Loading manuals conflict for 10mm load

[DragonFire]

While looking at recipes in my manuals I found a conflict between listed ranges.

I'm using some 10mm 200 gr RNFP plated bullet from X-Treme Bullets (formerly West Coast Bullets) using HS-6 powder.

Since the plating on X-Treme bullets is pretty heavy, I normally followed the loads for jacketed bullets.

I'm using on of the LoadBooks that list recipes from several manuals.

I found a load from Hornady for a 200 gr FMJ-FP with a range of 6.6 to 8.2 grains.

There's also a load from Speer for a 200 gr TMJ with a range of 8.2 to 9.1

And one from Hodgdon to a 200gr FMJ with a range of 7.5 to 8.6

I've loaded this bullet combination before, for a medium-hot load, before I had this LoadBook and settled on 8.6 grains of powder. Not terribly hot, with moderate recoil.

Now that I see the Hornady load, I see that that load could be potentially .4 grains over maximum.

Two of the three loads are pretty close, but I think it's a pretty gap between 8.2 (the max on one recipe) and 9.1 (the max on another recipe).

How would I figure out which one is the correct range?

 

[JDGray]

Plated bullets are in a class of their own. Rainier says not to excede 1200fps, and if datas not available, to load as lead. I've noticed, the same fps as lead, using less powder. I would load them down, or get jacketed for hotter loads.

 

[Ol` Joe]

Every time you change the components you change the load results. The books are showing the difference they found with the components (not only bullet differences) they used. You likely will not have the components they had and your loads will vary also. This is why they tell you to start low and work up. IMHO The best data is still the loads you get from the bullet manufacture.

BTW, I`ve been read some canister powders can vary up to 10% in burn rate and still meet specs. This is another reason to take max loads with a grain of salt.

 

[DragonFire]

JD: I've found that with X-Treme bullets the plating is thick enough and of enough quality that the jacketed load recipes work very well, and I usually get similar velocities as cited in the manuals.


I know changes in exact components with cause the results to vary even if using the same bullet/powder/primers/barrel length listed in the manuals. But usually the results are pretty consistent between manuals. One of the reasons I try to find the loads for the same bullet/powder in different manuals is to save myself from a typo in one of them.

This is the first time I've encountered them not being consistent.

I tend to load on the cooler side of the recipes, so I think I should be safe.

 

[GooseGestapo]

A lot of 10mm data changed back in the early to mid 1990's.

I had an S&W 1006, and shot it extensively. My favorite hunting load was a Hornady 200gr XTP (recently introduced at that time) and a then recommended max. load of AA#7.

The next years publication of data by Accurate Arms, and others showed a reduction in the charge of about 15%.

I was perplexed at first thinking that they had done what they had done with the original #5 and gone to another manuf./vendor, and the spec's. had changed.

What HAD happened, was that Glock had introduced the Mod #20.

I found out this the hard way as an aquaintance who was activated for the first Gulf war (1991) had hard financial times and needed to sell his mod 20, and I bought it from him to help him.

The first 3 rounds I fired blew out the case heads at the bottom of the feed ramp. This was the above mentioned load. Safe and nominal in the S&W, didn't cut it in the Glock. This also applies to S&W firearms in .45 Colt vs. the Ruger Blackhawks and Redhawks. Loads that are fine and recommended for the Rugers are WAY TOO hot for the S&W's. No slight against the guns, just differences in manufacturing design and tolerances.

It is important to verify what type firearm the data is worked up in and adjust accordingly.

Hodgdon has a disclaimer against using their handgun data in a firearm with unsupported chambers.

 

[Rabid Rabbit]

I see that in a number of loads

I had a similar issue with unique and 135 JHP. The min - max loads were off by 1 grain, so I called both Nosler and Alliant. They told me the difference may be due to a number of rational reasons such as. Powder manufacturer data may list a wider spread, while a bullet manufacture may limit it to the relatively accurate loads, the equipment used..... I forget which book it is but they said some of the changes in the book are due taking out the loads that didn't add anything of value, meaning accuracy, consistency, reliability etc....

One of the customer services reps told me if reloading was that sensitive, the entire industry would have been litigated out of existence years ago. Just build up slowly, pay attention and don’t do stupid things