quote:

Lay down like the Thor? What a ridiculously self-absorbed statement. I think you meant bore or whore.

Your words, needed no reintrepretation by me.

would it be a major problem for them to publish a book for modern rifles and a disclaimer for older or secific actions? Just asking I only know that I do see some loads for say a 7mm rem mag that I have loaded for eight modern 7mags and the book is a minimum of 6 grains to low. It may just not make sense to have 2 books i am kind of curious.

quote:

would it be a major problem for them to publish a book for modern rifles and a disclaimer for older or secific actions? Just asking I only know that I do see some loads for say a 7mm rem mag that I have loaded for eight modern 7mags and the book is a minimum of 6 grains to low. It may just not make sense to have 2 books i am kind of curious.

Gerry, If I published a loading Manual it would be called "For Modern Bolt Action Rifles Only".

quote:

Originally posted by gerryb:
would it be a major problem for them to publish a book for modern rifles and a disclaimer for older or secific actions? Just asking I only know that I do see some loads for say a 7mm rem mag that I have loaded for eight modern 7mags and the book is a minimum of 6 grains to low. It may just not make sense to have 2 books i am kind of curious.

There all kinds of stupid people in this world and that is why for example that Marlin brought out the 450.

The difference between hand loaded ammunition for the 45-70 loaded to the same pressures as the 450 Marlin is so marginal they are the same. So why introduce a new cartridge? There would be way to many people killed even if the boxes for this high pressure 45-70 were all put in Orange boxes and had blue bullets atop someone would get blown up. That is the only reason the 450 Marlin has a belt.

I recently read of a guy who said he chambered and fired a .270 in a 7mm mag. Another said he had loaded a .40 magazine to include a 9mm, which then chambered and fired (?). Nothing was damaged and neither seemed to think it was a serious mistake. One even said the rounds just 'looked so much alike'!! Meaning ammo could have flashing colored lights and some people would still screw up.

Now, from that, and considering that ALL manuals tell us how to develop loads safely and it still gets ignored, how could book makers do anything that would make certain the mindless could reload safely? (And the rest of us really don't need special books. IMHO.)

Jim, Boss, you guys do have a point. I'm sure my Lawyer would have a fit. Maybe that's why I haven't written it yet.

Interesting post - I've wondered about conflicting manuals and the 7mm Rem Mag myself. The old gunsmith who taught me most about reloading worked up my original load made it for my rifle - it scared the crap out of me when I read the maximums in a couple of manuals that were considerably under the load I had been using. When I used a different primer it made a huge difference in accuracy and it certainly could have been a difference in pressure as well.

Certainly all of the variables can make a difference and testing equipment has gotten better. But living in Southern California I am a firm believer in Lawyer Paranoia. The fear of law suits infects every part of modern commercial life. "Don't drive into ditch" signs on a golf course make it pretty clear somone was sued. As an employee of a large company my decisions are quite different than if I were acting as an individual - I'm aware of that potential of being sued or fined all of the time.