We all talk about "reduce the charge 10% when working up a new load."

Well, load data in most manuals is already reduced 10% on the "maximum" end to begin with. I look at listed CUP/PSI and consider the gun for which I'm loading.

My guns are new, in excellent mechanical condition, and well maintained. I'm not doing anything "experimental" on the load bench -- just the basic "bread/butter" reload.

I never begin with a 10% reduction in a book published load. I reduce with online, "forum" data -- and check with published data too -- IF the load appears truly "maximum." But if it falls into the realm of broadly published data, I don't reduce -- not with standard components.

I've never had "pressure signs." (And I check for them -- with a micrometer in some instances.)

I'm loading some pretty "tame" stuff: 45 ACP, 38/357, 44 magnum pistol, .223 Rem.

When I develop loads for .223 Ackley Improved, I reduce the "found" data and compare it to published .223 Rem. I run chronograph data on this stuff and keep copious records.

Were I running some really "heavy" calibers, I'd likely sneak up on the max load. 300 Win Mag comes to mind . . . 460 Weatherby, 470 Nitro Express.

But for run of the mill reloads, I just load by the book, at the "maximum" end of the chart. The indicated/published pressure data is no where near the maxium SAAMI spec.

Corporate attorney's for powder/component mfgs. have reduced the load for you.

But I'm certain there are those in here who disagree --

------------------
.223 Ackley Improved Wildcat Forum:
http://www.hotboards.com/plus/plus.mirage?who=223ackleyimproved

You guys have fun. I'll start at the start. JMO, Dutch.

Also, I read in a book by Col. Whelen (something like small arms design) that the problem with MAX LOADS is if you accidentially load an extra grain and then take the gun out in the hot sun and shoot it, then you can get yourself into real trouble.

I think I'll go with Dutch, start from the starting load. And, I think I'll stick with published max loads. I'll sacrafice 100 fps for a little extra safety.

I'll use myself as the prime example. When I first started loading I used Lee tools, No powder scale, I didn't have a clue about seating lengths so consequently I stuck a bolt in a 221 XP100. I pounded open the bolt with a soft hammer and the primer fell out. The primer pocket was so big I couldn't beleive my eyes. The only thing that saved my ignorant ass was the strength of a Remington action.

I didn't write any data down but at that time I used the top load in what ever manual I happened to have. To this day I haven't a clue what the load was but experience now tells me it overloaded and probably way over length, the necks were probably to thick for the throat and I'm not sure about the powder either. As I remember it was a bitch to close the bolt, also.

I stuck the bolt in a Remington 25-06 not much later and had to send it back to Remington to have it fixed. That time I had
acquired a powder scale and weighed my charges but they were still the top load and I still don't know about the components. I learned enough after that to stop messing around until I learned a lot more.

Nowadays we have tons of data available and tons of information on the do's and don'ts of loading AND the lawyers have, at least in this case, saved ourselves from ourselves.

For the most part, I don't care that the published data has a built in fudge factor, I keep those images of me and my ignorance right in front of me when ever I load for a new rifle AND all the other pictures I've seen over the years of what can happen when the tolerances built up the wrong way.

Having many years of loading experience and large mounts of tools to use still doesn't mean I won't get bit by Murphy's law and I always remember Powleys admonition that reducing the pressure by 10% only decreases the velocity by 5% and increases the accuracy by 100%.

I start every new rifle load process at the middle of the range in the latest loading manual I have. It doesn't matter if I have a dozen rifles of the same caliber in my rack and think I know everything there is to know about reloading and that is the advice I give when ever someone asks. With the way lawyers make their money nowadays if you make a statement that gets someone hurt they will use you for a sex object as long as they can.

I don't shoot in hot weather. We don't get hot weather around here. But were I shooting in hot weather that would be a different story.

I've been loading for about twenty years. I understand pressure, seating depth, headspace, land engagement, etc. And I have some pretty specific data on my guns.

Checking the older manuals, circa 1960's, I see that loads in current manuals have been significantly reduced.

Elmer Keith's 44 mag load was "22 grs. of 2400." That's with a 240 gr. lead bullet.

Today's manuals list a "MAX" load of 19.5 gr. (Hodgdon Data Manual #26, 1992) Lessee . . .

22 gr. minus 10% . . . That's 19.8 gr. Hmmmmmm . . . looks like the reduction is alread done for you.

19.5 gr. yields 36,000 CUP according to Hodgdon. SAAMI spec for 44 magnum is 40,000. Hmmmmmmmm . . . 40,000 minus 10% . . . that's 36,000 . . . Interesting . . .

See what I'm saying?

I see similar trends in other data -- lots of it.

------------------
.223 Ackley Improved Wildcat Forum:
http://www.hotboards.com/plus/plus.mirage?who=223ackleyimproved

I don't mean to sound like a nag. Just my opinion. To qualify this, I haven't reloaded very long.

[This message has been edited by Ben_Wazzu (edited 04-23-2002).]

[This message has been edited by Ben_Wazzu (edited 04-23-2002).]

I don't use old data, and I don't rely on one set of data to formulate a load. I don't rely on "dated" SAAMI specs.

YES, components change, powder changes, ballistics are affected. Nonetheless, there is a systematic trend in the data to reduce loads, again, and again, and again . . .

It's not "new components" it's attorneys.

SAAMI spec data affords a safety margin of about 5x between a functional load and a catastrophic failure.

I find it ironic that Hodgdon provides "+P" load data for 45 ACP -- in one instance a 16% increase over the "maximum" listed load -- and in the same chart WARN that these +P loads "should not be reduced."

Still . . . STILL . . . the published "+P" data is running about 10% below SAAMI spec for pressure.

Plus P loads are NOT in excess of SAAMI spec for a particular caliber, they are merely loads which reach maximum SAAMI pressures specified.

American ammo mfgs and reloading mfgs are running a very conservative operation. The industry is frought with liability on the face of it. The data is conservative, very conservative.

Yeah, it's possible that you could load up a "max" round, shoot on a hot day in a specified gun and have some problems with bolt lift, etc. But that's completely different than approacing a catastrophic failure -- or even damaging the gun for that matter.

AND, I'd suspect a gun that can't manage published load data (Sheister's .270) likely has a headspace issue that needs to be addressed. -- But that's a mechanical problem with the gun, not a safety issue with the load data.

Please understand, I'm not "slamming" anyone in here. I'm being provocative in order to provoke some serious discussion about a serious issue.

------------------
.223 Ackley Improved Wildcat Forum:
http://www.hotboards.com/plus/plus.mirage?who=223ackleyimproved

Where are those old and bold reloaders? JMO, Dutch.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sheister:
As far as I can see from your statements, you're as full of BS as you can get and not suffocate under the weight.

You strike me as the kind of fool who advises everyone you know that the reloading manuals were all written by lawyers, so go ahead and just use them as a "rough guideline". Nothing could be further from the truth these days.

- Sheister

---

I didn't inpugn your person nor your judgment. Why do you suppose it's OK to insult me?

Address the issues. Leave the ad hominem for the rubes in Hillsboro.

We can calculate bore capacity, load volume, bullet intertia, burn rate, barrel length, sectional density, and ambient temp to come up with stats. The books are full of fudge.

------------------
.223 Ackley Improved Wildcat Forum:
http://www.hotboards.com/plus/plus.mirage?who=223ackleyimproved

[This message has been edited by Genghis (edited 04-23-2002).]

What about consulting three or four different manuals, take the "lowest" maximum and reduce that by two or three grains and work up one grain at a time? It's not neccessarily 10% but I'd think you're pretty safe given some of the discrepancies of max loads in different manuals. Each test barrel was obviously different.

------------------
Phil- Life Member NRA & SCI

[This message has been edited by Genghis (edited 04-24-2002).]

Every bullet acts totally differet I found out. I can push Noslers past max, but not Bearclaws and Barnes. In fact Alliant recommends almost 10grains different in Re25 from Barnes to A-Frames. They recommend 81 or so for Barnes and 91.5 for A-Frames in 180g. So I learned 10% for safe shootin is well worth it.

I have an older Nosler manual (#2) which list some pretty warm loads as max. For example the manual lists a load of 48 grains of IMR 4064 with the 150 grain bullets in 308 win. That load proved to be too hot for my rifle. I now use 46 gr. of 4064 with 150s. Some other manuals are more conservative with that powder/caliber combination. Don't know what the new Nosler manual lists for it.

Have the powder companies changed the composition of the powders to any major degree since the early '80s?

I guess I don't see the harm in being cautious with starting loads. Why risk injury or damage to your firearm?

It just sounds like the apples and oranges thing. Not really apples to apples. Why would you use max data for partitions when trying out a Trophy Bonded or whatever? Thats not working into a great load thats called stuffing shells. A lot to lot variation requireing a 10% reduction isn't something I have delt with. I didn't get any "hot" RL22 but from what I gathered in the bigger cases it's used in it still wasn't a 10% deviation.

But I'm wondering how far to go with that. Here's my scenario:

I am getting ready to work up a load for my brand new .375 H&H Mod 70 with 300 gr. Nosler Partitions.

The most common "perfect" load that people (not just 1 or 2 people) have recommended is 72 grains of RL-15.

Of course, I don't want to start there, so I go to the data manual and see what it says.

The only book I have found (Nosler isn't available yet) with a RL-15 load is the Alliant book, which lists a charge of 66.5 grains for a 300 gr. Hornady.

Now, if I take the book load and start down 10%, I am at 60 gr., working my way to 72!

I'm not looking for a hot load, just an accurate, reliable load around 2450-2500fps.

By the time I get to a decent load, I probably won't have a shoulder left! And as to the difference in pressure between Nosler and Hornady, I haven't a clue.

My plan is to start out at 69 grains.

OK, it's free-for-all time!

Tell me what you think, what you would do in my place, where you think my head is, what my mother wears, etc...

Rick.

I must say that I am in NO WAY going to start off at the MAX or near MAX of the loading data in any reloading book. I value my life to much, it opens the door for making assumptions that could mind you lead one down a very reckless and disasterous road in the near future. No two guns are alike when it comes to pressures etc. So I have been told by a couple of manufacturers anyway. There are to many different things that come into play regarding the realoading issue. Besides "One should NEVER get in a hurry" it isn't going to take that much longer and you aren't going to waste $10 worth of powder in the whole process.

Sheister's approach I feel is the correct way to go about reloading. I don't approve of his less than gentleman like attitude mind you. However I feel there is no such thing as being to safe with a gun and the same applies to explosives and reloading shells or cartridges. I was told by a wise old man, to treat reloading like your Holy Bible......Don't Add To It.....Take It Word For Word!

For those who start 10% below max. and work up for each combination of components, how do you go about doing this? By that I mean the specifics.

Do folks load up multiple powder charges at home in 1 grain increments? And if so, how many rounds at each level do you load? Do you wind up pulling a lot of bullets?

Or do you just make multiple trips to the range, working up each time? My range is 1 hour from home, so that option is pretty difficult for me to do.

Does anyone load at the range? Only the benchrest guys seem to do this where I shoot.

Do you use chronographed data in determining whether it's time to stop moving the powder charge up, or are you looking for pressure signs?

Thanks. I'm always looking for others experiences to try to improve how I go about developing a load.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bjdoerr:
An innocent question here in this sometimes heated topic:

For those who start 10% below max. and work up for each combination of components, how do you go about doing this? By that I mean the specifics.

Do folks load up multiple powder charges at home in 1 grain increments? And if so, how many rounds at each level do you load? Do you wind up pulling a lot of bullets?

Or do you just make multiple trips to the range, working up each time? My range is 1 hour from home, so that option is pretty difficult for me to do.

Does anyone load at the range? Only the benchrest guys seem to do this where I shoot.

Do you use chronographed data in determining whether it's time to stop moving the powder charge up, or are you looking for pressure signs?

Thanks. I'm always looking for others experiences to try to improve how I go about developing a load.

---

1) Load at 10% reduction and move the load up in 0.5 gr. increments. Look for pressure signs. DON'T assume that one round is safe. I typically load 10 to 15 rds. in the increment.

I arrange the loads in a case box with a tape strip across the inside of the lid specifying the load. I keep an OPEN row between the increments of loads. There are other approaches, but this one works for me, and I have lots of case boxes.

2) Half grain increments (0.5 gr.) between loads. I load 10-15 in each increment. This allows ample ammo for chronograph data and grouping.

Just because the first round fires OK, that doesn't mean the load is necessarily OK. That's why we run a chronograph, standard deviation, and a micrometer on the brass.

3) A chronograph should provide you with an indication of "bore capacity." There's a point in the load increment when a half grain increase just doesn't give you the "standard" increment of increase in velocity. E.g. If you're getting 100 fps increase with each 0.5 gr. increment and then it drops to 60 fps, you're at the "bore capacity."

You can load past bore capacity, but you'll spike pressure without much gain in velocity.

Of course you MAY start seeing pressure signs before you reach bore capacity. ALWAYS look for pressure signs. The primer and the web seem to be the first place to indicate pressure problems.

4) I have a setup where I can load at the range. Depends what I'm doing. Sometimes I'm out on a "shooting expedition" and spending three/four days camped at a site. I'll load there if it's indicated. Mostly, I load the ammo at the home bench. It's more accuate, neater, safer, less bother.

Yeah, we pull bullets. It's not hard if you have a decent bullet puller. I like the RCBS because it's rugged and warranted for life.

I use a slotted spoon to catch the bullet from the puller while pouring powder back into the container. Make sure you're getting the right powder in the right container. (You knew that!)

Too much data is always nice to have. I've discovered that ammassing data has reduced my ammo cost insofar as I spend more time figuring and less time shooting up the range.

Each shot counts more.

------------------
.223 Ackley Improved Wildcat Forum:
http://www.hotboards.com/plus/plus.mirage?who=223ackleyimproved

Thankyou thankyou thankyou...

I feel a little better knowing that someone besides Alliant recommends RL-15.

I agree on the powder purchase, too. Once I'm convinced that RL-15 will tune in, I'll
be getting an 8-pound can.

Otherwise, it would mean checking out the load every pound, which is only 100 rounds!

Rick.
(been to Tucson, Bisbee, Ft. Quachuca )

You are an idiot
---------------
Indeed, Clark...I think
your post contained a lot of smoke, along with some fog. Your
calculations may have some validity in calculating high pressure
pipes, but little to do
with overall firearm strength. It also might have some use in
calculating potential strength of barrels alone...only if those barrels
were
precisely the same steel
and so heat treated. However, you have clouded the validity of your
results by assuming they were, where likely they are not.
As for your statements
concerning blowing up firearms. What methods using accepted engineering
equipment did you use? What results have you logged
as available as to what
sequence of shots that the firearm let go? Was it the 1st, 5th, 100th
shot from a new gun? Can you results be duplicated in a
testing lab? What factor
have you use it your destruction test....Peak Pressure Factor, Dwell
Pressure Factor, or Metal Fatigue Factor?
As a gun designer..what
patents do you now hold and what firearm designs have you sold?
And foremost.....I think
the forum would like to know your credentials (I would)....What
engeering school did you graduate from and in which field did you
master? What Engineering
Association do you now belong? What engineering position do you now
hold. Can these statements be authenticated and may
we?
Having heard this question
answered, I may want to professionaly comment on your methods.
----------------------
Your experience does have much to offer. For that we
are grateful.

However, this
recurring subject matter regarding intentional overloading practices
with outcomes of explosive firearms failure is not only
disturbing on
our forums, but irresponsible to the hundreds of members, and thousands
of visiting guests, in that it implies a placitude of
respect for
existing handloading pressure standards. Many of our readers are
entirely new to handloading, seeking safe, and sane,
common sense
advice in the persuit of thier newfound hobby. Not only do your posts
depicting firearms destruction imply that there is a
broad latitude
for over-pressure loading practices, it also has the propensity to scare
off those who otherwise might embark on a lifetime
of handloading!

In the future,
refrain from posting data in excess of established pressure perameters,
and particularly any references to your pratices of
intentional
firearm blow-ups!

As you've
mentioned your background being a materials engineer, you're intimately
aware of the strength limitations of existing
manufacturing
materials, and their capacity to handle pressure. Disappointingly, I've
never seen you quote what simple mathmatical
caculations
would predict failure pressures to be of a given gun, based on your
technical knowledge of current manufacturing materials
and heat
treating proceedures, then correlate that with any practical application
to your over-pressure testing. The only benefit that I can
see your
blow-up testing would serve, is as a guideline for others to avoid such
circumstances.

Too, I've never
seen you give any quantitative information regarding pressure tests of
your hopped-up loads. They can be pressure
tested either
at Hodgdon Labs or White Labs for a minimal fee. Until these two
elements can be integrated into an informative,
instructive
tool for the learning and education of both new and experienced
handloaders, I'll request that such data no longer appear on
our forums
either in full or in part, unless submitted to me first, for evaluation.

If these simple
requests seem too much or too confining for your tastes, then I suggest
you perhaps establish your own website for
posting of such
materials. Most ISP providers offer free 10-25 meg personal website
space on their servers, and Domain Names are
relatively
inexpensive... 8.95 right now at www.10-domains.com. May I pass along a
suggested possible URL for your site...

"IBlowUpStuff.Com"

--------------------------------
I don't know if I missed the point but DO NOT pay any attention to the
mis-information Clark has listed.

I don't mean this as a personal attack or flame, but just an observation
from reading lots of Clark's posts on this and another board. I think
he's

nuts...insane...wacko....bonkers...dangerous!!!
---------------------------------
You are out of your mind.

Posting garbage like this is
incredibly stupid and irresponsible.

Blow yourself up on your own
time.... but quit encouraging others by
your posts, before someone gets
hurt.

---------------------------
Sorry Clark, but I still don't understand what your trying to
accomplish.

If your goal is to blow up guns, thats easy to do. Overload them, place
an
object in the barrel like a patch, get them to fire out of battery,
chamber
the wrong cartridge, fire a squib load then fire a normal load.

If you think that by experimenting with X grains of powder that will
blow
up a barrel, then X-1 grains is a safe hot load, you are mistaken. Read
the
precautions in the front of every loading manual. All loads are designed
based on data from pressure barrels, and within safe tolerances. Even
minor
changes of load data can result in unexpected pressure variations.

If you want a Magnum pistol, then get a magnum pistol. You won't be able
to
take the anemic Tokarev and get magnum performance from it.

---------------------
its ironic to me that some of the
"experts" some of you posters revere on here give you these ridiculously
high end loads and you continue to kneel at their feet
and gobble up all of this data that
falls just short of producing mushroom clouds. in my book, these loads
not only are uneeded, its careless to give loads that
have zero margin of error. its only a
matter of time when a handi rifle will blow pushed just beyond some of
these loads and when it does, all of a sudden we;ll
have to endure the posts proclaiming
the NEF as a POS. then people wonder why we live in a world of lawsuits
and liability crapola.
------------------------

I think Clark's opinions about load data are probably accurate.

I think Clark's methods in load testing are completely off the wall.

There is a correlation between pressure and velocity. If you load according to data and record velocity, it's entirely possible to extrapolate some pressure data -- not directly, and not precisely. But you can extrapolate USEFUL pressure data regarding bore capacity and optimal load.

In most instances, bore capacity is way beyond published "maximum" load data. But bore capacity needs to be measured with reliable tools. Physical/visual inspection of metalurgical integrity is hardly a reliable tool. And such inspections provide no quantitative data whatever relative to operating pressure.

Most especially, repeated firing of an overloaded firearm will EVENTUALLY cause a catastrophic failure. PO Ackley tested firearms/loads by repeatedly shooting the same overload until it caused a catastrophic failure.

That the gun holds together for one shot tells you practically nothing.

That the gun comes apart after one shot tells you practically nothing.

The "load window" we covet is not the point where the gun fails. The window is the point at which increased loads produce diminishing gains in velocity. This "window" is "bore capacity."

The way to determine bore capacity is with a chronograph, some micrometers, and a careful statistical record of data.

The "load objective" is not "to blow the gun apart." The "load objective" is NOT to blow the gun apart.

------------------
.223 Ackley Improved Wildcat Forum:
http://www.hotboards.com/plus/plus.mirage?who=223ackleyimproved

I am going to slow down and take the advice of an old gun designer, "make inserts". I would like that chamber split data, but I think I should cut some 4140 inserts and wreck them.

[This message has been edited by Sniper06 (edited 04-26-2002).]