Hornady reload data questions

[bigpower491]

Well, I was going to reply “yes”, but i double checked the Hornady manual(s) I own. The load you reference is the same in the 9th, 10th, and 11th edition. 9th edition being published in 2012.

All that said, it stood out to me that the all of the 180s that Hornady produces is in the same table. Match, ELDX, RN, etc. Does manufacturer make a difference; maybe(?). Does manufacturing make a difference; not according to how Hornady groups all of their bullets under the same weight category.

True, they lump em together like that. I reckon that they are close enough for the start charges to all be within safe limits, but where all those different types of bullets would finish load wise in a particular rifle would be much different IMO

 

[grogetr]

The length of the bullets can be different so depending on load length there could be more of the bullet in the case changing case capacity. This can also effect the load amount.

 

[bigpower491]

While I certainly agree with you @bigpower491, I do wonder why Hornady lumps all of their bullets together (by weight) when it comes to load data. According to their manuals, the 180gr RN Min/Max is the same as the 180gr SST.

Hornady isn't the only one, Speer also, Sierra, Nosler....

 

[Flatland_mike]

IMG_20221224_094851264

• Flatland_mike
• Dec 24, 2022

Sierra 3040k

Yes, sierra groups like weights together as well

 

[bigpower491]

Well then let me add probably the number one reason they lump em together like that. It saves a heck of a lot of pages on a reloading manual. And that we know saves them $$

 

[MWC1974]

I think we’ve all come to the conclusion that reloading manuals are published “guides” and it’s not a one-size-fits-all game.

 

[Bill M.]

I like the on line data from Hodgdon and Alliant. Yeah, I have old manuals.

 

[buck460XVR]

Yes for sure. For example, compare the diameter of the Hornady 44 cal handgun bullets compared to other manufacturers......Hornadys are .430 and most others come in at .429. That will make a difference. Then we have bullet lengths, ogive, jacket material hardness and thickness, so lots of things matter, yes, right down to if it was tested for data in a firearm or a test barrel.

Bearing surface makes for a big difference too. Sometimes, it comes down to how much bullet is in the case, thus reducing case capacity. This could be because of the location of the cannelure on revolver bullets or the listed OAL for other bullets without a cannelure.

I think we’ve all come to the conclusion that reloading manuals are published “guides” and it’s not a one-size-fits-all game.

It's the components and the platform that is not the "one size fits all". If one is using the exact components and platform that the manual is, one will get very similar performance. For the most part, using similar bullets with similar construction, recipes will still be safe. There's a reason the manuals all strongly suggest we "start low and work up carefully". It's not because their info is vague or misleading, it is because they cannot control what the user has and does. Part of reloading experience is learning how to safely "interpolate" info and use alternative components. Most of the time this is a different bullet or primer and has little effect on the end product. For me, most jacketed bullets that are 158gr in .357 and 240gr in .44, use the exact same recipes, obtain very similar velocities and produce very similar patterns. It's when I deviate from construction( bonded, plated, lead, etc.) that I cannot use the "old standby".

 

[Flatland_mike]

I think we’ve all come to the conclusion that reloading manuals are published “guides” and it’s not a one-size-fits-all game.

Agreed, the variance between "guides" was surprising to me, but you all have given me lots of info to support these differences...

 

[RainDodger]

I have manuals from as far back as a Speer from 1966, as well as my own hand-written load data from the 1980s. I've found Hornady manuals to be conservative, with Speer and Nosler manuals generally listing higher charges for their hotter loads. Sierra manuals seem to be a middle ground. I really value the Lee loading data book, as Lee doesn't have any dog in the fight - they don't make bullets, primers, or powders that they want people to buy. There are a LOT of loads listed in the Lee manual and they do break out bullets that have different load data than other bullets of the same weight, such as a Hornady XTP. When I'm working up a load, I generally look at at least 3 different sources and go from there.

 

[EricBu]

New to this group, just a little info on myself, I've been reloading rifle rounds for about 20 years now, I like to shoot and like to hunt, enjoy reloading as well. I've always used sierra bullets with the exception of the Hornady bullets I load for my 22 hornet, but the last few years as we all know supplies have been hard to get, sierra bullets being no exception..... Hornady bullets seemed to be more available and I wanted to shoot so I started buying some in various cals.... Being I was starting to have more and more Hornady bullets I got ahold of the Hornady reloading book..... Which is where my concern come from.... I have a lee modern reloading book, the sierra book, and a speer book, all three of those books show very similar max and min loads..... The Hornady book shows WAY different min/max powder charges...... This doesn't make sense to me? Anyone else noticed this? Anyone have an opinion?

Look at the COALs listed, and also keep in mind that hornady manual is based on hornady bullets, which may have a different profile than what you are used to, and hornady may use different test methods.

 

[Highland Lofts]

The huge differences between published data would be a question to ask the manual publishers, not people guessing on a internet forum in my opinion.

 

[AJC1]

The huge differences between published data would be a question to ask the manual publishers, not people guessing on a internet forum in my opinion.

Maybe understanding that manuals are test data, not facts goes a long way. Two mustangs from the same Ford factory produce different horsepower even though they have the same engine.

 

[mdi]

Just a couple thoughts; reloading manuals are not hard and fast formula. They are reports of what a test lab achieved with the components and amounts/dimensions listed and from the barrel lengths listed. I would be concerned if all manuals published the same data, what's going on? Also equipment will differ, some older used, some new with little wear and tear (how many rounds have been fired through the universal receiver barrel?). Some use long barrels in universal receivers and some use actual guns. So, yes, results will differ. The big difference between older manuals and up to date manuals is the pressure testing methods. Newer electronic testing methods are much more accurate than copper crush methods...

If I am using Hornady bullets, I get data from a Hornady manual. Same with Sierra bullets, Sierra manual, Nosler bullets, Nosler manual, and cast bullets, Lyman manuals, etc. I like books so I have a shelf full of reloading manuals, old and new...

 

[AJC1]

Just a couple thoughts; reloading manuals are not hard and fast formula. They are reports of what a test lab achieved with the components and amounts/dimensions listed and from the barrel lengths listed. I would be concerned if all manuals published the same data, what's going on? Also equipment will differ, some older used, some new with little wear and tear (how many rounds have been fired through the universal receiver barrel?). Some use long barrels in universal receivers and some use actual guns. So, yes, results will differ. The big difference between older manuals and up to date manuals is the pressure testing methods. Newer electronic testing methods are much more accurate than copper crush methods...

If I am using Hornady bullets, I get data from a Hornady manual. Same with Sierra bullets, Sierra manual, Nosler bullets, Nosler manual, and cast bullets, Lyman manuals, etc. I like books so I have a shelf full of reloading manuals, old and new...

Books, your so old.... every manual I can get my dirty mitts on I grab... the one still eluding me is jacketed performance with cast bullets.

 

[Flatland_mike]

Lee sure slaps his own back over & over & over again in his reloading manual.
I done use his information much at all. After dealing with their customer service I use 99% other manufacturers products.

That's something that's stuck with me for 20+ years as that was the book that came with my first reloading press, he's pretty proud of himself, there is some good info mixed in there though

 

[JEBruns]

While I certainly agree with you @bigpower491, I do wonder why Hornady lumps all of their bullets together (by weight) when it comes to load data. According to their manuals, the 180gr RN Min/Max is the same as the 180gr SST.

Yeah, that bothers me too. I love Hornady bullets, but their reloading data leaves me a little cold.

 

[johnjohn]

I'm a big fan of books.(only way I learned how reload) Never had a mentor. Didn't know anybody who did. So it was me and Lyman #47.

 

[fxvr5]

Many folks here are saying that Hornady publishes conservative load data. However, a person who worked on Hornady's manuals says otherwise. Guy Neill worked in the industry and developed loads for Hornady and Speer. He's very clear that the loads are not conservative. They developed loads right up to the maximum SAAMI pressure limit, without exceeding it.

Check out his comments at these two sources;

https://forums.brianenos.com/topic/302740-book-max-seems-low-for-n320-plated-124gn-9mm/

The reloading manuals, at least those I'm personally familiar with are not conservative. All the maximum loads I hsve developed for manuals have been as close to SAAMI MAP (Maximum Average Pressure) as possible without going over. That's not being conservative.

But, yes, reloading data HAS changed over the years, but not due to being conservative. In the 1950's or so, none of the manuals (that I'm aware of) for load development. They used case head expansion measurements - a very poor means of trying to determine pressure.


https://forums.brianenos.com/topic/41041-44-magnum-they-cant-all-be-right/

I don't know how other manufacturers do it, but at Speer and Hornady, the CYA factor was whatever was built into the SAAMI specs. Both have loading manuals with max loads as close to SAAMI max, without going over as the tests showed. Thus, there was no added CYA factor for those manuals.

Also, no one has come up with a better means of measuring load pressures than using pressure guns. If that is a weird set-up, then so be it. At both Speer and Hornady, the loads are fired from standard guns following the pressure gun work-up, generally to get a real world velocity.

All this does not relieve the shooter/reloader from starting low and working up. His (her?) gun and components are different, and tolerances can stack up in one direction to vary results.

If any of you internet forum experts want to challenge this, please provide the pressure data Hornady used for their loads.

 

[AJC1]

This is a science and you are expected to review all relivent data before conducting your own tests for your saftey. One easy adjustment or piece of test gear can skew the results. The thickness of the brass used can change results considerably. They may or may not adjust results based on the common scales used by their user base.... there are so many important factors that are easily disregarded for conformation bias of the lever or trigger jerk on this end. What if load tables were held to man rated status like ladders.

 

[Blue68f100]

When using the Hornady manual you need to look closely at what was used. Example on 223R. There match bullet is a 68gr where Sierra is a 69gr, not a lot of difference. But if you look at the length and OAL there is a huge difference 0.090". So if both are seated to max length of 2.260", there is an extra 0.090" bullet setting in the case taking up space for powder. So you will have a significant increase in pressure.

Just remember these load manuals are just test reports on what the tester did. So starting off you don't have anything of what they used, lot number will be different. Now you may have the powder/bullet and maybe the primer and brass. The data gives you something to get you started with.

I've on many occasions have had velocity data be 200 fps slower than published, and some that were over. You don't know till you test. The reason to always start low and work up.