Any accidents in load work-up?

[schwim]

All the precautionary measures are certainly needed and must be followed when reloading, I understand this totally and feel I've done sufficient research on what I'm doing as a new reloader for rifle. I've reloaded tons of .45.

Chamber length, head space, measure from ogive to head with knowledge of the chamber's measurements to lands, case length and individually weighed powder charges, etc. have been accounted for. I was starting to get a little concerned as I'm getting set to work up a new load this weekend with going over the book max, as conditions allow (first time doing this).

Don't feel I need to get paranoid, but was wondering if anyone has had any serious safety issues or has seen anyone with problems occur. Did a search and saw that M1's and M14's can present problems, and read about the potential issues in my Sierra manual, but was wondering if anyone has ever had (or knows anyone who has had) any serious issues in reloading a work-up round for a bolt gun? What went wrong? Thanks.

 

[Chadwick122689]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

What's the purpose of going over book max? Have you already found that the powder does not work at any of the charges between the top and bottom listed? Need more background info, obviously I will not tell you it's safe to go above max... But people do it, very carefully...

 

[Powder_Burns]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

Book maxes seem to drop a few tenths of a grain for every subsequent publication. Watch your pressure signs, start low and work up. Sometimes you will hit max before the book's max, sometimes you could go a little further. A chronograph is an invaluable tool for load workup..

 

[schwim]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

Everything I've read on searches talks about finding the highest safe charge acuracy node in the optimal charge weight evaluations. The one post that I did find about my exact rig and work-up round found the optimum charge at 1 grain over the book max without any signs of pressure, so I'm set to go there as I work up from the lowest charge weight-up. I've seen lots of talk about the best accuracy for L155 scenars being at above 2900 fps, which is where I intend to go, if possible, with a 20 inch barrel.

 

[Grump]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

Biggest safety problems I've ever had during load development were:

1. Twice, I've almost seated my fingertip in a case. Drew blood once. Single-stage press both times.

2. Twice, I've had ejector marks/smears and 10-20% of cases get loose primer pockets. Once with FC brass, once with USGI stuff. One of those was this year with a NOT worked-up load something like 1 full grain less than a published max for that bullet. Was using up the last few ounces of a powder I don't plan to buy again...

After doing this for years and having quickly gotten over the temptation to hold the firearm around the corner of some good bulletproof obstacle for the first three rounds of "pressure testing", and having seen false high pressure signs from short-sized cases fired in long-headspace chambers, and velocities fully 100+ fps faster than two or more published sources say I should be getting from that barrel length...

and

having seen lots of other loads get fully 100+ fps LESS velocity than two or three published sources said I should have been gettng...

I no longer believe in "pressure signs" being useful for load development, other than as evidence that you're at LEAST 10,000 PSI over specs. There just isn't any reliable physical sign of pressure *at* or even reasonably close to *over* specs for a typical full-power/pressure centerfire rifle cartridge. It's too much like reading tea leaves.

My "pressure signs" are now the max velocities reported by the reloading manuals, combined with mathematical modeling by QuickLOAD. I take my powder burn rate, adjusted it to match my velocities actually obtained, AND include my case capacity and other load data. If that predicts a chamber pressure over spec with the velocity I'm really getting, I don't give a flying flip about what the primers or caseheads look like. I just don't go there. What I've found is that very few powder/bullet combinations can go more than about 30 fps higher than "book max" *velocity* without having pressures predicted over spec. Most predict overpressure right there at the velocities the books say are max for that powder and bullet.

 

[vman]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Schwim</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Everything I've read on searches talks about finding the highest safe charge acuracy node in the optimal charge weight evaluations. The one post that I did find about my exact rig and work-up round found the optimum charge at 1 grain over the book max without any signs of pressure, so I'm set to go there as I work up from the lowest charge weight-up. I've seen lots of talk about the best accuracy for L155 scenars being at above 2900 fps, which is where I intend to go, if possible, with a 20 inch barrel. </div></div>

You might find this difficult... you can lose about 15-25FPs per inch of barrel. Not saying its impossible but dont stress too much if you dont reach 2900

 

[Grump]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

I'm with vman. If you want 2900 fps with a 155-gr .30-caliber bullet from a 20-inch barrel, your only two options IMO are Hornady SuperFormance ammo (powders supposed to be out early 2011???), or a bigger cartridge. I believe that with the right powder, a .30-06 could do it.

Or you could get a Magnum and download it slightly. Nothing wrong with getting longer barrel life by *not* using all of the excess capacity.

 

[huntinggamo]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

i messed up in my .40 s&w and forgot to put powder in one round, lucky i noticed it and did not fire the next round.... real eye opener there, my wife cut off part of her fingertip wile de-priming cases once...lol

 

[BOLTRIPPER]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

just pay attention to what you do....wear glasses, remember there is no glory in being a speed queen with a broken face

 

[schwim]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

Thanks. Not looking to go cowboy on this, so really there's no super-high expectations.

The Hodgdon website talks about 2854 as max with IMR 8208 XBR, but this is not the exact bullet or barrel for me. I'll take it slow and see what happens with the chrono.

 

[schwim]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Grump</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Biggest safety problems I've ever had during load development were:

1. Twice, I've almost seated my fingertip in a case. Drew blood once. Single-stage press both times.

2. Twice, I've had ejector marks/smears and 10-20% of cases get loose primer pockets. Once with FC brass, once with USGI stuff. One of those was this year with a NOT worked-up load something like 1 full grain less than a published max for that bullet. Was using up the last few ounces of a powder I don't plan to buy again...

Thanks, great info to think about. Experience knows. Haven't seen this approach, but will keep in mind as "wise" knowlege.

After doing this for years and having quickly gotten over the temptation to hold the firearm around the corner of some good bulletproof obstacle for the first three rounds of "pressure testing", and having seen false high pressure signs from short-sized cases fired in long-headspace chambers, and velocities fully 100+ fps faster than two or more published sources say I should be getting from that barrel length...

and

having seen lots of other loads get fully 100+ fps LESS velocity than two or three published sources said I should have been gettng...

I no longer believe in "pressure signs" being useful for load development, other than as evidence that you're at LEAST 10,000 PSI over specs. There just isn't any reliable physical sign of pressure *at* or even reasonably close to *over* specs for a typical full-power/pressure centerfire rifle cartridge. It's too much like reading tea leaves.

My "pressure signs" are now the max velocities reported by the reloading manuals, combined with mathematical modeling by QuickLOAD. I take my powder burn rate, adjusted it to match my velocities actually obtained, AND include my case capacity and other load data. If that predicts a chamber pressure over spec with the velocity I'm really getting, I don't give a flying flip about what the primers or caseheads look like. I just don't go there. What I've found is that very few powder/bullet combinations can go more than about 30 fps higher than "book max" *velocity* without having pressures predicted over spec. Most predict overpressure right there at the velocities the books say are max for that powder and bullet. </div></div>

 

[schwim]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

{issue trying to quote}

Thanks, great info to think about. Experience knows. Haven't seen this approach, but will keep in mind as "wise" knowlege.

 

[Fuzzball]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

"I was starting to get a little concerned as I'm getting set to work up a new load this weekend with going over the book max, as conditions allow (first time doing this)."

There is GREAT hazard asking - or answering - this kind of question. Leave it at telling people to observe what the books say and accept them as knowedgable sources.

Those who know, or think they know, how to judge pressures have no valid reason to discuss it in public, for obvious reasons. Those who don't have a clue certainly shouldn't be talking about it.

IMHO.

 

[schwim]

Re: Any accidents in load work-up?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fuzzball</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"I was starting to get a little concerned as I'm getting set to work up a new load this weekend with going over the book max, as conditions allow (first time doing this)."

There is GREAT hazard asking - or answering - this kind of question. Leave it at telling people to observe what the books say and accept them as knowedgable sources.

Those who know, or think they know, how to judge pressures have no valid reason to discuss it in public, for obvious reasons. Those who don't have a clue certainly shouldn't be talking about it.

IMHO.

</div></div> Smart, TY