Why not start at “Start”?

I thought the rule was to start 10% under the maximum load unless a starting load was listed. You shouldn't go below the starting load unless you are being really careful. There is a good chance of sticking a bullet in the barrel.

I say you are absolutely 100% correct.

We have seen way more problems here on THR in the last year with stuck bullets and damaged guns caused by Too Light then by Too much.

I have never been one to download below starting, or hot load to max most of the time.

But then again, I always charge 50 cases with powder in a loading block and look at them all before putting bullets in them.

Maybe that is a few of the reasons I have never had a squib, stuck bullet, or damaged gun in 50 years of reloading.

My personal feeling is, if a starting load kicks too much for you?
You probably should get a smaller caliber gun, or switch hobbies to golf.

rc

So, is that the proper use of going 10% under???

Click to expand...

Yes.

Alliant for instance only publishes MAX loads with all their powder.

You are expected to reduce 10% for the correct starting load & work up.

rc

For semi-auto pistol load development, when using same/longer OAL than published, I will stick to the start charge, but if I am using shorter than published OAL or different nose shape bullet that will seat the bullet base deeper in the case neck, I will tend to dip .2-.3 gr below start charge to conduct my work up.

Of course, this is based on my experience only for semi-auto loads in 9mm/40S&W/45ACP, but I have never stuck a bullet in the barrel going .2-.3 gr below published start charge, regardless of the bullet type (jacketed/plated/lead/moly coated lead). YMMV

However, I have stuck bullets in barrels with squib rounds (primer only, no powder). But last time I did that was a looooong time ago.

I consider myself a cautious individual. That being said, I rarely start at the Start loads anymore. I've had goofy things like backed out primers, unburned powder, etc. at their start loads. I load for semi-autos too, so I like to ensure function.

I cross reference mulitple reloading manuals and try to start right smack in the middle. and work my way up from there.

That's just one guy's experience though, so take it with a grain of salt.

As has been said, 10% max not start load. I always start a load as published knowing that my choice will probably be in the middle to upper range. I've been lucky I have found data for all my loads that list a starting and max load.

I was not aware that anyone sugested starting below starting load data.

I too am fairly cautious, and have only been at it for about five years, but based on past experience, for rifles I start at the starting load, and for pistols I start a little above the lowest starting load listed between all the information sources it can find for similar bullets.

10% below the starting load? I have never read anywhere that this is a good idea. I'd expect the bullet to make it out of the barrel, but would not count on it cycling a semiauto.

56hawk is correct, the start load is 10% below maximum. Manuals often used to publish just the maximum load with a note to reduce 10% for start and work up. Many manuals provide a "start load" for you thus doing the math. Mo further reduction is needed for safety. A great help for those that are math challenged and do not carfully read directions. If you look at the numbers you will see that the manuals start load is almost always a 10% reduction from their maximum. There are a few powders where the start load is less than 10%, W296 and H110 for example. You need to read the information provided on the particular powder to find out about these differences.

I start at the "Start" load.
I typically will first go through all the reloading manuals I have and what is free online to confirm that the load I am about to START with is, indeed, the STARTING load.

Better to take a few minutes beforehand then to have a kaboom!

As said the usual starting load is 90% of maximum. (Isn't that easier than subtracting 10%?)

Lyman commonly shows lighter starting handgun loads than that, apparently based on the minimum pressure they think will burn the powder and blow the bullet out the barrel.

A 90% load will usually function an autopistol. In my trials 88% would, barely; but 85% would not (except a 1911 which is more flexible than most.)

Speer shows three loads. I have never had "pressure signs" in a rifle with their middle load which is 95% of their top powder charge.

I concur that the 10% is the reduction from MAX load for starting load unless the starting load is stated. Sometimes the load can't be reduced and that is noted by the manufacturer to keep you safe. When starting a new can of propellant with the same load as the old can had I will drop 2% and start IF it is not a max load to begin with. If at max then I will drop it 5% and work it back up. Buying in large containers is the way to buy if you can spend the cash all at once to avoid lots of extra work. YMMV

I know with the small Hogdon manuals that they give away at my LGS, they only list max loads, so that's where the 10% comes in. I would never go 10% under the starting load. There are exceptions, but they are documented, such as Hogdon's 60% rule with H4895.

Pistol loads:

Like bds, I often load at less than published oals; so I may start below the 90% level if it's a new-to-me powder.

When it's a powder where I have a number of established loads, I use bullet weight and proven "seating depths" to get known safe pressures for a safe starting load.

OALs don't determine pressure, seating depth determines pressure.

10% below Max load on most powders, NOT ALL. WW296 is 3% so you need to know what powder your dealing with. When this powder was first released they said to load as published. Then they said it was safe to drop 3% from max. Now they actually give you a range, starting and Max.

Anyone who suggests you reduce the starting load by 10% is totally incorrect and doing something very dangerous. This is one of the reasons you should be very weary of what you read on the Internet. Always double check information you get from someone on the Internet with one or more published resources. (powder manufacturer, Speer, Lyman, Lee, Hornady, Sierra and so on)

Your statement of reducing the MAX charge by 10% to get your starting load is totally correct. Like you asked, yes, that is the correct application of the "10% rule".

NoAlibi said:

This Forum - Thread: When working up a load...... Post# 10


Now you are aware that sometimes a nebulous statement can be misconstrued (Does he mean 10% under the "min" he was just referring to or 10% under max which he did not refer to? This is not clear to me and as yet no one has asked for a clarification.) Go through some old threads on working up loads in this forum and you'll see this come up again and again. If you reload long enough and pay attention you will see and hear a lot of misconceptions and those misconceptions will be touted as fact. As for me I never suggested to start below the starting load because this can be dangerous especially in small capacity cases and can cause a spike in pressure with some powders.

Click to expand...

You are mistaken about the 10% statement in Post #10 not being challenged. Post #10 was challenged in the very next post.

Post #11.

gamestalker said:

To specify starting at 2.0 grains below minimum or maximum published data is far to broad of statement in my opinion. In fact, I personally feel that doing so would introduce unpredictable variables, very likely dangerous one's including bullets failing to exit the barrel. I've never separated a case with mid range load data or experienced excessive pressures for that matter.
Reloading books recommend starting at minimum published data or 10% below the published maximum, if a minimum charge doesn't exist, not 10% below published minimum, or 2 grains +/-.
GS

Click to expand...

ArchAngelCD said:

Anyone who suggests you reduce the starting load by 10% is totally incorrect and doing something very dangerous. This is one of the reasons you should be very weary of what you read on the Internet.

Click to expand...

OK, let's use an example: 45ACP 200 gr Lead SWC with W231.


Hodgdon load data lists the following using 5" barrel and Federal 150 primer:

200 gr CAST LSWC Winchester 231 Diameter .451" OAL 1.225" Start 4.4 gr (771 fps) 11,000 CUP - Max 5.6 gr (914 fps) 16,900 CUP

Click to expand...

Lyman #49 lists the following using 5" barrel and CCI 300 primer (I am using the load data for Lyman #452630 as it is more similar to bullet I am using with a single groove lube channel):

200 gr #2 Alloy (SWC) W231 Diameter .451" OAL 1.235" Start 5.4 gr (769 fps) 12,700 CUP - Max 6.1 gr (885 fps) 16,300 CUP

Click to expand...

Well, here are the differences.

Lyman used .450" groove diameter test barrel, .451" sized bullet, Lyman #2 alloy (I think around 15 BHN?), 1.235" OAL and CCI primer. Hodgdon load data does not indicate groove diameter of the test barrel or bullet type but used .451" sized bullet, 1.225" OAL and Federal primer.

I use .451" groove diameter barrel in my Sig 1911, .452" sized bullet with Missouri 18/12 BHN Bullets, 1.245" OAL and Winchester/Tula/Wolf primers.

When I first saw the start-max charges for Hodgdon and Lyman load data, I tell you, I scratched my head and went, "What the heck?"

Hodgdon: Start 4.4 gr (771 fps) 11,000 CUP - Max 5.6 gr (914 fps) 16,900 CUP
Lyman: Start 5.4 gr (769 fps) 12,700 CUP - Max 6.1 gr (885 fps) 16,300 CUP

Click to expand...

I mean, Hodgdon's max load data was almost Lyman's start charge! Then I realized the differences in testing variables such as barrel groove diameter vs bullet sizing vs type of alloy/BHN etc. My load uses larger sized .452" bullet in .451" groove diameter barrels with different primers, but 5.0 gr of W231/HP-38 will cycle all of my pistols (and in all other pistols I have shot them in) while producing very good accuracy (which tells me that chamber pressures must be consistent ).

So, if you went by the published Lyman #49 load data, 5.0 gr would be 7.4% below Lyman's start charge and Hodgdon's published start charge of 4.4 gr would be 18.5% below Lyman's start charge.

bds said:

For semi-auto pistol load development, when using same/longer OAL than published, I will stick to the start charge, but if I am using shorter than published OAL or different nose shape bullet that will seat the bullet base deeper in the case neck, I will tend to dip .2-.3 gr below start charge to conduct my work up.

Click to expand...

I think I need to clarify some things but I still stand by my comment for the following reasons.

For me, the premise of referencing published load data is because I lack the chamber pressure measuring devices to determine when SAAMI average max pressures are reached so I do not blow up my barrels/pistols which I have seen plenty of other good intentioned reloaders do so by accident/distractions/wrong load data as stated by them (I will admit that most of these incidents were probably due to double charges, not overcharges but I do not have any facts/evidences to support it).

Let me ask some questions, and this is specific to semi-auto pistol loads in 9mm, 40S&W and 45ACP I have shot quite a bit of.

How do you know the published load data you are using is duplicating the same chamber pressures in your pistol/barrel? Even when matching the muzzle velocities with a chrono, how do you know the readings you are getting are accurate, especially at max load data powder charges? Has it been re-calibrated/verified since you purchased it?

We all know that most published load data are determined by using test fixtures and not actual pistols. Since there are differences in barrel length, groove diameter, rifling start/leade, rifling type/height, etc.; chamber pressures/muzzle velocities generated in our pistols/barrels (factory or aftermarket) may vary, especially when using different bullet type (jacketed vs plated/TMJ and for lead, to include alloy characteristics and BHN)/nose profile/bearing surface length/bullet base length/seating depth, etc.


How about another example? 9mm 125 gr Lead SWC with W231

Hodgdon load data lists the following using 4" barrel and CCI 500 primer:

125 gr LCN Winchester 231 Diameter .356" OAL 1.125" Start 3.9 gr (1009 fps) 25,700 CUP - Max 4.4 gr (1086 fps) 31,200 CUP

Click to expand...

Lyman #49 lists the following using 4" barrel and CCI 500 primer (I am using the load data for Lyman #356402 as it is more similar to bullet I am using with a single groove lube channel):

120 gr #2 Alloy (Truncated Cone) W231 Diameter .356" OAL 1.110" Start 2.9 gr (963 fps) 17,000 CUP - Max 4.4 gr (1264 fps) 29,600 CUP

Click to expand...

Well, here are the differences.

This time, Lyman used .355" groove diameter test barrel, .356" sized bullet, Lyman #2 alloy (I think around 15 BHN?), 1.110" OAL and CCI primer. Hodgdon load data does not indicate groove diameter of the test barrel or bullet type (simply LCN) but used .356" sized bullet, 1.125" OAL and also CCI primer.

I use .355" groove diameter Lone Wolf barrels (4.49" and 3.46") in my Glocks, .356" sized bullet with Missouri 18 BHN Bullets, 1.045" OAL and Winchester/Magtech/PMC/Tula primers.

When I was determining Max/Ideal OAL, 1.045" OAL fed/chamber reliably in factory Glock and Lone Wolf barrels. Due to the shorter OAL and substantial bullet base with longer bearing surface that got seated much deeper in the case neck, I conducted my powder charge work up below the published start charge of 3.9 gr (I started at 3.6 gr).

So, if you went by Hodgdon load data, 3.6 gr would be 7.7% below start charge, but Lyman's start charge of 2.9 gr would be 25.6% below start charge? (I do realize Lyman used 120 gr bullet and not 125 gr).

If you have the very same components as the load manual lists, then use the starting load. If you are substituting components, then you may need to go 10% below the starting load depending on bullet length and COAL.

There is no hard 10% rule. You have to use your head and understand how bullet length and seating depth affects pressure.

there are always "exeptions to the rule".

when i was fire lapping my 44spl blackhawk, i started under the "starting load", and worked my way down to where i had to be (less than 600fps).

while i was "working down" the load, i checked for a suck bullet in the barrel after every shot. after i "found my load", i made sure i saw "the dirt fly" in the berm after every shot.

if you are playing out-of-bounds, it pays to be extra careful.

fwiw,

murf

NoAlibi,
There is no reason to take things personal especially since I didn't say anything out of line. This is a discussion, not a competition.

When you said, "This is not clear to me and as yet no one has asked for a clarification" it sounded like there were plenty of posts after the one in question but no one asked about it.

There really is no reason to change a discussion into a competition. I won't speak for anyone else but I can tell you I'm here to learn, not compete with anyone so why not lighten up a little?