Lyman load data VS. Lee load data

I was a a bit surprised when I compared load data between my 49th ed Lyman reloading manual and my 2nd ed Lee Modern Reloading manual for S&W460 load data.

Lyman: Barnes XPB 250 gr., H110 powder
Starting : 36.5gn Max: 38.5gn
1985 fps 2123 fps

Lee: Barnes XPB 250 gr., H110 powder
Starting : 39.0gn Max: 41.5gn
1985 fps 2133 fps

I am a little spooked when I see one starting out above the max recommended load of another source. I would greatly appreciate any help regarding this issue since this is not a round I want to risk an excessive load on. (none for that matter)
Thanks

Check the powder and bullet manufacturer's manuals. I know Lee reprints the data and it's not the most current.


Brought to you by TapaTalk.

Persoally, when I find this, I use the lower info. What can it hurt to start with the lower data. Kinda erring on the side of caution.

What does Lee say for their max load? Exactly. I think they saved time that way. H110 is like that.

Typos do happen.
It is always a good idea to check multiple sources.
Glad you caught it.
When I get conflicting data in print the next stop is bullet/powder manufacturers data online.

Your post doesn't state what primers, COL, brand of case or barrel test length. All will contribute to the differences you show. Factors such as powder lot and ambient temperature when tested also makes a difference. Outta my .460 using H110/W296 I get big differences in velocity from shooting @85* and -5*. The reason to use more than one reference when reloading is so one can compare these differences to the components and the firearm they are reloading for. It has nuttin' to do with typos......but just variations in components. With a high pressure round like the .460 it doesn't take much of a variance to make a difference. For instance, my PC X-Frame has tight throats and will exhibit signs of over-pressure when using anything but min loads listed in Hodgdon's manual. Whereas these same load recipes from Lyman, Hornady and Speer fall into the "middle of the road". Some load recipes and some factory ammo for the .460 was softened after a few years to accommodate revolvers like mine. Cor-bon is one example.

I have found more than a few that have large differences. Also you have to take in account the test fixture/weapon. I would check additional references and if it looks like a typo, it may be. I believe I would go with Lyman on this one and check for signs of pressure if you continue into the Lee data upper limits. I checked Hodgdon site and it looks like that is where they pulled their data.

Mike

Lee does not do their own load development and testing. They just reprint from other sources.


I checked Hodgdon site and it looks like that is where they pulled their data.

Mike


Probably. The Hodgdon site has not been updated for some time and may still be load recipes from when the .460 was first released. One reason I believe they are "hot" in my revolver. I know they were extremely hot in my son's .460 Encore. They still list H4227 in their loads even tho they stopped distributing it some time ago. They also do not list IMR4227 in their recipes and I have found it to be one of the better powders in my X-Frame. BTW....Hodgdon themselves told me that recipes using H4227 and IMR4227 were not interchangeable even tho many folks claim the "new" IMR4227 is just the "old" H4227 re-branded.

The primers specified:

Lyman: LRM
Hodgdon: LRM
Lee: LR

But the load data is exactly the same from Lee & Hodgdon.
I have seen where people have said that mag primers make a difference and NEVER use magnum primers with VV powder and yet Lyman list vv (N110) with magnum primers.

The primers specified:

Lyman: LRM
Hodgdon: LRM
Lee: LR

But the load data is exactly the same from Lee & Hodgdon.
I have seen where people have said that mag primers make a difference and NEVER use magnum primers with VV powder and yet Lyman list vv (N110) with magnum primers.

Believe your Lyman Manual. It may be a little on the conservative side, but, there is nothing wrong with that.

Put your faith in the Lyman manuals, as they actually test their loads. The Lee manual just sits gathering dust, rarely used, even for reference.
My go-to is the online data from the powder manufacturers, as they have the most current data, including the newest powders. Specific bullet data for standard cup & core isn't an issue if you start low and work up, as you're supposed to do. Printed manual data is often a year or two old when published.


NCsmitty