Ever found Max published load data that indicated an over pressure situation?

[cfullgraf]

There have been several cartridges and published data that I felt the maximum charge was at a higher pressure than I was comfortable with. I will not say it was over pressure, but I was not willing to go there.

I even have two "identical" firearms that show substantially different velocities, 10% difference) with the same case/primer/powder/bullet load.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Yes I have.

Lil Gun in 357mag, carbine in my situation.

One firing on a new case would be rendered unreloadable and not even at maximum loads

 

[CraigC]

I learned early on that what was safe in the firearm used in developing loading data for publication in a reloading manual may not be safe in my personal firearms.
Some published loads for the 44 Magnum showed definite pressure signs in my Ruger Super Blackhawk.

All you can do is assume and with revolvers, probably incorrectly. I always defer to John Linebaugh on this, that pressure signs in revolvers are unreliable to the point of being practically meaningless. Through destructive testing, they found that some guns would show zero pressure signs right up until they blew.

 

[stringnut]

I had a H and R handi rifle in 22 hornet that would not handle any 50 grain bullets. Starting loads with every bullet or bullet or powder would loosen primer pockets or even give leakage, around the primer. These same loads were great in a friends Savage 22 hornet. Never did figure that one out. Close to the lands or way back it didn't matter. Since it was a single shot didn't worry about it actually blowing up. Sure did make people at the range nervous!

 

[Cbob]

Blue Dot and .357 (for some reason those loads are no longer published)

You mean primers aren't supposed to completely fill the primer pocket?

 

[Archie]

From Lyman #49 manual, page 119, bottom of first column; heading "Maximum Load Grains".

Hidden cleverly (last sentence in top paragraph in second column, continued from first column) in that section is the sentence: "Never use any maximum charge without carefully working up to it from the Suggested Starting Grains."

This warning (which may or may not have identical wording but the same conceptual essence) appears in all the other loading manuals I can remember.

Also.

Every loading section specifies the case, primer, powder and bullet - weight and 'type' - used in the load. Every loading section identifies the type of firearm or test mechanism used.

Then, in the same basic chapter of the loading manual - the boring front part with all the words - is the warning of substituting components; and the advisory to begin developing a load from the bottom up all over again.

It should be understood when using one's one firearm INSTEAD of the one specified in the loading data section, one has in fact substituted a component.

The short answer is yes. Sometimes the published load is over the limits in a specific firearm under the conditions. Similar to CFullgraff, I've had at least one load where I quit at lower than the published maximum. Velocity was acceptable and the report and recoil were all I wanted. I don't think another tenth of a grain would blow up, but I didn't see any point in doing it.

If any of you haven't already, read the boring part of the reloading manual. There's a good deal of information and answers in there.

 

[TimSr]

So that must be the reason they tell you to start with a "starting load" and "work up" from there!

 

[fguffey]

Yes I have; the barrel was not .300" in diameter, it was smaller by .001". And then; there are all of those barrels that have barrels that are larger in diameter. When describing loading for one of those the reloader starts the conversation; "My rifle likes loads that are 2 grains over maximum.

In the old days Winchester cases were the range because they were thinner. Appluing that logic to military cases required a 10% reduction for starting loads maximum loads. Now we have reloaders that do not sort cases.

F. Guffey

 

[armarsh]

This is really just a survey to see if anyone has ever had a case in which published load data, using the published components, feel was too hot and was possibly over pressure in their gun. I am only talking about loads that were made using the same bullet, powder and COL as published. The only variable is the case and primer being different from what is published. I am not endorsing to start working up a load a close to max. I do believe in starting low and working up. I am just interested in seeing what the possibility is in finding a max published load that could be close to being unsafe when working one up to that level.

The Sierra reloading manual #5 shows 13.2 to 14.9 grains of Blue Dot for a 125 Grain JHC in a 357 Magnum. The starting load of 13.2 would stick the brass to the cylinder and the primers were completely flat. The brass was ruined - primer pockets would not hold a primer.

This was before I found out that Alliant published a warning not to use Blue Dot with 125 grain bullets. http://www.alliantpowder.com/getting_started/safety/safety_notices.aspx

 

[osprey176]

I tried a midrange load using H-380 in my 257 Weatherby once. The load came right out of my Lyman book, but I won't be using that powder in that case again!

 

[FiveInADime]

Yes... The max load for 7mm-08, 150gr bullets with RL-17 in the Hornady #7 (I think) listed 47gr, I think. I popped a primer and jammed the ejector down so it collapsed the spring and froze in the bolt face. I took a close look at my brass and I had flat primers starting at 46gr. 47gr did, unfortunately, shoot half-inch groups.

I don't rush through load workup any more.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Scooter22]

In my 40 or so years of reloading no. I never load up to the max listed load. I'm usually a grain or two below it. I've never tried to get to max and that other 50-100 fps. I'll go to a round that gives me that with normal loads. I enjoy reloading and don't want worry I'm at the edge everytime I pull the trigger. jmho

 

[GooseGestapo]

Many, times too many to recall.
A better question would have been the number of times STARTING loads caused flattened, cratered, or blown primer pockets. Several times over the 44yrs I've been reloading.
The most recent episode was with an early lot number of Hybrid100V in a .257Roberts.

Powder manufacturers frequently issue recalls on lot #'s of powders due to production issues. It's as much art as science.

 

[steve4102]

The Sierra reloading manual #5 shows 13.2 to 14.9 grains of Blue Dot for a 125 Grain JHC in a 357 Magnum. The starting load of 13.2 would stick the brass to the cylinder and the primers were completely flat. The brass was ruined - primer pockets would not hold a primer.

This was before I found out that Alliant published a warning not to use Blue Dot with 125 grain bullets. http://www.alliantpowder.com/getting...y_notices.aspx

Sierra has NO pressure testing equipment and does NOT pressure test their loads before for publishing them in their manuals.

Avoid Sierra data at all costs.

 

[Metal God]

Yes last month I did working up loads with the same rifle

This load shoots fine
168gr Hornady BTHP
43gr IMR 4895
LC-12-LR case
Fed match primers
COAL 2.845

This load has sticky bolt with extractor and ejector marks on the head
168gr Hornady HPBT
42.2gr IMR 4895
LC-14 case
Win LR primer
COAL 2.854

That right there is more scary then then hitting max pressure before the books max charge . I had already seen 43.4gr be fine in the first load . Yet reducing more then one full grain was not enough when I changed components . Thank god I worked up from minimum anyways with the second load .

There's a reason they say if you change a component . Reduce the charge at least 5% and work back up .

 

[sugarmaker]

I had a 1980's keg of 2400 that would over max any upper end book load. Can to can variations are real.

 

[Nature Boy]

Sierra has NO pressure testing equipment and does NOT pressure test their loads before for publishing them in their manuals.

Avoid Sierra data at all costs.

Really? I'm sure that would be news to countless numbers of reloaders who have been using that data for decades.

So if we avoid Sierra's published data for their bullets, where do we go for loading info?

 

[steve4102]

Really? I'm sure that would be news to countless numbers of reloaders who have been using that data for decades.

So if we avoid Sierra's published data for their bullets, where do we go for loading info?

Yes Really, they do not pressure test their loads.

A few years ago I contacted Sierra and asked them when they were going to come out with a New manual and Why they do not list "Pressures" like Lyman and the powder manufacturers.

Here is their response.

Hi Steve,
Thanks for the email.
I’d guess we might get a manual finished in the next two years but there is no time table in place at this time.
We shoot all our loads in real guns and read pressures just like you do so there are no hard and fast numbers to publish.
That might all change in the future. Powder companies need to know the pressures for their product while actually all we try to do is provide safe and accurate information generated with our bullets when we do a book.


Read pressures like we do, in other words they guess.

As for Load data, I get all the True Pressure Tested data from the Powder Manufacturers, Lyman, Nosler, Hornady and even Speer. Yes, I will use Nosler or Hornady data for a Sierra Bullet.

 

[zeke]

Yes. And Speer #8 has loads I will not even attempt. Some manuals also have flat out editing errors, a good reason to have multiple sources of reload data.

While Sierra may not use pressure measurements, have found their loads to be fairly conservative (mostly).

 

[TRX]

I've had bricks of primers that were so soft they'd flatten with plinker loads and leaked or blew at max loads.

Back when I shot a lot of .38 and .357 I sorted brass by brand; with the same bullets, primers, and powder, some brass would stretch and/or stick while other brass would spring back almost to its original shape.