Getting Load Data From Different Sources?

[texasveteod]

First, thanks for any help; this is a pretty cool site that has tons of good info.

I'm pretty new to reloading, but it's not really rocket science. I do have a question about getting data for a bullet that may not be in any manual. For instance, can you take a bullet for a given weight say Hornady .223/4 62gr FMJ and use a different manufactures bullet load data of the same weight to get a good starting point?

Thanks.

 

[Blue68f100]

In most cases yes, but only if the profile and construction is the same. There are many incidences where one mfg bullet will be shorter/longer than another. Some by a few 1/1000's and some times a 1/10 of an inch.

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

That's what I do as long as bullets are of similar type. With any change in components, reduce powder charge and work up.

 

[Wildfire]

Many of us have several or more loading manuals. It is a common practice to use more than one. Some manuals may seem a tad on the warm side compared to another manual.
One manual may not list the powder or bullet you wish to use. As long as we stay in what would be considered safe specs there is no wrong done.
Primers can be an issue at times when loading near max specs. The difference between a magnum primer and a standard primer can be as much as 2000 psi.
It is best to compare specs and deal with that from there. Accurate arms manual does not use mag primers in loads that other manuals do. Their powder dictates that.
Bullet choices if close seem to make less of a difference. When we shove a heavy bullet in where a lighter one should be PSI will rise.
Twist rates and many other factors come into play.
Loading specs are rocket science. Most ballistic programs were or are developed by NASA. At least they have been in the past.
Many aspects of hand loading can and will effect the outcome. Accuracy, safety and so on.
The first and most important is safety, and then we hand load rifle rounds for our version of accuracy. Then the cost factor.
No two hand loaders do things the same.
Some play near max specs all the time pushing everything for all they can get. Others play it safe and keep things normal or maybe even mild. The search for more power is rarely needed because with accuracy you have the power of perfect hits.
So, to answer your question, Yes.

 

[.308 Norma]

First, thanks for any help; this is a pretty cool site that has tons of good info.

I'm pretty new to reloading, but it's not really rocket science. I do have a question about getting data for a bullet that may not be in any manual. For instance, can you take a bullet for a given weight say Hornady .223/4 62gr FMJ and use a different manufactures bullet load data of the same weight to get a good starting point?

Thanks.

Short answer - Yes. Just make sure it's as you said - a "starting point." That is, start low and work up as far as your powder charge goes.

I myself prefer to use the load data from the manufacturer of whatever brand of bullet I'm using. But as you've obviously already found out, that's not always possible. It's not always possible even for me, and I've acquired quite the library of loading manuals over the past 45+ years of handloading.

I'm cautious about load data found on the internet though. I'm not saying I've never used it. I'm just saying I compare it to load data in printed manuals and/or personal experience before using it.

Wildfire types faster than I do.

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

That's what I do as long as bullets are of similar type. With any change in components, reduce powder charge and work up.

This^

Keep in mind COAL is set to fit in the chamber, magazine (where applicable) and it is adjusted in some cases to feed better even if it fits magazine and chamber as the feed angle in some guns with some bullet types need to be longer or shorter to make the turn and go into the chamber easily. Set length to feed and fit, then for function if it's even necessary.

 

[Sunray]

"...different manufacture's bullet load data..." Yep. It's all about the weight and jacketed or cast. Who made it doesn't matter. Neither does the construction or shape unless it's a solid copper bullet. Copper being much lower in density for the same weight they need their own data.

 

[texasveteod]

Thanks, I have multiple manuals as well as online content. What I found is virtually no 2 load manuals are the same or rarely seem to have the same bullet/power load data. Hornady sticks all of their 55gr .223 virtually together except for the GMX, so I figured there cannot be too much difference. Another one I am trying to figure out is the 69gr TMK.

 

[Another_Kelley]

I'm pretty new to reloading, but it's not really rocket science.

Welcome

 

[ArchAngelCD]

The reason for a load range instead of a load is slight differences in bullet brands and gun barrels. Perfectly safe as said above.

 

[Hardtarget]

I'll encourage you to err on the side of safety with your reloads. If it comes to needing more power...step up to a larger cartridge. Just makes things easier all around. Keep it safe, keep it fun!

Mark

 

[macgrumpy]

...Who made it doesn't matter. Neither does the construction or shape...

Absolutely wrong, the shape does matter, so much so that some bullets will produce unsafe pressures if you use the same cartridge overall length. Berger and Hornady are two manufacturers that make bullets whose shapes will force you to adjust your loads.

 

[horsey300]

Thanks, I have multiple manuals as well as online content. What I found is virtually no 2 load manuals are the same or rarely seem to have the same bullet/power load data. Hornady sticks all of their 55gr .223 virtually together except for the GMX, so I figured there cannot be too much difference. Another one I am trying to figure out is the 69gr TMK.

But they list a different coal. That will change pressures. Have you checked out the loadbooks one book one caliber books for your cartridge? I got mine cheap at cabelas but even direct from loadbooks they're still less than a full manual from all the manufacturers, they include the popular manufacturers and powder manufacturers data.

 

[Dog Soldier]

I use the data on the web. These are mostly from powder or bullet companies. It seems to be the most up to date loading information.

 

[horsey300]

I use the data on the web. These are mostly from powder or bullet companies. It seems to be the most up to date loading information.

I usually do as well, quite handy really! Only problem is finding hornady or Sierra data online. I do have an old hornady manual from a time before ballistic tables could be found on a screen, but I like Sierra data when I can get it, they offer accuracy loads and usually between them and nosler published accuracy loads, I can find my load with great efficiency (of course I start at min, but it helped alot when I was working with h1000 for another cartridge and would have been much more frustrated with the shotgun pattern if they hadn't recommended a Max load lol). Also, for the .223 rem, Sierra offers bolt gun AND ar loads, while I personally don't use an ar, I find it useful for those who are using a fast twist short barrel.

 

[Dog Soldier]

The new powders and Cartridges are coming out so often the reloading manuals are out dated in a year. I have a .22 TCM it is not listed in any of the lading books I have seen.

 

[Bart B.]

Of course there's hundreds of loads for a given bullet in a given cartridge.

What do you expect when those hundreds of load developers use different barrels, component lots, marksmanship skills, reloading stuff (tools, setup, techniques, etc.), pressure measuring (guessing?) systems, plus different accuracy objectives, conditions and standards?

Do you think all of them developing a load for a given set of components and rifle would end up picking the same parameters for them based on data from a couple of few-shot tests?

If some new bullet comes out, why not ask its maker for load data?

 

[horsey300]

The new powders and Cartridges are coming out so often the reloading manuals are out dated in a year. I have a .22 TCM it is not listed in any of the lading books I have seen.

Agreed, none of my manuals have 4451 or 4166 and they're two I'm most anxious to play with, as such, I will be dealing exclusively and carefully with hodgdon. I say carefully because their load for my weight is a deep seated Barnes that I'm NOT using and this gives me a bit more capacity but the careful part comes in when I work up the ladder to see how much leeway that extra capacity gives me lol. Probably not much but I'm gonna shoot till the primers look wonky or I hit my target group size.

 

[Dog Soldier]

I have never used the Vihtavuori powder. It looks very interesting. But the price is $40 bucks a jar around here.


http://www.vihtavuori.com/en/powders/overview.html

 

[DownInTheDark]

Don't believe everything you read on the internet - Thomas Jefferson

 

[texasveteod]

Welcome

LOL!

Thanks for all the info. Being former EOD, I have a pretty through understanding of explosives and how pressures can effect things. I understand there are a lot more intricacies in reloading but the properties are still the same. I did a ton of reading on safety before I ever got started. Generally what I do for my loads is I take the max, drop it by 10% and work up in .2 or .3 grain increments, checking for pressure signs after each round. But I have not been happy with the results I have been getting with CFE223 and Hornady 68gr BTHP-M bullets. So I found a place local that has 8206 XBR and Varget, I wanted to start working on my 69 TMKs, 55 V-MAX, and 75 BTHP. The TMKs give me the most concern because I need them to fit at mag length and there is virtually no data on them. Sierra says use the SMK data but the TMK is much longer. At first I tried to use Varget but you cannot get enough powder in the cartridge. I didn't feel it was safe so I switch it to XBR instead, the final 3 weights in the workup (using Lyman 50th) are pretty compressed and I don't think I will make it to them before I start seeing pressure signs. Funny thing is, in the Lyman manual for a 69gr round, their accurate load called for 27.something grains of Varget. That much Varget completely filled the case.

Once I find a good round and charge that my rifle likes, that what I will stick to. Me and my gun are capable of .75 MOAish so that is what I hunting using Black Hills 69SMK, so that is what I am hunting.

 

[texasveteod]

I'll encourage you to err on the side of safety with your reloads. If it comes to needing more power...step up to a larger cartridge. Just makes things easier all around. Keep it safe, keep it fun!

Mark

For my AR, it's more about accuracy and reliability than power. I have no reason to go past 300 meters with this rifle. I want an accurate round for that range and I will be happy. Now once my new Vortex 5x25 PST Gen II come in, I will need to build a rifle around that. For that I am looking at 6.5 CM to go out to 800/900meters, not sure if I want a bolt or gas gun for that.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Agreed, none of my manuals have 4451 or 4166 and they're two I'm most anxious to play with, as such, I will be dealing exclusively and carefully with hodgdon. I say carefully because their load for my weight is a deep seated Barnes that I'm NOT using and this gives me a bit more capacity but the careful part comes in when I work up the ladder to see how much leeway that extra capacity gives me lol. Probably not much but I'm gonna shoot till the primers look wonky or I hit my target group size.

The new Hornady manual has data for the new Enduron powders in some cartridges. I see IMR4451 used in the 25-06, 6.5 Creedmoor, 30-06 and a load or two with IMR4166 in the 308 Win. I do agree data in printed manuals for new powders and bullets can be thin. The problem is, work on these books starts many years before the manual is released and most times there us no time to test new powders before printing. It's a shame though...

 

[Another_Kelley]

none of my manuals have 4451 or 4166 and they're two I'm most anxious to play with

Hodgdonreloading.com has data up for all the new Enduron powders.

 

[horsey300]

Hodgdonreloading.com has data up for all the new Enduron powders.

Sure do. I print as much data as I can for the new loads, that way I can thumb through it without a screen or worrying about internet access if storms knock the power out. I really like the paper route. This technology is great but I hate relying on it too much.