25-20 WCF
Member
I’m not calling out anyone in particular, but for many years I’ve read posts which claim that current major loading manual data are somehow castrated by “lawyers” or “insurance companies” and that the maximum load data in decades-old manuals is perfectly safe to use today. I have to assume that those who claim this are simple conspiracy theorists since thinking folks know that the actual reason for any reductions is science, not politics.
Beginning in the mid-1970s more loading companies started using actual pressure measuring equipment, while before that they used primitive methods like primer appearance and bolt lift. By adhering to SAAMI engineering standards - rather the just guessing - the major manuals have made reloading safer for everyone. To insist that “lawyers” rather than engineers dictated the reduction in maximum loads is, well, insulting. There will always be those few deniers who insist that what they want to be true is indeed fact, the reality is apparently very threatening to them. I hope that newer reloaders will follow modern published data, not the emotional hand-wringing of a few.
Thoughts?
.
Beginning in the mid-1970s more loading companies started using actual pressure measuring equipment, while before that they used primitive methods like primer appearance and bolt lift. By adhering to SAAMI engineering standards - rather the just guessing - the major manuals have made reloading safer for everyone. To insist that “lawyers” rather than engineers dictated the reduction in maximum loads is, well, insulting. There will always be those few deniers who insist that what they want to be true is indeed fact, the reality is apparently very threatening to them. I hope that newer reloaders will follow modern published data, not the emotional hand-wringing of a few.
Thoughts?
.