Lyman 49th manual, small rant.

[bscott29]

I read a lot of things online telling me that this is a good manual to start with. Since purchasing this manual I have realized two things.

1.) If you were to pick out loads in this book and then go to the store to buy the components you will most likely come home empty handed.

2.) If you go to the store and buy components then come home and look in the book for data you will most likely find yourself out of luck.

For a manual that has been updated 48 times there are damn few bullets listed.

 

[berettaprofessor]

It's a nice reference, but Hodgdons annual manual gives you a lot more bullet choices.

 

[bscott29]

I think I'm gonna buy the Hornady manual because there bullets are usually in stock everywhere.

 

[buck460XVR]

Overall, The Lyman book has the most variety of bullets of any manual. It is a good manual to start with. But this is a prime example of why most of us use three or more sources of reference before starting new loads/recipes or before buying quantities of components. There is also using similar weight/profile bullets for given recipes.

 

[MEHavey]

I've never had a problem find component match/candidates from Lyman manuals.
Can you give some details as to your experience in this case ?

 

[bscott29]

I've never had a problem find component match/candidates from Lyman manuals.
Can you give some details as to your experience in this case ?

I just started reloading.

Loads I've loaded:
45 colt 250 grain rnfp with universal.
45-70 350 grain lead with trailboss.

Loads I have just gotten components for:
45-70 300 grain interlock with imr 4198.
45-70 325 grain ftx with imr 4198.
308 winchester 110 grain Nosler Varmageddon with imr 4198.

I can draw some parallels with the 110 grain 308 and 300 interlock, but that's it. These won't be exact either.

 

[joel6180]

When I started reloading, I read all the chapters of Lyman 49 before thinking about making any reloads. Found the information very helpful before starting any actual reloading. Now I use 4 manuals, and online powder manufacture load data.

 

[AnselHazen]

I'm with BScott on this. I'm new to reloading. I have the 49th edition and I read it along with other sources. Then I went to buy components to try to start putting that into action. I think the biggest issue I ran into was powder. What I can buy, and what I have for data don't seem to match. I have been able to purchase AR-Comp and CFE-223. But there is no mention in the 49th of these powders. I have been to enough sites to make my head spin trying to put together a load with components that are available to me.

I finally took a giant leap forward when I bought Lymans AR Reloading Handbook. The first printing of which was in Feb of 2014. All of a sudden the powders I can buy are in the tables of data.

As a newbie reading lots of posts about I can't get this or I haven't seen that in x number of years it sorts of speaks to me that the industry as a whole is going through a change. Powders that you more experienced reloaders have on the back shelf are non existent to someone starting out. Newer powders are coming out that I'm sure are really fine products, but the published data seems like it hasn't caught up yet.

 

[Hondo 60]

The only time you're gonna find a perfect match is if you buy & use the bullet company's books.

But then you're stuck only using their products.

I like to use lead or plated bullets.
While Lyman's book doesn't have any plated data, I can still draw LOTS of inferences.

There is NO perfect manual, that's why we always suggest having several on hand.

It's only recently that the powder companies are posting data for plated bullets.
And that's still kinda scarce.

 

[MEHavey]

published data seems like it hasn't caught up yet....

Always go to the on-line powder manufacturer's websites in these instances.

Case(s) in point:
AR-COMP: http://www.alliantpowder.com/products/powder/ar_comp.aspx
CFE0223: https://www.hodgdon.com/new_prod.html

These sites will give you ballpark load data for just-on-the-shelf type products.
But handloading is much, much more... and the manuals provide background info you can't get anywhere else.

 

[ReloaderFred]

It takes years to produce a loading manual, since each and every load has to be tested, and retested. In just one caliber, there can be a couple hundred combinations, or even more when you consider the loads between the start and maximum loadings listed in the data. I'm still amazed they can produce these manuals and not charge well over $100.00 for one. The man hours that go into the just the data is mindboggling, and then there's the printing, binding, transportation, marketing, etc.

If you'd ever been in a ballistics lab (I've been in two), you'd have a better understanding of what goes into developing load data.

The bottom line is, we should all be very appreciative of what information we have available, and how cheaply we can get it. It wasn't always so........

Hope this helps.

Fred

 

[41 Mag]

What ReloaderFred refers to is about the bottom line, in the manuals as well as the budget spent on testing.

I was working with a .280 Remington years ago and was on Hodgdon's site. They had data listed for the AI version but not the standard version. I was curious what the deal was and called them up. After a goodly long discussion on data they DID have but hadn't posted yet it was fair to say they simply didn't budget the testing for the standard 280 and had for the AI version. They DID have data but it takes time and money to get it from the lab stage to the printed stage and then even to the internet.

I had a similar beef with the latest Lyman manuals. I think the one I had been using was like #42, and I decided that enough new powder, bullets, and new data had come out I would pick one up. While I was at it I threw in their Handgun and latest Cast manuals as well. Granted there ARE some new loads, and a couple of new calibers listed, but I was less than impressed with the abundance of different weights and styles that were listed for those which have had some nice improved bullets and data.

It wasn't a total disappointment but I was a bit let down. I usually use the same ol stuff time and time again but with casting and now with adding a couple of new to me calibers to load for I was expecting a little more.

Still in all, like mentioned, there is the online powder data from each manufacturer, as well as the bullet manufacturer's manuals, and if that isn't enough to get off to a start, there are places like this where one can at least come and ask about a recommendation from the members on what has been working. Most do not like to give out exact load data, but there are plenty who will recommend a powder for a specific bullet or weight in a something popular. It might or might not be the exact powder or bullet your looking to use, but it's sometimes more than a guess in the dark once you cross reference things with a couple of other sources.

 

[cfullgraf]

For a manual that has been updated 48 times there are damn few bullets listed.

Remember, Lyman's bullet "production" is bullet molds. They do not manufacture bullets so they would like you to buy their molds and equipment and cast bullets.

It is pretty good of them to include some other bullet data.

If you have not already figured it out, manuals produced by the bullet manufacturers only have their bullets in them. References produced by the powder manufacturers only have their powders in them.

If you really want to get bummed out, obtain several manuals and look at the on line sources and compare data for the same bullet/powder/cartridge combination.

None of them will be the same between the different references.

It is all part of the charm of reloading.

 

[Ironicaintit]

And this is why its good to have a wide variety of literature on any one thing.
Used as a reference, theyre handy to have; but if they are studied, they are priceless!
If I only had one manual, id go nuts. Being able to cross reference saves a lot of time in working up a load, IMO.
Ive got Speer #8 and #10, Lyman #45 and #46, and newer books by Hornady and Lee, pamphlets from IMR, Hodgdon, and Alliant, as well as the complete guide to handloading by Sharpe.
They can usually be found at gun shows for not a lot of cash.

And with all that, educated guesses make it an easy chore to know what can be done with what all may be available.

 

[DC Plumber]

I agree with bscott. I was disappointed with it when I took off the cellophane wrapper and started reading. Without getting and looking for the actual load I am quite certain they don't even list a 158g LSWC lost for 38 special or for 357 mag.

My favorite manual is Speer number 14. They even list less than maximum lead billet loads intended for target velocities and with actual standard lead bullets COMMONLY available such as 240g LSWC for 44mag and 200g LSWC for 45auto.

HOWEVER, almost all load manuals contribute to your reloading knowledge.

 

[RandyP]

The Lee and Lyman manuals (and I have both) are 'usually ' available on Amazon for about $20 each. If my staying in the reloading hobby hinged on $40? I'd quit - lol

I am very much a tight budget hobbyist and am sure I've wasted much more than that on stuff I don't ever use but have found both manuals to be a great reference source.

I also use the online reloading centers (Hodgdon especially).

ALL components have been a bear to find for several YEARS now and supplies of powder and primers are only slowly becoming more available in many areas. As more and more newcomers enter the hobby - and that is FANTASTIC - strains on inventory are going to happen. I have found it easiest to settle on just one powder for the handgun calibers I reload (Win 231/HP-38) and one for the AR (H335) and patiently shop around so I have enough on-hand for my meager usage.

The same thing happened with .22LR ammo, which after a few years is only slowly showing up in quantity again a some shops.

 

[HexHead]

Reloading is as much art as a science. I have several sources I use and the 49th is a good starting point to work with. I may not find exactly the bullet I want, but I'll find something close enough to start working up a load.

Aside from my .223 rifles, I pretty much only use Nosler bullets so I use their manual a lot.

 

[R.W.Dale]

I have a Lyman manual I too bought on the recommendation that it's a "must have" but for the most part it's primarily usefulness is in showing me data for an odd powder I'll never buy.

Far and away the most complete manual albeit dated is "metallic reloading" followed closely by hodgdon's webpage


http://www.amazon.com/Metallic-Cartridge-Reloading-M-McPherson/dp/0873491807

 

[Mauser69]

Some People Do Not Seem To Be Able To Understand...

The reason the Lyman manual is so often recommended for newbs is NOT for the load data!! Although they do have a excellent amount of data, IMO, the reason you need that manual is to actually READ the information about reloading, components, safety, and evolution of the process. The same is true about the Lee Modern Reloading manual.

I continue to see posts over an over again from folks new to this hobby that clearly show they haven't bothered to read a danged thing. Then they come on a forum like this and ask questions that show they do not have a clue and do not want to learn anything more advanced than how to make toast from a printed recipe.

Once someone has learned enough to understand the variety of components available, AND the significance of different types and brands of components, then the process of finding the right ones to start with is fairly simple:

• Look at load data from several different sources for the caliber in which you are interested (the Lee manual basically does this for you, since all of their data is copied from other sources).
• Make a note of the various specific bullets available in the data that interest you most, including brand, weight, construction, and specific name.
• Make a note of which powders are commonly listed for MID RANGE loads with each of those specific bullets.
• Now go shopping. You are bound to find some combination from your lists that lets you get started.

There are many powders that perform excellently and similarly over a broad range of loads, so finding any one of them is just as good as another for a beginning reloader. This does NOT mean they are interchangeable, just that they are similar enough in performance that with the correct load data, they can produce very similarly performing ammo. An example of these types of powder groups for average pistol calibers might include Bullseye, 700-X, Zip, HP-38/231, Acc #5, and Unique (among others). Any of those powders are very flexible and will give a reloader many different options in a midrange cartridge like .38 Spl.

They key to my message here is that anyone who had actually read the information in the front half of either the Lyman or Lee manuals would totally understand that process and be well positioned to start developing not only good safe ammo, but processes that would keep both themselves and others safe while they learned more from experience.

 

[Kevin Rohrer]

Lyman is always my Goto manual, but I check other sources, too.

It ain't Rocket Science, guys. Find a bullet type (lead or jacketed), match the weight or come as close as possible to what you have, and load.

 

[GBExpat]

... For a manual that has been updated 48 times there are damn few bullets listed.

While reorging a small section of the basement a few weeks ago (going thru old boxes of stored, um, stuff), I came across one of my early reloading manuals ...

Lyman, 45th Edition, copyrighted in 1970.

That, of course, got me thinking about the fact that between 1970 and 2002 (Edition 48) there were only 3 updates, or, on average, one per decade ... and then The Silliness kicked in ...

... and I realized that if that decade-per-update was a hard rule, the 1st Edition was published when Henry the 8th was King of England.

 

[joem1945]

New powders ar coming out all the time. Formualaions of powder change slightly so it's a good idea to have the most current data available from the manufacture's web site.

 

[AnselHazen]

They key to my message here is that anyone who had actually read the information in the front half of either the Lyman or Lee manuals would totally understand that process and be well positioned to start developing not only good safe ammo, but processes that would keep both themselves and others safe while they learned more from experience.

I get all that, and for what you are saying the Lyman 49 is a fabulous tome of knowledge. And I'm totally there with finding a bullet weight that matches what I have to load and working that up. Where I can NOT go into the weeds yet is with powder. If I have load data for a 60 gr bullet using Benchmark and I have a different mfr's 60 gr bullets in the box I still NEED Benchmark. I don't have the experience or the confidence to look at the burn rate chart and wing it with other powder I can get. It's all about being safe when doing this right?

Benchmark, Varget, Unique, HP-38, Bullseye, Zip, 700-X, Acc-5. Etc. These are ghost powders to me. Store owners get this funny look and shake their head saying I haven't seen any of that in years.

Alliants web site only lists 9 bullets for AR-Comp. Yet was released in early 2013.

 

[snuffy]

Newbee scare

I realize that new reloaders want exact recipes. That's darned hard to do, it would take a gunshop that has every bullet made, every powder, primer, and case headstamp. That gunshop would be huge and it would take you lots of time to locate and purchase each component. point is;it's not necessary. But a newbee doesn't know that. It takes years of experience to be able to interpolate data, to know you don't have to have exactly the components that's called for.

Then along comes a new cartridge. Finding load data for a new shell is darned hard. Case in point; my new 300 WSM. This was back in '02 IIRC, I had one of the first rifles to hit the local shop, a Browning A-bolt mountain rifle. All I had was a box of 180 grain factory loads from Winchester.(IIRC the 180 power point bullet.) He had a die set from Redding, and a shell holder. Since I already had a bunch of other .308 bullets from my '06 and .308, and a variety of powder, I thought I was good-to-go. NOPE! All I could find for data was ONE load using WW-760 with 180 grain bullets, of course that was one powder I did NOT have!

A call to the LGS and a trip got me a pound of it so I could load the shells once I fired the rifle for the first time. I also found a second box of shells, this time 165 grain ballistic silver tips. Cut to the chase, I interpolated from 300 win-mag data for other slow burn rate powders like H-4831, and IMR 7828. As well as IMR 4350. As always when loading anything starting low and working up led to some real nice loads. Many times I found I could go higher to achieve the top velocities that rifle was capable of.

Any loading manual is out-of-date the moment it is printed . All it takes is one powder company to come out with a new powder,(CFE.223) or a bullet company with a "new and improved" bullet. It takes time and a new manual to cover the changes. Producing a loading manual is expensive, the companies never make any money from their books. It's a service so they can sell their wares, and explain the how-to's of reloading.

 

[AnselHazen]

Want is one way of looking at it I guess. Thing is I got the memo about safety loud and clear. So as a newb I ain't straying off the reservation no how. My particular vexation I guess is older tried and true bullets, but the only thing it seems available to me is newer formula powders.