Can it be dangerous to use data from older reloading manuals , are the powders producing higher pressure levels today or did the lawyers get involved in reloading manuals. This is why i ask . I have the fifth edition hornady manual and under the 30/06 using the 220 RN (#3090)the max load with IMR4831 is 53.8 for 2500fps My friend called me and his hornady manual shows 55.3 of IMR4831 for 2500 and his manual goes to 57.5 for 2600 fps, My newer manual doesn't go that high. So is he in danger if he uses the older manual to produce new loads?

In the old days, some reloading manuals didn't even bother to pressure test their data.

Even today, there is significant variation from one manual to the next. Pressure testing is not 100% straightforward and repeatable. There are many variables and even well equipped labs have calibration issues.

My answer is that there is no easy answer to your question. Bolt action rifles are very strong, and will tolerate a lot of abuse, so serious problems are rare even with loads that exceed SAAMI spec.

I use data from older manuals...

But as any good reloader knows.. work up from a lower level...

Older manuals were from times when lawyers and our society were less sue happy.....when American's thought the way to get ahead in life was to work for it.... not either win the lottery, or cash in big suing some big company.....as it seems to be today....

On the other end I have had current manuals publish data, that I can not get within two grains of without blowing primers.....

the most recent was Hodgdon's recommendation as the Max load for Benchmark in a 260 Rem, with a 95 grain V Max... They state 43.5 grains.... all three of my 260s are blowing primers at 41.5 grains.... yet at 43.5 grains with a 100 grain Ballistic tip, I have no problems....

So bottom line, with any Manual... WORK UP!!!!!

Cheers
seafire

But doesn't that load seem a bit hi for the 220grain RN in the 30/06 IMR4831 57.5 I've yet to see anyone go above 54.0

I always work up a load in my rifle until I see the first signs of pressure, then back off. Some of the loads I shoot are well above the max listed in some manuals but are perfectly safe in my rifle. I let each gun decide what it likes. Start low, work up in 1/2 gr. increments and use the manuals like the guide that they are. They are not the "Bible". Get a chrono for less than $100 and find if your velocities are what you are trying for, you will find velocities usually rise consistantly for each incremental increase, but when you are approaching max, you will frequentley see little, if any, change, letting you know you are getting there.

Dangerous?

I don't think so. Some of the loads I am using are at "max" from those old manuals, and both the loads and the firearms are holding-up just fine after 45 years...

I don't know if it's dangerous or not, but data from old loading manuals was not always worked up with pressure testing equipment. From what I understand, a lot of the manuals used "traditional" pressure signs to come up with their load data. Modern techniques have shown a lot of these signs are unreliable.

-Lou

One of my favorite old manuals is the Speer from the seventies with the stagecoach on front. It had a section on defense loads for 2" 38 spl. I shot many of them for years, mostly in my 2" m-15, but some in my m-37. Most of the listed loads are hotter than the .357 loads in the current manual! I'm still shooting both of those guns with no problems. Lawyers run companies nowadays.

quote:

Originally posted by Tanoose:
Can it be dangerous to use data from older reloading manuals

Hey Tanoose, Anytime a person gets the idea it is OK to use randomly picked Loads from ANY Manual(old or new) without developing the Load from below, the potential for a Pressure Problem exists.

quote:

My newer manual doesn't go that high. So is he in danger if he uses the older manual to produce new loads?

It is always good to use multiple Manuals to see what Powder seems to provide the best Velocity at the Lowest Pressure levels. Hodgdon Manuals do a fine job of providing this info, but it is important to remember it pertains to "their" Test Barrel and the Load should still be developed from below.
---

I'll disagree with the folks who believe old Manuals were written without any consideration given to Pressure. Peizo and Copper Crusher Pressure equipment has been in use before I was born. And before that the good old CHE/PRE Pressure Detection Methods worked just fine and still do.

Occasionally Joe Cullison(from Nosler) posts on here and he has mentioned they still use good old 0.0001" capable Micrometers to check for Pressure there as well as other Pressure Indicating equipment.
---

What ever Manual(s) you use, just Develop the Load from below while watching for all the normal Pressure Indicators and you all will do just fine.

Best of luck to you both.

seven excellent replies here.

One needs to get over the idea that there is hard and fast data for reloading. It's simply not the case.

Vapodog got it right. The load manuals are guides, not absolutes. Also, I still like the statement in the Hornady book: "each rifle is a law unto itself and generalizations should be made with circumspection."

quote:

On the other end I have had current manuals publish data, that I can not get within two grains of without blowing primers.....

the most recent was Hodgdon's recommendation as the Max load for Benchmark in a 260 Rem, with a 95 grain V Max... They state 43.5 grains.... all three of my 260s are blowing primers at 41.5 grains.... yet at 43.5 grains with a 100 grain Ballistic tip, I have no problems....

Seafire, thanks for sharing this! Proof that starting low and working up is the ONLY way to go.