Alliant load data vs. manual for 55 gr. .22-250


October 31, 2009, 02:03 PM
Hi Everyone,

This is my first post since joining and avidly following this forum a few months back. My question is in regard to load data that Alliant lists for the .22-250 Remington.

I have been working on developing a load using the Hornady 55 grain V-Max and Alliant's Reloader 15. When I compared the Alliant website data for 55 gr. V-Max, I noticed that Alliant lists 37.5 grains of RL15. This seems to be siginificantly higher than the maximum of 35.3 gr. published in the Hornday No.7 book and the 35.5 gr. in 49th editoin of Lyman.

Oddly, enough, the other recipies that Alliant lists for the .22-250 using RL15 matches what Speer has listed. I understand that there are variatoins across different manuals, but isn't 2.0 - 2.3 grains higher a little abnormal?

I didn't know what you guys thought about the manufacturer's site data and how it compares to reloading manuals like Hornandy, Speer, Sierra and Nosler.

If you enjoyed reading about "Alliant load data vs. manual for 55 gr. .22-250" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
October 31, 2009, 02:11 PM
Lyman #49 is using a 55 grain Sierra soft point.

Speer is usually pretty close to right.

Hornady always seems very cautious.

Sierra is, or used to be hotter then anyone else.

Nosler bullets can't really be compared to anything else.

The bottom line is, every manuals data is going to be a little different because no two use the same test barrel, primer, case, and powder lot number.

You just have to take the one you want to trust, start at the starting load, and work up.

All Alliant data only lists a max load so you have to reduce it by 10%.




October 31, 2009, 02:23 PM
RC, I just looked again in my copy of Lyman. On both page 145 and 147 they list the V-Max. I always think of Lyman as a pretty good source.

Thanks for your comments on the others!

October 31, 2009, 02:29 PM
Different data results from the different conditions in which the load was developed. Some ballisticians use pressure test barrels, while others use an actual gun to develop the load.

Because X grains of Y powder produced x velocity and y pressure in Gun A is no guarantee that it will produce the same numbers in Guns B and C. All it means is that that lot of powder with that lot of primers and that particular bullet produced that pressure and velocity in that gun on that particular day.

Change one thing, and you get to start over.

Ol` Joe
October 31, 2009, 10:47 PM
Alliant data uses Speer bullets in its development lately as the two companies are owned by AKT. The difference between Hornadies data and theirs is likely due to this, as is the similarity of Speers data which uses the same bullet.

October 31, 2009, 11:08 PM
Frustrating isn't it.

I recently ran into the same thing loading H110 for the .357 mag. One manual's max load for the 158 JHP is a grain below the starting load for that same combination in another manual. The second manual then lists a maximum load two grains higher yet. This for a powder that EVERYONE tells you isn't safe if reduced. Same thing happens with W296 (and why's the same powder).

Richard Lee wrote in his first reloading manual that a compressed powder load (loaded heavily enough that the bullet compresses the powder) slows the burn rate of the powder substantially and allows much heavier loading than if the powder is loose in the cartridge. This may be what's happening. People are finding a pressure peak that's near max with uncompressed powder and list that as the max load. Other places go right to the compressed load and are able to load much heavier before they encounter max. pressures.

Still, these are bright experienced people so you'd think they'd have a handle on this. In the long run it may be a matter of differing company policies with different legal department inputs.

If you enjoyed reading about "Alliant load data vs. manual for 55 gr. .22-250" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!