the Barnes Super Solid.

I loaded 3 rounds with 105 grains of H4350 and seated a 400 grain Bear Claw bullets, and fired them. I was using a 5 power scope.

When I looked through the spotting scope, I saw all three cutting each other.

I took the same cases, resized them and loaded them with the same charge and the Barnes 400 grain Super Solids.

I fired these at the same target.

The result was as you can see in the target above,

I stopped right there. Loaded my ammo and took the rifle to Africa.

I shot an elephant, several buffalo, two lions and an assortment of plains game.

That has been the shortest load development I have ever done for any rifle.

Saeed, et al, I understand that. Luck!

Years ago a group of us played cards, Hearts, during our lunch breaks. Of thousands of hands, ONCE, I got a hand in which I just laid the cards on the table after the dealing/passing - I had a solid string of winners in each suit! That was the only time I've ever even heard of such luck at Hearts.

Sometimes things just happen to fall in place, first time out. Wish such luck would happen to me more often, especially when developing a good handload.

quote:

Originally posted by Kiwi Vince:


The experimenters who are striving for performance or accuracy will follow procedures and work up loads and keep records etc.

Most of the posters on this thread appear to fall in that last category including me.

There are over 100 forums that talk about hand loading on the WWW, but AR is unique in the ratio of experimenters to recipe followers.

There are a few websites with more posts than AR that have banned me for posting work up data that went past the published data.