Need Speer Load Data

[TenDriver]

I have some 180 gr Grand Slam and IMR-4007SSC in 308. Hodgdon says 45-48 gr for that bullet weight. Seeing a 46 gr charge in there is causing me to second guess.

Anyone have a Speer book to verify that recipe? If not I'll email Speer.

Thanks!

 

[Potatohead]

Ten,
I'll check mine when I get home around noon if nobody does before then.

 

[sage5907]

The Speer Manual #13 doesn't list IMR 4007SSC for a 180 grain bullet in the 308. In fact, it doesn't even list that powder in their list of IMR powders. I don't have a manual #14.

 

[TenDriver]

Thanks guys.

I figured that powder wasn't in there but gave it a shot.

 

[Potatohead]

I think I have the most recent offering, though it's probably not in there if it's not in the previous version. Will check though.

Vit 340 at JCs yesterday ,Ten.. 47$

 

[Reloadron]

The Speer Manual #13 doesn't list IMR 4007SSC for a 180 grain bullet in the 308. In fact, it doesn't even list that powder in their list of IMR powders. I don't have a manual #14.

Nor does the older #12 manual. However, that said, looking at IMR data for a 180 grain bullet using IMR 4007SSC powder they show Min 45.0 and a Max of 48.0 with a COL of 2.8".

As to the powder:

IMR 4007 SSC
Super Short granulated powder with a burn speed that falls between 4320 and 4350. Ideally suited for varmint cartridges like the 220 Swift, 22-250 Remington and 243 Winchester. Additionally, well suited for the venerable 30-06, the 300 Winchester Short Magnum, and the Super Short Magnums 243 and 25 Winchester.

While using a burn rate is certainly no way to gauge a powder charge looking at the IMR 4320 and IMR 4350 load data in the #12 Speer manual for a 180 grain Grand Slam .308 (Speer list a COL of 2.680") a load of 46.0 grains does not seem unreasonable. However, I would certainly get Speer's take through an email. There must be a reason that IMR 4007 SSC doesn't overly show up for the .308 Winchester.

Ron

 

[jerkface11]

If the maker of the powder says it's ok why would you doubt them?

 

[Rule3]

Although the powder may not be "ideal" for the 308 it is probably not listed, as Speer is part of ATK Corp and they like to promote their own powders (Alliant" over others.)
I have no idea as to the suitability of the powder. They only test what they test.

 

[TenDriver]

If the maker of the powder says it's ok why would you doubt them?

Because I'm led to believe that the cannelure on the Grand Slam is farther forward on the bullet than what IMR used as a test bullet. Seating to the cannelure is going to produce a OAL of around 2.65-2.70 and compress the 46 gr charge by a bunch. The max charge of 48 gr is a compressed charge, but that is at an OAL of 2.80.

It just doesn't pass my smell test and makes me think I'm playing test pilot with this bullet / powder combo.

Edit: Speer emailed....

 

[Reloadron]

If the maker of the powder says it's ok why would you doubt them?

Well because in my simple little mind a good number of powders are OK for a cartridge. The 223 Remington and 308 Winchester are good examples to name but a few. Each cartridge can be loaded with a pretty wide range of powders. Being "OK" isn't what we always look for though. It's like there is a line between OK and well suited for.

The recent powder shortage, well component shortage in general, is a good example. It's like if we couldn't be with the powder we loved then we loved the powder we were with. In many cases this wasn't such a bad thing as many hand loaders had to settle for what they could get and many times it worked out better than using their old tried and true. Sometimes though, not so much.

I also agree that if the guys making the bullets also happen to own a company or two that market powder their manuals will focus on their powder lines also. Just good business sense.

All in all though, some powders are better suited for some cartridges than others. When possible I prefer the well suited over the OK powder.

I'll be curious as to what Speer has to say? Please do post what you get back.

Just My Thinking on The Subject....
Ron

 

[TenDriver]

Sure will, Ron.

 

[Rule3]

Hodgdon lists a Speer 180 SP but which one is it.? Speer #14 has 2 sp bullets The RNSP and the bullet you have the GS SP. I would be curious as to what bullet Hodgdon tested as their COL is different than the manual

From the manual it appear (by COL) they tested the Spitz bullet which matches the manual COL.

Regardless they group them all together and the charge data is the same for all of them even if the COL is varied a little.

 

[sage5907]

I didn't know who owned Speer until I read the post by Rule3 and it made me look up the company. It seems that Blount sold their sporting goods companies to Alliant Techsystems in 2001. This acquisition made Alliant the largest producer of ammunition in the U.S. It would be natural for Speer to push Reloder rifle powders in their Manuals. When I got my #13 manual I was surprised that IMR 4064 was missing from the list of 30-06 150 grain loads. Re 15 was there. Learn something new every day!

 

[Potatohead]

Ron, you simpleton

 

[FLIGHT762]

I didn't know who owned Speer until I read the post by Rule3 and it made me look up the company. It seems that Blount sold their sporting goods companies to Alliant Techsystems in 2001. This acquisition made Alliant the largest producer of ammunition in the U.S. It would be natural for Speer to push Reloder rifle powders in their Manuals. When I got my #13 manual I was surprised that IMR 4064 was missing from the list of 30-06 150 grain loads. Re 15 was there. Learn something new every day!

On page 480 in the Speer reloading manual #14, there are 14 powders listed for the 30/06 with 150 grain bullets. There are only two Alliant powders listed,
Reloader 15 & 19. The rest of the powders are a mixture of Hodgdon, Winchester, Accurate, Vihtavouri and IMR powders.

IMR 4064 powder is in fact listed for 150 grain loads.

 

[sage5907]

FLIGHT762, if you'll read post #3 you'll notice that it says that I don't have a copy of Speer Manual #14. When the #14 manual gets cheaper I'll buy one of them. I still can't believe that Speer Manual #13 didn't list IMR 4064 for their 150 grain 30-06 loads.

 

[Rule3]

I think the bottom line here is the Hodgdon lists a bullet of the same weight and pretty darn close if not the same. Anytime using a different bullet the COL is probably going to change.That's why work them up.

I would not be hesitant to use the Hodgon data. I have done so for years not using the exact bullet they have. Same with Hornady or other brands of bullets/manuals.

 

[TenDriver]

I think the bottom line here is the Hodgdon lists a bullet of the same weight and pretty darn close if not the same. Anytime using a different bullet the COL is probably going to change.That's why work them up.



I would not be hesitant to use the Hodgon data. I have done so for years not using the exact bullet they have. Same with Hornady or other brands of bullets/manuals.

I just don't buy the charge weight. At 46.0 gr I cannot fully seat the bullet to the cannelure. The charge is fully compressed. Same with the starting charge of 45 gr. cannot fully seat the bullet.

I already emailed Speer, will probably email Hodgdon as well before I just donate 4064 to the project.

 

[TenDriver]

I think the bottom line here is the Hodgdon lists a bullet of the same weight and pretty darn close if not the same. Anytime using a different bullet the COL is probably going to change.That's why work them up.



I would not be hesitant to use the Hodgon data. I have done so for years not using the exact bullet they have. Same with Hornady or other brands of bullets/manuals.

I just don't buy the charge weight. At 46.0 gr I cannot fully seat the bullet to the cannelure. The charge is fully compressed. Same with the starting charge of 45 gr. cannot fully seat the bullet.

I already emailed Speer, will probably email Hodgdon as well before I just donate 4064 to the project.

Here's what the bullet looks like.

 

[Rule3]

Speer loads your bullet at a COL of 2.680 with the powders they tested.

Hodgdon also lists 2.680 their data list a start of 45.0 grains and a max (compressed load) of 48.0 grains IMR 4007 SSC

Is your brass trimmed to 2.005? Only way to match the cannelure and the COL if in fact it is the same bullet that Hodgdon tested

So, yes it is a mystery. A FYI Hodgdon does not answer e mails. Call them M-Thursday. Closed Fridays.

Good luck.

 

[TenDriver]

Brass is trimmed to 2.005.

Thanks for the note on Hodgdon.

 

[FLIGHT762]

You don't necessarily need to seat the bullet to the cannelure. I often seat hunting bullets below the cannelure. Depending on the throat in your rifle, you may be able to seat the bullet out to 2.800" (max. magazine length) as long as you don't jam the ogive into the lands.

As an example, Remington factory 308 barrels have a very long throat. Other manufacturers will vary.

You can test by seating a bullet to 2.800" into a sized, empty case, mark the outside of the seated bullet with a magic marker, chamber the dummy round and see if the lands contact the ogive of the bullet. If there is contact, You can keep seating the bullet a little deeper at a time until there is no longer contact with the lands.

That may give you the internal space you need.

 

[BigBore45]

Just because the powder looks like it will be compressed does not mean it will be. I load H-380 in a .223 rem case that is compressed at the begining but once it takes a trip to the ammo storage shelf and back down to the pickup it has space in there. also same issue with 4064 under a serria 155 gr. palma match. try one or 2 of them out then use a electric tooth brush to "settle" the powder in the case. then shake to see if still compressed. also are you using the same brass the manufacture did with the same inside dimensions? Prob. not thats why you work loads up. you do not have to seat a bullet at the cannelure either, i often dont with bullets, mine is for accuracy reasons.

 

[TenDriver]

Well because in my simple little mind a good number of powders are OK for a cartridge. The 223 Remington and 308 Winchester are good examples to name but a few. Each cartridge can be loaded with a pretty wide range of powders. Being "OK" isn't what we always look for though. It's like there is a line between OK and well suited for.

The recent powder shortage, well component shortage in general, is a good example. It's like if we couldn't be with the powder we loved then we loved the powder we were with. In many cases this wasn't such a bad thing as many hand loaders had to settle for what they could get and many times it worked out better than using their old tried and true. Sometimes though, not so much.

I also agree that if the guys making the bullets also happen to own a company or two that market powder their manuals will focus on their powder lines also. Just good business sense.

All in all though, some powders are better suited for some cartridges than others. When possible I prefer the well suited over the OK powder.

I'll be curious as to what Speer has to say? Please do post what you get back.

Just My Thinking on The Subject....
Ron

Speer responded today that they did not test that powder with the Grand Slam and thus had no data. I called Hodgdon and basically narrowed my question down to whether I can safely reduce a 4007SSC charge below what the book says, to which I got a "I don't see why not" answer. He also stated he didn't know what it would do to accuracy . consistency.

I'm going to drop a 40 gr charge in a case and see if I can't eye ball where the base of the bullet will sit it relation to the top of the charge when I get home and go from there.

Two things that were asked or pointed out in earlier posts:
I know I don't HAVE to seat to the cannelure, but I'd like to unless the jump to the lands is excessive. Second, not only is the charge compressed, it's compressed to the point I cannot seat the bullet as deep as I'd like to.

 

[Haxby]

Nosler's website has data for IMR-4007SSC with their 180 gr bullets.