How low can I go? (charge weight)

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

labnoti

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2018
Messages
1,892
I recently started loading 6.5 Grendel for my boys' future deer rifle. For practice, I've been loading Speer 90 gr. TNT close to the Hodgdon book "starting" load of 28.5 grains of H335. I'm getting just under 2600 fps, slightly below Hodgdon's data. I'm thinking of loading some with as little as 26 grains, which I estimate will give me around 2300 fps. The loads I'm shooting now do not have a lot of recoil, but they do give a good shove in the lightweight bolt-action rifle and a 60-pound kid is going to feel it.

I can't think of a reason not to load that far below book unless it's going to result in a squib load or possibly have a SEE. I could use a faster powder like H322, but I really don't want to buy a pound of it when I think they'll be comfortable moving up to starting loads of H335 after the first 20 shots. Any reason I shouldn't drop the load to 26 grains of H335?
 
i strongly suggest you follow your reloading manual and don't go below their min. charge weight.

luck,

murf
 
H335 is NOT a slow burning magnum powder. I can't imagine you would have any problems at 26 grains.

The problems come with large capacity cases and very slow magnum powders.
 
I'm guessing that the folks who create the load data create a minimum charge weight for reason? I can't come up with a 'good' reason to go below OR above published data.

If you child is too small to handle minimum load weights for that caliber, perhaps learning on a .22 is a better direction until they are big/old enough?
 
There is a difference between a "minimum" load and a "starting" load. "Starting" loads are often arbitrarily 10% below the maximum loads and do not indicate a minimum. There are powders such as the "magnum pistol" powders mentioned where there are listed "minimum" loads and instructions "do not reduce," but we should not assume that all starting loads are the safe minimums.
 
Shooting benchrest 308 , looking for a accurate for punching paper copy at 200 yards , started at a mid-range load of 41.5 gr. of IMR 4064 using a Sierra 168 gr MK . Brass cases aren't the same thickness so the thicker brass I lowered the charge by 1.0 grain that brought me to a load below listed , powder still filled the case at the base of the neck . The load I shoot all the time is 40.8 check the listed starting load for 308 caliber using IMR 4064 with a Sierra 168gr HPBT MatchKing bullet . Using the right powder for the bullet listed you can slightly lower your charge and check your primers for any pressure signs without jamming your bullets.
 
labnoti said:
There is a difference between a "minimum" load and a "starting" load. "Starting" loads are often arbitrarily 10% below the maximum loads and do not indicate a minimum. There are powders such as the "magnum pistol" powders mentioned where there are listed "minimum" loads and instructions "do not reduce," but we should not assume that all starting loads are the safe minimums.
Click to expand...
If you already know the answer why are you asking us?

I would switch powders and use IMR 4198.
 
I don't know the answer. I just don't believe the book "starting" load is the minimum. Knowing what's not the answer isn't the same as knowing the answer. The reason I'm asking is to see if there is any credible reason that is known to make going below starting loads a bad idea. So far, it's looking like I should try it.
 
At some point, lower charge weights will result in increasingly erratic combustion (hence velocity variation) and lots of unburnt powder fouling. You may also encounter position sensitivity with low case fill.

But, I say, since you're interested enough to ask, Go Try It! Start at the lowest charge you've used, and reduce 10% until you find a reason not to. Then you'll know something, and you will have escaped the "but there's no data" trap.

The worst you'll get is a stuck bullet, but based on my experience you'll be wiping a barrel full of unburnt powder out well before then.
 
Loads below the starting load will often have large velocity swings and therefore poor accuracy. Also as mentioned they will become dirty with the lower combustion pressures. Most published loads with a starting load are the result of stopping before getting to those points. Also if low enough then you might stick a bullet in the bore. It is good advice to ask the powder company about lower loads. They have access to data already tried and will share the info if safe to use along with alternate suggestions.
 
labnoti said:
I just don't believe the book "starting" load is the minimum
Click to expand...
Often times it is, not always, but it is something to consider carefully if you are going to go lighter.

I don't know how well H335 will download, never tried it, but it is a ball powder (strike one), but may do just fine. May have large ES & SD numbers.

If it were me I might look at different options, but it would mean going off the grid, not something I recommend to just anyone, and I don't know your skill level/experience reloading.
 
FROGO207 said:
Loads below the starting load will often have large velocity swings and therefore poor accuracy. Also as mentioned they will become dirty with the lower combustion pressures. Most published loads with a starting load are the result of stopping before getting to those points. Also if low enough then you might stick a bullet in the bore. It is good advice to ask the powder company about lower loads. They have access to data already tried and will share the info if safe to use along with alternate suggestions.
Click to expand...

+1 Another thing, they are also looking at the pressure curves. They can see things, weird things like multiple pressure spikes, that you won't see. I have used values that were below book values for standing and sitting rapid fire in NRA competition, for the 308 Win and 30-06. But you know, these were well characterized loads, shot by experienced shooters for years. The risk was very small that anything weird was going to happen.
 
Unless and until you become an expert QuickLoad user -- and maybe a chronograph for delayed-Xmas -- I'd stay away from departing too far from manufacturer-published data. (especially w/ ball powders as noted above)

WalkAlong & Slamfire have already pointed out several reasons purely from the powder type alone.... and I'd point out that the more you play with trying out truly poofier* load performance, the more you want you would want a different/faster powder anyway.**



* postscript:
Poofier is perfectly acceptable for kids/intro.
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5834689&postcount=1
But`ya gotta know what you're doing, what you did, . . . . and why.



** post-postscript:
All the above said -- and since you are working w/ a bolt gun -- Grab some Trailboss (yeah, another powder) and follow these directions:
http://serioussurvivor.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Trail-Boss-data.pdf


.
 
Last edited:
“Minimum” is the point just before the bullet doesn’t exit the barrel.

That said, Trailboss is my goto powder if I am trying for powder puff loads.

4BB3CA5F-7605-4D66-9BE1-E8FE7769E530.jpeg

Trajectory will be trashed but it won’t have much recoil.
 
Trailboss turns my .458 Win Mag into a .44 Mag velocity/power wise. A real pussycat.

Trailboss and .357 mag bullets in .35 Remington do the same thing, turn it into low cost low recoil fun.

TB won't make a deer load in 6.5 Grendel, but would be low recoil fun to get him started.

Looks like H4895 might work for you. 85 Gr in the 2600 range. 100 Gr in the 2400 FPS range.

https://sierrabulletsblog.com/2017/11/16/sierra-bullets-6-5-grendel-load-data/
 
IIRC, Accurate Arms #5574 is also well suited to some reduced loads, or just for loads that don't generate high pressures in big cases. In my 19th-century-made Swiss Vetterli, it makes a lovely "FOOMPF" sound upon firing. The level of recoil would be just the thing for gently cracking a soft-boiled egg held between your shoulder and the stock with minimal risk of getting the yolk on your shirt.
 
Shucks, amid all the discussions of bigger cases, I lost track of the fact that we were talking about the 6.5 Grendel, which isn't really the light-load-in-cavernous-case situation that is classic for 5744. Did you check Western's actual manual, or just their online data? Their paper book has more stuff now than their online free data (which is still pretty extensive).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
6.5 Grendel and H335?
Replies
17
Views
2K
Kaldor
Kaldor
Scout21
  • Locked
Can you substitute same weight bullets in load data?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
2K
AJC1
AJC1
A
  • Locked
Grabbed H322 when I wanted to reach for H335
Replies
21
Views
8K
Swampman
Swampman
M
  • Locked
concerned: data for H335 in 7mmTCU?
Replies
1
Views
438
Larry Ashcraft
Larry Ashcraft
D
  • Locked
Light loads for 30-30
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
film495
F
Back
Top