i have quit a few manuals, some are bullet company manuals, and some are powder company manuals. some show loads with the same bullet and powder combo, but with different max loads. some show as mush as 2 or 3 grains different. who is right bullet people or powder people?

Hi

Each company that tests uses different methods to accomplish their goal. Some use real rifles, some use pressure barrels.

Hence, you will receive differents results. Follow the destructions and you won't go wrong. When you get real froggy and think you can experiment always start low and build your loads accordingly.

Thats why everyone preaches the start 10% low axiom.

Best wishes, Bill

They are all right, according to the standards they have adopted.

Each uses a different rifle (whether a pressure gun or a conventional shoulder-fired gun), and each chamber and barrel varies in the way it reacts to a given load ("every rifle is a rule unto itself). In addition to variations in the guns in which sample loads are fired, the components vary from manual to manual, and even the variances in different lots of the same powder can cause an apparent discrepancy. Some manuals use a more conservative pressure standard than others, and some vary from cartridge to cartridge on the standards they use.

In recent years, they all have tended to become a bit more conservative on their maximum recommended loads, either due to greater caution, or due to better (or different) methods of measuring pressure. Thirty years ago, people tended to buy the manual that listed the highest velocity for the round they were interested in, as if being listed in the manual made it "safe". I can assure you that some of the loads in the #8 Speer manual from the early '70's will blow primers in many guns!

Many of my guns will, after careful and incremental experimentation and monitoring of velocities and case expansion, happily and accurately shoot loads that are above many of those listed as "maximum" in various manuals.

On the other hand, I have a few guns that undeniably show trouble signs (and proportionally high velocities) with loads that are commonly regarded as less than maximum. For example, my .270 with 130 grain bullets tops out at 58.5 grains of original 4831 and yields 3200 fps from that load. With most guns -- and in most manuals -- 60 grains is listed as maximum and velocity yields are closer to 3100 fps. It just goes to show you that every gun needs its loads tailored specifically to its own characteristics.

So, I reiterate, the variation between the manuals reflects neither "right" nor "wrong", mearly differences in unquantifiable variables.

I’ve been reloading for 35+ years now (along with many people here and some have been reloading much longer than that), the manuals have change a lot in the last few years. I don’t know if it’s from better testing equipment or from cold feet over liability issues. I would suspect that the testing equipment is getting better and liability issues weigh a little heavier on their minds.

It’s interesting to me that some of the powder manufacturers are still more aggressive about velocities/charge than the bullet makers.

Bullet people. Bullet shape influences chamber pressure. Jacket alloy is also an influence.

Not to mentions all test firearms are diff. What works in my rifle may not work in yours. They should call them Reloading Guides, but manual will do. Notice it's not called a reloading gospel.

quote:

who is right bullet people or powder people

Both and neither. Their loads are max for the guns that they were developed in, but YOURS will be different!!

I started loading all the reloading data I could find into a spreadsheet and then a database. It is interesting how some patterns start to show.

I think that some cartridges are better handled by the powder companies and some are handled by the bullet companies.

I will also say that I have a load that was max book, that is now over max book, and a couple loads that are over max book.

quote:

Originally posted by ddunn:
I started loading all the reloading data I could find into a spreadsheet and then a database. It is interesting how some patterns start to show.

That's essentially what the Lee reloading manual is -- a compilation of data from other manuals. However, without information as to the variables (length of barrel, pressure measuring method, bullet used, etc.) such a compilation can obfuscate rather than illucidate.

quote:

Originally posted by Stonecreek:
That's essentially what the Lee reloading manual is -- a compilation of data from other manuals. However, without information as to the variables (length of barrel, pressure measuring method, bullet used, etc.) such a compilation can obfuscate rather than illucidate.

Well you can't just use other peoples data. But it give me a good idea where to start.
And since I am compiling the data, I can always go back to the original source.

I always like to buy the latest manuals when they come out because I like to see the data on some newer cartriges,, then I usually give the older manual to either my son or one of my hunting pards. This year at the IWA I was real happy to see the newest Vihtavouri manual, and the salesman said it was their best manual yet, so I bought it sight unseen.

What a disapointment, not only does it not have any new data, the max reloads are LESS than the previous one. This is the first time I will give the new manual away, and keep the old. This is their worst manual yet. What a waste of money.

For me manuals are sort of like Olympic ice skating judging.
Use about 5 or 6 manuals, throw out any extremely high or low outliers. The 3 or 4 manuals that provide similar data are what I go with and I start at the low end of the data. For my purposes I often stay there. If I need to use maximum type loads I judge that by primer and case head expansion. For the most part I keep pressure low enough that cases wear out from repeated priming and not from over pressure.

I really like to have a Manual from the folks that make the Bullet I'll be using, along with the never improved upon Hodgdon #26.

I just called Hodgdon (913) 362-9455 last week trying to ge them to send me a "NEW" #26. Spoke to a very polite lady in their Customer Service who "claimed" there were no hidden boxes of them anywhere at Hodgdon. (She was probably sitting on a Case of them. )

The lady said they seem to be intent on keeping the "On-line Manual" current and we may never again see the wonderful Hard Bound Manuals from them again.

I told her that if they would even release a Special Reprint of old #26, I'd buy a few. Didn't seem to phase her professional outlook.

If anyone has an old #26 in good condition they want to sell, let me know. And if you also like the old Hard Bound Manuals, call them and GRIPE!!!

Best of luck to ya'll.

quote:

If anyone has an old #26 in good condition they want to sell,

Mine is not for sale....it's as fine a manual as I've ever owned!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
...Mine is not for sale....it's as fine a manual as I've ever owned!!!!!

Any chance you ever leave it next to an open window?

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
...Mine is not for sale....it's as fine a manual as I've ever owned!!!!!

Any chance you ever leave it next to an open window?

Wouldn't a #27 be better than an #26?

Personally I like the Nosler #5.

Hey Woods, Your link keeps trying to shove a "cookie" down my throat, so I didn't get to see what it looked like. But, if it is the 3-ring binder style, which is why I think I didn't get it when it first came out, I'll pass on it. But I do appreciate your effort, thanks.

Back when Sierra came out with their first 3-ring binder, I got it. Too easy for the pages to get torn out and the rings smashed. I just trashed the whole thing, cause it always had pages falling out.

Hoowever, if you like that style and have a #26 laying around in your way, I can get a #27 and swap with you. And a #28 if they made it.

Is that an icon of "BH" still waiting to catch a Spot?

quote:

Back when Sierra came out with their first 3-ring binder, I got it. Too easy for the pages to get torn out and the rings smashed. I just trashed the whole thing, cause it always had pages falling out.

Ya just gotta go easy HC. If you have to force the pages you likely aren`t turning them properly
Personally I kind of like the way binders lay flat on the bench opened to the proper page with out laying a wrench or screw driver across them. Sierra has always been of this type.

BTW I`ve a Hodgdon # 26. It aint for sale, but if you ask nice I`ll give you data from them if you need it............

Have any of you tried LoadData.com? If you are looking for load data they have it. Of course it's 30.00 a year membership. You can cruise the load data for free but it won't show powder charges without joining.

Load Data's Web Site

quote:

Originally posted by Down south:
Have any of you tried LoadData.com? If you are looking for load data they have it. Of course it's [b]30.00 a year membership. [/bYou can cruise the load data for free but it won't show powder charges without joining.

Load Data's Web Site

Rrrrridiculous!!

Hey Ol' Joe, Thaks for the data offer out of your #26. Mine is still usable, but has seen better days. I just don't look forward to the day when I'm forced to "put on a Mask" and go look for one - at Hodgdon!

Strange thing about the 3-ring binders is that I keep my Load Development Sheets and the Targets that go with them in 3-ring binders and they do fine. Somewhere there should be a reasonable explaination "why" I prefer my Manuals Hard Bound though. I don't know why. Also prefer Bourbon straight, beautiful women, spirited horses, accurate rifles and 4-wheel drive.
-----

By the way, if any of you with #26 Manuals in good condition begin feeling "sickly", send me a PM and I'll send you my name and address. Stick it on the #26 and instruct your relatives to send it to me if you continue to go down hill.

I just know Hodgdon has bunches of Un-Opened CASES of them hidden somewhere.

quote:

Originally posted by vines:
who is right bullet people or powder people?

Use the Lee! They've copied almost all the rest. No matter which you use you'll have to doctor the receipe to fit your particular rifle.

After some hard use the pages tend to stay open where you want them but not as good as the binder type.

With a scanner, CDs and a second computer,off line, it's all academic anyway. roger

For guns stronger than the brass, I don't use load manuals.

I use Quickload to get a starting point and see the potential of the load.

Then I work up until the brass gets sticky, the primer pocket gets loose, the primer pierces, etc.

Then I back off on the powder charge 6% ala Vernon Speer 1956.

For guns weaker than the brass, like thin walled shotguns and thin chamber walled 45 Colt revolvers, I use a load book recipe from either the bullet guys or the powder guys.

link to "How to write a mediocre load book"

The point of that screwball essay is that Mosses did not bring the load books down from the mountain.