Did they whimpify loads in new reloading books


PDA






KegCommando
November 19, 2008, 08:50 PM
I've wanted a new load book for a couple months now, and based on another thread of mine, I went and got some new bullets to experiment.

So, my current book doesn't have enough data for some of the bullets I got, which finally prompted me to trek on over to the store.

When I leafed through two of the books, I looked the load I am most familiar with and was kinda shocked to find that they were listed as max loads.

I didn't buy a book and went home to check out mine to verify, and based on my older data, I was at about the middle of the range.

I know I've been a bad boy and haven't gotten newer manuals to keep up with possible changes in a manufacturer's powder, but I haven't noticed signs of excessive pressure.

Oh, for the record, it was W-231.

So did the powder become that much more potent over the years, or have the books become more cautious?

If the books have become more conservative, is there one that hasn't, or one that is the least? Unfortunately I didn't make note of which two I looked at. I just jumped to the .380 section since my current book has almost zero data for that, but I also need one that has a better selection of 9mm 147gr data which is prompted me to go to the store in the first place.

Thanks!

If you enjoyed reading about "Did they whimpify loads in new reloading books" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
RPCVYemen
November 19, 2008, 09:52 PM
The powder companies claim that the piezoelectric pressure measuring mechanisms showed them new faster spikes that they couldn't see with the copper crushing pressure barrels. That has lead them to reduce some loads.

Mike

cliffy
November 19, 2008, 10:53 PM
Since a 24.2 grain Alliant Reloder 10x charge will religiously drive a .223 Remington 55 grain bullet to 3400 fps safely, what's the NEW recommendation? I'm anxious to laugh at lack-o-power loads. USE ONLY small rifle MAGNUM primers designed for .223 Remington applications, since the small rifle STANDARD primers are only meant for use in .218 Bee, .219 Zipper, .22 Hornet, and .222 Remington loads, NOT for serious use in .222 Remington Magnum loads or in .223 Remington loads! Popping a firing pin through a weak primer dirty's one's firing pin causing future misfires and inherent trigger sluggishness. Avoid this foolishness that I went through to begin with during my formative years of reloading. cliffy

ARTJR338WM
November 20, 2008, 12:52 AM
I do not know if it was to as you say "Wimpify" them, but the newest Lyman relading manual shows the max load of RL-19 for my 338wm 3 or 4 grains less than the one I own. I saw this as I thumbed through the latest Lyman manual while I was at Cabelas.

ants
November 20, 2008, 12:55 AM
I'm sure the word 'lawyer' will be used repeatedly in this thread, but RPCVYemen (Post #2) is on the right track that methodology and other technical factors are the greatest contributors.

Many reloaders will never understand this, but real lawyers are too smart to manipulate data up or down.

KegCommando
November 20, 2008, 02:09 AM
Found the answer in another post:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=401020


Thanks for the replies, and sorry for the repost.

If you enjoyed reading about "Did they whimpify loads in new reloading books" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!