Does anyone have a preference for one reloading manual over the other or do you mostly use the forums for information on reloads?…………
- Thread starter barryaclarke
- Start date
- Tags
- reload manual
It is always a good idea to have a reloading manual around. I have the Lyman 49th edition and it is a pretty good book, if you a lot of one kind of bullet than I would go with that manufactures book, ie Berger, sierra and such.
Walter
Walter
Hodgdon has load data available online you can google it. Compare loads from many sources. Start low and work up to find the best accuracy. What is reported as best does not guaranty it will work for you.
Last edited:
I use a reloading manual from a respected company (Hornady, Speer, Berger, Nosler, etc.) If you're just getting into this, stick to the books and read a lot. Then when you think you've read enough, read some more. Do you really trust your life to random people on an internet forum?
Just be careful if you buy say a Hornady Manual, and then buy a bunch of Sierra bullets. The bullet differences call for different powder charges. I have Hornady, Nosler, Sierra, Speer, Hodgdon manuals, and use QuickLoad also. I do a lot of cross-referencing, and often hit a manufacturer's website also to check data. You can't double or triple check too much. An eye, or your life, is way too important to not double check data.
I called Sierra and they sent me an electronic version of theirs, I also have a Hornady and, when money allows, and Speer. I was not aware Hodgdon has an online version so I will find that.
Agreed on reading the books from great sources. I just finished re reading the ABC's of Reloading and am now re reading Loading for Handguns. As Aur0ra 145 indicates I always find some new nugget of info or some thing I have read takes on a new meaning.
Agreed on reading the books from great sources. I just finished re reading the ABC's of Reloading and am now re reading Loading for Handguns. As Aur0ra 145 indicates I always find some new nugget of info or some thing I have read takes on a new meaning.
Absolutely correct, Pester. Those books you mentioned are ones I read before even buying any equipment. I just read the Speer Manual, the reloading info part, and found it very informative. Like you said, I found nuggets of info that really meant something now with a little practical experience behind me. I read the forums too, but somethings I read there are what not to do, as well as many things that are of great value.
I like and suggest the Sierra manual. I like that is uses real firearms that most of us can afford and that their load data is on the REALLY safe side. Their max charges can be a full 2 grains lower than other manuals so it is really hard to get into pressure/safety concerns. I also like that they have the most comprehensive coverage of reloading for semi-auto's than the others combined
I'm not sure you fully understand the reason for using data from the specific manufacturer of your components. Sierra's loads are lower than many other manuals, specifically because their bullets have different profiles than say Hornady. If you take a Hornady 168gr BTHP Match in .308, it has a slightly different profile than the Sierra of the same weight and spec. Thus, the bearing surface of the two bullets is not identical, and they behave differently in terms of pressure with a given charge weight. If you run QuickLoad on these two bullets, you would see that the pressures change from one bullet to the other with the same COAL and Powder/charge weight. It could not necessarily be that Sierra is conservative always, but rather, they have different shaped bullets and thus impact actual case capacity at a given COAL, and have different bearing surface, impacting friction differently than other bullets. I saw some difference even between Nosler and Hornady in the 165gr .308's.
This is why you need to use the data from the manufacturers whose components you are using. Then, you start low, and work up for your particular rifle.
A few weeks ago a member here destroyed a rifle and a scope with a buddy's pet load. It appears that this was done with mixed powders, and there may have been other factors. But, I took the lesson very seriously to be very careful in all that I did, and cross-check my data, as well as using the different manufacturers data for their products that I use.
"...do you mostly use the forums for information on reloads?"
Well first off, forum gurus are ONE source of load data I would NEVER use! Not only is it unsafe, it's not even helpful because there's too much variation between individual firearms for even the safest of loads to expect someone else's "super" load to shoot well for me. Buy a manual, pick your power at the listed best velocity for your bullet weight and start your load development there.
Your concern is understandable but unnecessary. When I started reloading some 47 years ago the local gun club reloading guru suggested I start with ONE manual, any one, and stick with it until I learned to deal with variable data without mental anguish. For the next five years I only used my first Lyman and never felt I needed anything else until enough new powders (and interesting new cartridges) were out to justify me buying a new book. Thing is, if we do load development the way every manual says to do it; "start low and slowly work up to book max unless signs of excess pressure occur earlier" and we won't need multipule (always conflicting) data. If we do load development right, we can use any book, any bullet or case or primer or powder lot or whatever, with complete safety. If we ignore that cardinal rule, or try thinking any manual at all is a scientically accurate bible for everyone and all time and we'll never be safe.
It's worth mentioning what a revelation of reloading ignorance and total lack of common sense or reading comprehension exists today. I've read a couple of web posts where some dufuses said they were expanding case heads and blowing primers while doing "normal load work up just the way the manual said", by starting low and working up TO book max. The increasing signs of over pressure didn't seem to mean anything to them if they just kept moving up slowly, as if how they approached an excessive book charge would make high pressure signs in their rigs meaningless! Gag. Ain't no manual or massive collection of manuals gonna change that!
Well first off, forum gurus are ONE source of load data I would NEVER use! Not only is it unsafe, it's not even helpful because there's too much variation between individual firearms for even the safest of loads to expect someone else's "super" load to shoot well for me. Buy a manual, pick your power at the listed best velocity for your bullet weight and start your load development there.
Your concern is understandable but unnecessary. When I started reloading some 47 years ago the local gun club reloading guru suggested I start with ONE manual, any one, and stick with it until I learned to deal with variable data without mental anguish. For the next five years I only used my first Lyman and never felt I needed anything else until enough new powders (and interesting new cartridges) were out to justify me buying a new book. Thing is, if we do load development the way every manual says to do it; "start low and slowly work up to book max unless signs of excess pressure occur earlier" and we won't need multipule (always conflicting) data. If we do load development right, we can use any book, any bullet or case or primer or powder lot or whatever, with complete safety. If we ignore that cardinal rule, or try thinking any manual at all is a scientically accurate bible for everyone and all time and we'll never be safe.
It's worth mentioning what a revelation of reloading ignorance and total lack of common sense or reading comprehension exists today. I've read a couple of web posts where some dufuses said they were expanding case heads and blowing primers while doing "normal load work up just the way the manual said", by starting low and working up TO book max. The increasing signs of over pressure didn't seem to mean anything to them if they just kept moving up slowly, as if how they approached an excessive book charge would make high pressure signs in their rigs meaningless! Gag. Ain't no manual or massive collection of manuals gonna change that!
Last edited:
if you're lucky, the forum infos are coming from the manuals_ if you are not lucky, some forum infos can become short-fuze grenades,few inches from your nose_ therefore : reputable reloading manuals, and even in this case, approached cautiously_
Many shooters on forums post results showing how fast they are able to push their rounds, so you need to be really careful pulling data from the internet. This should give you insight on what's hypothetically possible, but running near max, max or overmax loads isn't something you should do unless you have worked up to the charge weight methodically. If you are going to try out someone's charge, start at 10% below and work up (yes, you need to invest in a bullet puller tool).
It's really sort of scary every time I hear that question. Info in the books comes from people who actually have done what they say they've done, have something to lose, and the resources behind publishing the data along with the liability. Info in the forums comes from . . .
Anyhow, with regard to what books . . . you can read the ABCs of Reloading on google books for free. You can get load data from each of the powder manufacturers on line. And you should buy at least one book from a bullet manufacturer . . . preferably one you buy bullets from lol. I can vouch for both Hornady and Sierra's books covering the art and science of reloading, and providing info supporting their bullets . . . and some others.
Finally, the reloading equipment manufacturers have primers (no pun intended) on reloading in either text or video format. And when it comes time to choose equipment, Youtube videos are very useful . . . sometimes with the sound turned off lol . . . because seeing is better than reading advertising copy.
Anyhow, with regard to what books . . . you can read the ABCs of Reloading on google books for free. You can get load data from each of the powder manufacturers on line. And you should buy at least one book from a bullet manufacturer . . . preferably one you buy bullets from lol. I can vouch for both Hornady and Sierra's books covering the art and science of reloading, and providing info supporting their bullets . . . and some others.
Finally, the reloading equipment manufacturers have primers (no pun intended) on reloading in either text or video format. And when it comes time to choose equipment, Youtube videos are very useful . . . sometimes with the sound turned off lol . . . because seeing is better than reading advertising copy.
Always start with a book. Forums can be great, but not everyone knows what they're doing on the internet. Hopefully, if you do go off of a forum, the person who's giving you the load is copying it from a manual, not saying what should be safe based on past experiences with various rifles, what his buddy used, or even computer programs.
I search the forums for a load: Rifle, twist, powder, and bullet that is similar to my load goal. Then I compare and contrast with the manufacture of the powder and the bullet. I then OCW close to the load I am trying to duplicate. This technique has saved me money in the long run.
For example, the Remington 700, SPS tactical 20" 1:12, lapua, WLR, 2.830 178 Amax with 44.4 Varget. If you search you will find several members with similar, if not the same load.
In short, you can use the forums as a placemark, but never exclusively for your load. You should validate all data with the manufactures resource first.
For example, the Remington 700, SPS tactical 20" 1:12, lapua, WLR, 2.830 178 Amax with 44.4 Varget. If you search you will find several members with similar, if not the same load.
In short, you can use the forums as a placemark, but never exclusively for your load. You should validate all data with the manufactures resource first.
hello Walter,
Thank you for your reply.
Barry
Thank you for your reply.
Barry
Hmmm, sounds like good advice. Why I ask is my Lyman manual shows 38 grains for a load and then the Hodgdon manual shows 34.6 grains
Hello Tim,
The reason for the question is I have two reloading manuals, a Hodgdon and Lyman. For 22-250, Varget, 50 grain V-Max, the Hodgdon manual shows a maximum load of 36.4 grains and for the Lyman manual, for 52 grain A-Max (same bullet different color tip) it shows a load of 38 grains Varget. I thought this was a significant difference in loads. Reading several comments from this sight and others, they seem to suggest using the high loads from Lyman. Last year I used 36 grains and got less than dime size groups. But, the comments seem to suggest the heavier loads even shoot better.
Thanks,
Barry
The reason for the question is I have two reloading manuals, a Hodgdon and Lyman. For 22-250, Varget, 50 grain V-Max, the Hodgdon manual shows a maximum load of 36.4 grains and for the Lyman manual, for 52 grain A-Max (same bullet different color tip) it shows a load of 38 grains Varget. I thought this was a significant difference in loads. Reading several comments from this sight and others, they seem to suggest using the high loads from Lyman. Last year I used 36 grains and got less than dime size groups. But, the comments seem to suggest the heavier loads even shoot better.
Thanks,
Barry
Hmmm, I forget about the mentally challenged who might get onto a sight such as this.
Thanks,
Barry..........
Thanks,
Barry..........
I have an old bullet puller from Dillon that's about 40 years old and have used it many a time. I am surprised that I haven't shattered it yet as it's beginning to show a lot of wear and tear on the bottom……….
From the many comment I have read, they say pushing the V-Max with heavier loads improves accuracy over slowly loads. Then I have seen some saying that they are two grains above the maximum and this bothers me to even think about that.
Thanks,
Barry
Thanks,
Barry
I have used my trusty old Dillon 550 for 40 years. Why I tossed this question out was I saw loads that I thought were significantly different between the Lymon and Hodgdon manuals. This is an example I pointed out to someone else, for a 22-250, using Varget, and 50 grain V-Max, the Hodgdon manual shows a maximum load of 36.4 grains but the Lyman shows for the 52 grain A-Max (same but with a green tip) a maximum load of 38 grains. I thought this was a big enough difference that I just tossed out a generic question to see if I got some feed back regarding the different manuals and if one or the other was perfered. Last year I use the above 50 grain V-Max with 36 grains of Varget with dime size groups. But, I also read where the high loads and velocities with the V-max produce tighter groups. Thus, I am a little confused and am thinking of going with 36.5, 37, and then 37.5 grains to see if the groups get better. Yes/no?
Barry
Barry
Very good ideas.
Thanks,
Barry
Thanks,
Barry
Barry,
Its a good idea to work up to max incrementally. I usually load in .5 gr increments until I get 1 grain to max then I switch to .2gr increments and carefully examine the brass as I get closer to and over max. Reloading manuals are simply a guide for what worked for that combo over that testing period in those temperatures with this lot of bullets and that lot of primers and powder through this brass and that rifle. Its imperative to be able to identify pressure signs when working up a load and again the Sierra manual has the best coverage on everything reloading in simple and easy to understand terms with pictures.
So, the prudent thing to do here is to do a load work up from what you all ready know is safe in your rifle, and increase by small increments watching for pressure signs. Call it a ladder test if you will, but what you are really doing is trying to find safe max pressure for your rifle. Once you know this, and you know that the "targeted" charge weight is in the safe range, then you can do a few groups with that and adjacent charge weights to see if they group well with your rifle. This way, you have heeded the manuals, and followed proper procedures, and hopefully found the Best Grouping Highest Velocity that is SAFE IN YOUR RIFLE. Best of everything, and you followed procedure.
Wise words from SniperUncle.
I have only the Hogdon #27 in this big-assed simulated leather binder that looks like I want it put it next to my bible.
Whenever you get any info off the 'net, you have to check it for accuracy. There's a lot of trash out there to mislead (and kill) you. As EddieNFL said, cross check it with published data.
I have only the Hogdon #27 in this big-assed simulated leather binder that looks like I want it put it next to my bible.
Whenever you get any info off the 'net, you have to check it for accuracy. There's a lot of trash out there to mislead (and kill) you. As EddieNFL said, cross check it with published data.
I have a Berger book, and several of the one book, one caliber books.
Before I load anything out of the one book one caliber books, I verify with the powder manufacturer if they have data online (I use a lot of hodgdon/winchester powder, so generally, I'm good).
I also ask people I know and TRUST what their loads are.
No matter what number I find or am given, I always WORK UP to it.
Right now, I have 45 .308 rounds waiting to be sent downrange. All the same brass, powder, primer, and bullet - just varying charge weights: 37.5 38.0 38.5 39.0 39.5 40.0 40.5 41.0 41.5 , 5 of each. Whatever groups the best (and the fastest if multiple good groups) will be my load, as long as there are no pressure signs.
For the guys who said trust but verify (with a book!), no way. Verification for me comes on the range. I inspect each and every piece of brass ejected from whatever I'm shooting for any overpressure signs. Once I see them, if I see them, then I stop, and I'll pull all the rest of the bullets when I get home.
Stay safe...
Before I load anything out of the one book one caliber books, I verify with the powder manufacturer if they have data online (I use a lot of hodgdon/winchester powder, so generally, I'm good).
I also ask people I know and TRUST what their loads are.
No matter what number I find or am given, I always WORK UP to it.
Right now, I have 45 .308 rounds waiting to be sent downrange. All the same brass, powder, primer, and bullet - just varying charge weights: 37.5 38.0 38.5 39.0 39.5 40.0 40.5 41.0 41.5 , 5 of each. Whatever groups the best (and the fastest if multiple good groups) will be my load, as long as there are no pressure signs.
For the guys who said trust but verify (with a book!), no way. Verification for me comes on the range. I inspect each and every piece of brass ejected from whatever I'm shooting for any overpressure signs. Once I see them, if I see them, then I stop, and I'll pull all the rest of the bullets when I get home.
Stay safe...
Exx1976, I agree with you and with your method. One Question though---Where did you come up with your 41.5 number to be your stop for your pressure/accuracy tests? That would in most cases be based on some form of printed matter, would it not? Even if you were trying to do some "over book max" pressure tests, you would have some data to use for the top of your pressure test.
I don't know where you decided to stop in terms of close to book max, over book max, or some other stop point, but if I were doing it and IF IT WERE approaching or over book max, I would use say 0.2 or even 0.1 grain increments for the last levels of testing----I only make and use one round each for the intermediate steps at the top, and if no pressure signs seen, then shoot 5 rounds of the desired weight for a group test-----(5)-40.5, (1)-40.6, (1)-40.7, (1)-40.8, (1)-40.9, (5)-41.0....you get the idea. This way you can watch for pressure signs that may show up before the full 0.5gr increment. I have seen some QL load ideas that can go from "high but good" pressure to "potentially dangerous" pressure in 0.5 grains. I assume you have this well under control, but I am writing my thoughts and cautions for others who may read this post.
If you have previously established "Max Safe Pressure" loads for a particular powder/bullet, etc set-up, then the small steps I advocate would probably not be necessary, as you would have all ready established the safety margin.
I don't know where you decided to stop in terms of close to book max, over book max, or some other stop point, but if I were doing it and IF IT WERE approaching or over book max, I would use say 0.2 or even 0.1 grain increments for the last levels of testing----I only make and use one round each for the intermediate steps at the top, and if no pressure signs seen, then shoot 5 rounds of the desired weight for a group test-----(5)-40.5, (1)-40.6, (1)-40.7, (1)-40.8, (1)-40.9, (5)-41.0....you get the idea. This way you can watch for pressure signs that may show up before the full 0.5gr increment. I have seen some QL load ideas that can go from "high but good" pressure to "potentially dangerous" pressure in 0.5 grains. I assume you have this well under control, but I am writing my thoughts and cautions for others who may read this post.
If you have previously established "Max Safe Pressure" loads for a particular powder/bullet, etc set-up, then the small steps I advocate would probably not be necessary, as you would have all ready established the safety margin.
Uncle - an excellent point, and one that I suppose I should have mentioned when I posted that. The info below is not aimed directly at you, but more to contain everything necessary to cover the new guys (I'm sure you already know about OAL, so you can disregard the comment below about it). 
In the interest of clarification and to prevent new reloaders from taking those numbers and running with them with some random bullet/powder combo, here it is in all it's glory:
Brass: Hornady Match .308 WIN, once fired by me, and competition-processed (sorted by weight, flash hole debur, primer pocket uniform, etc etc)
Primer: Federal 210M
Powder: Varget
Bullet: Berger 185 Hybrid
OAL - .020" jump (IN MY RIFLE! Yours may well be different, which is why I didn't specify an actual OAL)
The numbers I am using in this set of loads are straight from the Berger manual, which lists 41.6 as the max. My plan with this load is to find the most accurate (and fastest if multiple accurate groups). All 45 rounds will be run through a chrono. *IF* I am unhappy with the speed of the most accurate group, then I will load and begin to play with the "over book max" loads, watching for pressure signs in the brass (assuming I see none with the loads I already have, of course). These will be done in .2gr increments, starting with 41.6gr, and going until I either see pressure signs, or find another accurate grouping meeting my speed goal, whichever comes first.
Once I find a charge with the desired accuracy and speed, then I will play with seating depth.
In the interest of clarification and to prevent new reloaders from taking those numbers and running with them with some random bullet/powder combo, here it is in all it's glory:
Brass: Hornady Match .308 WIN, once fired by me, and competition-processed (sorted by weight, flash hole debur, primer pocket uniform, etc etc)
Primer: Federal 210M
Powder: Varget
Bullet: Berger 185 Hybrid
OAL - .020" jump (IN MY RIFLE! Yours may well be different, which is why I didn't specify an actual OAL)
The numbers I am using in this set of loads are straight from the Berger manual, which lists 41.6 as the max. My plan with this load is to find the most accurate (and fastest if multiple accurate groups). All 45 rounds will be run through a chrono. *IF* I am unhappy with the speed of the most accurate group, then I will load and begin to play with the "over book max" loads, watching for pressure signs in the brass (assuming I see none with the loads I already have, of course). These will be done in .2gr increments, starting with 41.6gr, and going until I either see pressure signs, or find another accurate grouping meeting my speed goal, whichever comes first.
Once I find a charge with the desired accuracy and speed, then I will play with seating depth.
Uncle - an excellent point, and one that I suppose I should have mentioned when I posted that. The info below is not aimed directly at you, but more to contain everything necessary to cover the new guys (I'm sure you already know about OAL, so you can disregard the comment below about it).
In the interest of clarification and to prevent new reloaders from taking those numbers and running with them with some random bullet/powder combo, here it is in all it's glory:
Brass: Hornady Match .308 WIN, once fired by me, and competition-processed (sorted by weight, flash hole debur, primer pocket uniform, etc etc)
Primer: Federal 210M
Powder: Varget
Bullet: Berger 185 Hybrid
OAL - .020" jump (IN MY RIFLE! Yours may well be different, which is why I didn't specify an actual OAL)
The numbers I am using in this set of loads are straight from the Berger manual, which lists 41.6 as the max. My plan with this load is to find the most accurate (and fastest if multiple accurate groups). All 45 rounds will be run through a chrono. *IF* I am unhappy with the speed of the most accurate group, then I will load and begin to play with the "over book max" loads, watching for pressure signs in the brass (assuming I see none with the loads I already have, of course). These will be done in .2gr increments, starting with 41.6gr, and going until I either see pressure signs, or find another accurate grouping meeting my speed goal, whichever comes first.
Once I find a charge with the desired accuracy and speed, then I will play with seating depth.
Thanks, exx1976, I did get the picture that you did know what you were doing, and had a basis for it, but I was just trying to clarify for any who did not understand, or maybe were not experienced, so that they were aware of the whole picture. I didn't take personally anything you said, and I do agree with you, just clarifying what I thought could be misconstrued. As always, I am open to correction, as I'd far rather be corrected than injured by a bad reload.
Totally understand. I figured rather than just answer your one question about where the top number came from, and still leave the new reloaders confused, I'd throw all the information out there. I only intended for you to pick out the info you needed.
I figured rather than just answer your one question about where the top number came from, and still leave the new reloaders confused, I'd throw all the information out there. I only intended for you to pick out the info you needed. Totally understand.
How do you get the smiley faces in the middle of the post? I can only get them at the top by the title line.
That's a special key he has on his keyboard labeled "sip beer"
Thanks for the great advice. Years ago I worked up loads for the 22-250 using H380. Now that Vargat is one of the preferred powders, it seems like I'm starting all over again. I guess there are no easy shortcuts.
Thanks again
Barry
Thanks again
Barry
There are....but if I told you, I'd have to......
I am working on testing a method that I read about, which cuts the load work up by about 60%, but I am in the middle of testing it, so I can't recommend it from experience yet. I read a paper on OBT by Chris Long, and have started testing his theories. So far, the tests are paralleling his paper, with a few tweaks, but I can't tell you absolute data yet. Anyway, if you have access to QuickLoad by NECO, along with Chris Long's OBT paper, you can short circuit your testing by quite a bit, and still fulfill the principles of safety and load development. Here is the link to Chris' paper.
Optimal Barrel Time Paper
If you read it and want more info, I'll be glad to forward an email string between me and Chris, in which he helps me fine tune my tests a little better. I have not been able to get to the range to shoot my second round tests yet, but the first round showed promise and the need to do follow up testing.
I have a whole shelf of reloading manuals, have read every one, virtually every page including the drop tables. Some are better than others, some are conservative and a few back in the day tended to push limits...like Speer.
Anyway, the last place to get data advice is the Internet forums; as an only source, at least. You need to start low and work up, observing high pressure signs and looking for accuracy.
There was a topic a while back and a good percentage of the opinions were; that you don't need to read manuals, sort of a waste of time. Maybe, but where does that leave you for advice? The Internet? It helps to have a working knowledge of handloading unless you own a bullshit detector. A lot of online advice has merit, but you need a little foundation before you should accept advice at face value. A basic tenet is that your rifle is unique and it will tell you when you have reached it's potential. Therefore, you cannot assume what the book says is a max load, will be YOUR max load. It is surprising that this obvious fact has to be reminded, but it does. BB
Anyway, the last place to get data advice is the Internet forums; as an only source, at least. You need to start low and work up, observing high pressure signs and looking for accuracy.
There was a topic a while back and a good percentage of the opinions were; that you don't need to read manuals, sort of a waste of time. Maybe, but where does that leave you for advice? The Internet? It helps to have a working knowledge of handloading unless you own a bullshit detector. A lot of online advice has merit, but you need a little foundation before you should accept advice at face value. A basic tenet is that your rifle is unique and it will tell you when you have reached it's potential. Therefore, you cannot assume what the book says is a max load, will be YOUR max load. It is surprising that this obvious fact has to be reminded, but it does. BB
Random people from the Internet? Most of you hardly have "random" encounters and know more about each other than you admit. Don't forget that's reloading manuals are done by people...not companies. Still human error and do you guys even know how many different people are involved with manuals. It could be fewer than you think.
I haven't been around long enough but aren't there gurus here that everyone tends to trust because they know what they're doing and they get a chance to prove they know what they're doing? It's more than you get from the manuals. Plus, everyone works up and checks for pressure signs anyway...
Sure if you listen to random things then you could get in trouble.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
I haven't been around long enough but aren't there gurus here that everyone tends to trust because they know what they're doing and they get a chance to prove they know what they're doing? It's more than you get from the manuals. Plus, everyone works up and checks for pressure signs anyway...
Sure if you listen to random things then you could get in trouble.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Lyman's handbook is probably the most well-rounded manual on the market. I find myself referencing data.hodgdon.com a LOT, though. I have a bookshelf's worth of reloading manuals, many of the bullet manufacturers will publish a book for their bullets. The nice thing about the Lyman book is that it covers projectiles from many manufacturers, different powders, AND cast bullet loads. Lee's book has LOTS of data but it is somewhat antiquated in its layout. I wouldn't recommend Hornady, Barnes, Sierra, Speer, or Nosler's books for an all-encompassing load manual.
This is about what I do as well. I get the book data or check the manufacturers website for load data, and they look around the forums to see if other have had success with the powder/bullet etc combo I am wanting to try. Always verify what you find on the internet though. I find much of the data in the forums is close to max as guys are looking for velocity.
I think the difference is liability. "They" publish a manual, even if it's two guys and a midget, (maybe) BUT also a lawyer looks at it, because the company does not want to be sued for publishing irresponsible data. The guys on the boards don't have the same responsibility, or concerns; even if they are honest and careful handloaders. But, it's also possible to make a mistake, wrong bullet weight, or different brand, IMR4350 instead of H4350, mag primers? even the barrel length could make a difference on a faster or slower burning powder. Dealing with max loads, you need specifics and none are directly interchangeable. Either source, it's just a starting point and most manuals tell you to reduce the starting load by 10%. I don't think it hurts to be cautious/I read on here once in a while where they claim that they just used the max load listed. Not that they worked up to the max load, but that they assumed the max load was a safe load. Sure, in a Universal Receiver or a different make and model than what the user has. Some barrels are fast, some are slow, some will never get the velocity published in a manual and others will exceed it easily. You never know, but you need to find out, incrementally. BB
That is definitely part of it , BB. I just finished reading the Speer Manual, the first several chapters in which they tell you how to reload. I have been reloading for about a year, and before I started, I read ABC's of Reloading, and Reloading for Handguns. I took a one-on-one class and made my first 20 under the watchful eye of a master-reloader. I have since made about 7,000 rounds or so, and had some free time, so I read the Speer book. I did notice that they spoke of doing the development and testing with pressure meters on the rifle. They did test for safe pressures with some form of measuring device in the load development, which is something that most of us do not have access to. For this reason, they have to be a little conservative, as they know that we don't have such equipment, so if we were to fail to work the load up, and just used their book max, then there could be a problem. For this reason also, they are conservative in the books.
I use both and compare multiple sources.
Think about this, you find a powder you really like and buy a bunch of it. Some years later you have a new cartridge to load for and that powder would be ideal but it has been discontinued and there is no load data on line for it. That's when you wish you had bought the manual that had loads for that powder.
Think about this, you find a powder you really like and buy a bunch of it. Some years later you have a new cartridge to load for and that powder would be ideal but it has been discontinued and there is no load data on line for it. That's when you wish you had bought the manual that had loads for that powder.
It's not only discontinued powder. Suppose you can't resist, and buy a 30/40 Krag or a 218Bee, 219Donaldson Wasp. There are old editions of manuals that have this data. They all have value as a reference. Have we reached the point where we can burn books and close libraries because it's all available ....online? Welcome to The Brave New World. BB
I always consult my 8th ed. Hornady manual. The cross reference with speer manual. Its easy to get bad data on the internet. Even a simple miss hap when typing could be bad news. No substitute for test supported data!
