Help me find data for a load

[Mr_Flintstone]

I have some Speer Hot Cor 130 gr SPFN bullets that I’d like to load for my 30-30. Unfortunately, I only have TAC and a little H4895 powders right now. Hodgdon has data for the H4895, but I’d really like to use the TAC because I have more of it. Does anyone know if there is a published load for TAC with a 130 gr jacketed bullet? Ramshot has a load listed for a Sierra 125 gr HP-FN with TAC. Would that be close enough to use?

 

[memtb]

I’ve kinda had a similar problem with a cartridge that had no load data for the powder that I had chosen. I went to a burn rate chart, found a powder with essentially the same burn rate, and used starting charge data for the similar powder as my starting charge. I survived! memtb

 

[Charlie98]

I'd probably be OK using the Sierra data... starting at the bottom, of course, and working up.

 

[Charlie98]

I’ve kinda had a similar problem with a cartridge that had no load data for the powder that I had chosen. I went to a burn rate chart, found a powder with essentially the same burn rate, and used starting charge data for the similar powder as my starting charge. I survived! memtb

I must admit... I'm curious what two powders you did that with.

 

[Mr_Flintstone]

Well, Hodgdon lists 31.5-35 gr for H4895 with the 130 gr bullet, and Ramshot lists 32.2-35.8 for TAC with the 125 gr bullet. On my burn rate chart, TAC and H4895 are 87 and 88 respectively. Maybe if I start at about 32 and don’t go above 35, I’ll be in the safe zone with TAC.

 

[unwashed]

I’ve kinda had a similar problem with a cartridge that had no load data for the powder that I had chosen. I went to a burn rate chart, found a powder with essentially the same burn rate, and used starting charge data for the similar powder as my starting charge. I survived! memtb

I too but I went with case capacity and loaded starting at 90%. Come to think about it I hardly use published data and always go with case capacity.

 

[horsey300]

Well, Hodgdon lists 31.5-35 gr for H4895 with the 130 gr bullet, and Ramshot lists 32.2-35.8 for TAC with the 125 gr bullet. On my burn rate chart, TAC and H4895 are 87 and 88 respectively. Maybe if I start at about 32 and don’t go above 35, I’ll be in the safe zone with TAC.

I'd start at 30, faster powder + heavier bullet= lower charge weight.

 

[FROGO207]

Howabout you get ahold of MR Loubster at ramshot. He has been extremly helpful in the past several times.

 

[memtb]

I must admit... I'm curious what two powders you did that with.

I was developing a load for my .375 AI. My chosen powder was RL 17, purchased a couple of years after it’s introduction. The only load data that I could find was for a .375 Weatherby, essentially a twin to my cartridge, I found load data for the .375 Weatherby using H 4350. H 4350 had similar burn rates to that of the RL 17. So, I gave it a shot.....pun intended! memtb

 

[Mr_Flintstone]

Howabout you get ahold of MR Loubster at ramshot. He has been extremly helpful in the past several times.

Thanks. I contacted them and got the following:

Powder: Ramshot – TAC®.
Bullet weight: 125 grains.
Start load: 31.0 grains (2175 – 2275 Fps)
Maximum load: 34.0 grains (2475 – 2575 Fps).

This is not the data listed in their manual for a 125 gr bullet. It looks like they did a 5% reduction. I rarely load max data anyway, so I probably would have been OK, but it’s nice to know from the source what is safe.

 

[FROGO207]

Yeah the manual I had was version 4.2 they said to check for latest data on line or manual and use that. Their data was always good and hot on the max charge to me.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Well, Hodgdon lists 31.5-35 gr for H4895 with the 130 gr bullet, and Ramshot lists 32.2-35.8 for TAC with the 125 gr bullet. On my burn rate chart, TAC and H4895 are 87 and 88 respectively. Maybe if I start at about 32 and don’t go above 35, I’ll be in the safe zone with TAC.

The Sierra and Speer bullets are built different. The Speer is designed to expand fully at slower velocities than the Sierra; you may find the starting charge gives you the best terminal performance even if it isn't the fastest load.

 

[Charlie98]

H 4350 had similar burn rates to that of the RL 17.

They are nowhere near the same powder, regardless of burn rate.... but everyone makes choices, and has their own assumption of risk.

 

[memtb]

They are nowhere near the same powder, regardless of burn rate.... but everyone makes choices, and has their own assumption of risk.

Perhaps just incredibly lucky....but, it works darn well in my application! memtb

 

[lordpaxman]

I don’t load 130’s in 30-30 so I didn’t pipe up, but this comment caught my eye as well:

H 4350 had similar burn rates to that of the RL 17

My understanding is the burn rate charts are relative. I don’t believe you can make assertions of similar burn rates based on those charts, and use data for those powders interchangeably. I’m not trying to be the powder police, but if someone who doesn’t understand the charts reads this forum and sees this technique they could get in trouble. I’m certainly glad things worked out for you. It does remind me of the saying: “if you have your choice of lucky or good, choose lucky”. Good luck.

 

[bluejay75]

I would approach it as the 125 HP bullet listed by Sierra is just as long if not longer than the 130 grain Speer. Sierra lists the starting load for their bullet at 29.1 grains of TAC. Use the same OAL and reduce it by a half to one full grain and work to max. TAC works best on the top end, so if you don’t find acceptable accuracy on the way up to what you determined as max go a few more tenths and see what’s there.