Not impressed with Lyman's manual

[Potatohead]

I kept hearing people talk about the Lyman's manual, like it's the reloading bible, so I decided to pick one up. I flip to the 9mm pages, since that's my primary reload, and am disappointed. It doesn't have load info for 115 gr FMJ, or the 125 gr lead that I've been using. Am I missing something?

You make a good point about the 115s but I like the Lyman for all of the other stuff. Case prep, die set up, measurements on every cartridge, etc. Try "Loading For Handgunners" by Patrick Sweeney maybe? He's got a write up and recommendations for each of the popular calibers. 5 -115 recipes and 5- 125 lead recipes. Someone may have mentioned above..

PM me and I'll be glad to give you the recipes if you don't want to purchase the book.

 

[RussellC]

Would that be similar to using the Lyman's 120gr lead for a starting point for 125gr lead? Lyman's lists Titegroup as 3.2-3.8 gr's at 1.065" OAL when the Hodgdon website lists it as 3.6-4.0 at 1.125" OAL. That seems like a pretty big difference.

Not really, one has a heavier load, but its OAL is somewhat longer, allowing for the heavier load, without much of a pressure change.

I have noticed some info, like on the sheet that comes with Lee dies for 9mm that they dont specify if HP, RN, FP, etc. If RN is planned for, then I figure it is safe for HP or FP at same weight bullet,(at that OAL) as the HP and FP are shorter...given the same OAL the load would be less powerful as it isnt compressed to the same degree. HOWEVER, if the load and OAL are for HP or FP and you substitute RN at that OAL, the pressure is going to be greater, as that bullet will seat deeper at that same OAL. I always start low and inquire here before I pull the trigger. I dont know if this is proper, but I just measured the difference in the bullet lengths with a caliper and adjusted the OAL accordingly. THAT was based on advice I got here, started a little lower on powder in an abundance of caution, and worked up.

Russellc

 

[918v]

Get Pet Loads by Ken Waters. It has plenty of useful data developed in actual 9mm semi-auto pistols.

 

[Potatohead]

Thx for that recommendation 918 v. Hadn't heard of that one.

 

[PO2Hammer]

I agree with the OP, they should have 115 (and 124) FMJ data. Since OAL is critical in the tiny 9mm you really need data specific to the FMJ's so that new handloaders don't accidentally seat the FMJs too deep.

 

[RealGun]

I agree with the OP, they should have 115 (and 124) FMJ data. Since OAL is critical in the tiny 9mm you really need data specific to the FMJ's so that new handloaders don't accidentally seat the FMJs too deep.

But are you varying the load or just the OAL? The three brands of 115 gr FMJ that I have on hand vary in OAL by only a spread of .009. The RWS 124 gr FMJ is right there in the same range.

My JHP is not 115 gr but rather 124 or 147. Georgia Arms 124 gr JHP is 1.079 rated 1100 fps, and the 147 gr JHP is PDX1 at 1.121.

Rather than worry about the loads, wouldn't a person be okay simply knowing the difference in length of the bullets and then calculating approximate OAL, given the benchmark of either the standard or the OAL and bullet type proven to run in the gun? The pressure and max OAL is often provided with any reference load, so there can be quite a bit to work with in the data.

 

[readyeddy]

I loaded 9mm FMJ using the Lyman's manual. I used the JHP data and measured a factory 115 gr FMJ to get OAL. In fact, in about 95% of all my hand loads, I am not able to find data for the exact bullet I'm loading so I end up using something close. With this approach I have found the Lyman's manual to be very useful.

As always, stay under max and check for over pressure. So far I have produced some very reliable and accurate ammo using approximations.

 

[cwsample]

The way I see it, manuals like this that may be targeted at beginners and novices should have specific load data for the most common calibers and bullet grains. The advanced stuff and "approximations" are a different story. I agree the manual has a lot of good information in the beginning chapters, and I have read it, I was just hoping the other 350 some-odd pages would also be relevant to what I was hoping for. I'll check out some of the other manuals mentioned and keep checking manufacturer websites for specific load data.

 

[1SOW]

RealGun, I mostly agree.
A 124gr JHP at the SAME SEATING DEPTH of a 124FMJ will be a safe "starting load" and then work up (and vice-versa). The only problem is knowing both bullet lengths to figure the seating depth on the load data bullet. You can always load "longer"/less seating depth and still be safe
Forum info can be handy for bullet lengths given by generous members.

 

[Lost Sheep]

The way I see it, manuals like this that may be targeted at beginners and novices should have specific load data for the most common calibers and bullet grains. The advanced stuff and "approximations" are a different story. I agree the manual has a lot of good information in the beginning chapters, and I have read it, I was just hoping the other 350 some-odd pages would also be relevant to what I was hoping for. I'll check out some of the other manuals mentioned and keep checking manufacturer websites for specific load data.

My opinion is that it is doubtful any manuals are tailored for novices. The publishers may be conservative, but they run empirical tests and report results. They subscribe to the S.A.M.M.I (Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute) and are not likely to "sandbag" their results. It would essentially "turn off" their "bread and butter" clientele. There is simply no incentive to "dumb down" their loading data. Their reputation would quickly suffer and subscribers (sales) drop.

You can easily negate the effects of (suspected) "novice-oriented" data, or debunk it by comparing multiple manuals and authoritative load data sources (powder manufacturers, loading gear makers and bullet makers) and seeing if any are out of line with the others.

There are reasons that almost all loaders of more than one year's experience have multiple manuals on their bookshelves and multiple web sites at their fingertips.

Lost Sheep

 

[RealGun]

There are reasons that almost all loaders of more than one year's experience have multiple manuals on their bookshelves and multiple web sites at their fingertips.

They may also have a B$ meter by that time.

 

[GBExpat]

B$ Meter ... verrrrrrrrry important piece of equipment for a reloader researching load data.

 

[PO2Hammer]

Rather than worry about the loads, wouldn't a person be okay simply knowing the difference in length of the bullets and then calculating approximate OAL, given the benchmark of either the standard or the OAL and bullet type proven to run in the gun? The pressure and max OAL is often provided with any reference load, so there can be quite a bit to work with in the data.

Yes, that would work. You could set the loads to all have the same seating depth and then you could use data with any bullet shape. That does add a step that would not bother most of us, but these days I think they need to make things idiot proof (no offense intended at any individual). The 115 and 124 FMJ must be the most loaded bullet by far in 9mm, so let's get them in the manuals so that beginners don't have to extrapolate load data.

 

[boom boom]

For a bunch of data from various reloading manuals in one place try a subscription to loaddata.com. Another valuable source is Handloader's magazine which has been around for a while. Also don't forget other gun mags such as Guns and Ammo, etc. that have reloading pages. That being said, I have various manuals from bullet companies that I use such as Sierra and Nosler, Hornady, and Speer, general manuals such as Lee and Lyman, and of course powder company info such as Hodgdon's which publishes an annual edition.

After that, I cross reference some internet sites with those sources mentioned above due to reloading odd old milsurps.

The other thing to remember is that you can generally use data from the next highest bullet wt. such as the 124gr. data as a starting point if the bullet weights are close enough together. Major bedeviling issue that I have found with the 9mm lies in specific bullet OAL lengths which does affect pressure in such a small case. Oregon Trail 124gr LRN to be exact--which I ended up by buying Silhouette and getting a Ramshot powder guide. Unfortunately, the 1.06 OAL works in some of my nines but not others.

 

[readyeddy]

Not really trying to defend the Lyman's manual. Just trying to point out that the data is not set in stone. For example, a manual's max OAL for a particular bullet is more or less a suggestion. Adjustments to OAL are often inevitable due to feeding tendencies, fitting in magazines, or it just don't look right.

And there really aren't any beginner load manuals. There's data in various forms in a bunch of different books. Sometimes that data conflicts for various reasons - different test guns, different barrel lengths and sometimes the powder recipe actually changes over the years, e.g. W231.

Not trying to argue with the OP. But based on experience, one would be well advised to keep the Lyman's manual along with a few other manuals and look to each as a source of information.

 

[buck460XVR]

I see no difference between Lyman and any of the other more popular reloading manuals. No manual I have ever owned nor any powder manufacturers website I have ever visited has every load for every specific bullet/powder combo available. There are just too many out there for one manual to test all of them. If they did, they'd hafta charge $200 for it and it would weight 50 lbs. While Lyman may be pale in 9mm, they push .357s faster than most. You want loads specific to your bullets, get the manual from the bullet maker. If you discount bullet company doesn't publish loads for their bullets, you will need to find something close in somebody else's manual, start low and work up........just basic reloading 101.

 

[cwsample]

No where did I mention "dumbing down" load data, or specific bullet brands. If someone can tell me that a 115 gr FMJ is not one of the MOST loaded 9mm rounds, then my point about this particular manual will have been debunked. I'm not looking for specific brands', or even powders', load data. I'm just saying that a manual of this size should at least include the most common type of round for what they even agree is the most common caliber in military AND civilian use.

I love the conversation, though. It's full of great info. Thanks guys!

 

[GBExpat]

No where did I mention "dumbing down" load data, or specific bullet brands.

No, but folks sometimes lose track of or expand upon the original premise of the thread and, oftentimes, end-up doing a little chewing on each other ... but around here, usually in a nice way.

 

[Catpop]

I learned to reload from reading a 1973 Lyman manual cover to cover (and the help of the local gun store) while in college. As previously mentioned, it was the old book that was plastic bound to lie flat on the bench, lots of illustrations, and downright fun to read.

Problem today is everybody (including a best friend and new reloader) is in such a hurry to make ammo they are bypassing the basics (and fun part, to me at least)! Its not only a shame but also dangerous to begin reloading without the basics knowledge required to pursue this rewarding hobby. It comes from first reading and studing the manual.

I'm still safety reloading today, 40 years later, and it all started by reading a Lyman manual.

 

[ReloaderFred]

I've been in the ballistics labs of both Sierra Bullets and Nosler Bullets. I've seen what goes into the development of loading data, and the time it takes to develop each and every load combination. Companies have literally thousands and thousands of dollars, if not millions, invested in their labs, and untold hours and money invested in researching data.

For me it's a little irksome to see someone who is admittedly new to the business come along and badmouth a company for not including "their bullet, or load" in a manual that has taken several years to put together and represents a huge investment in time and money.

I started in this hobby in 1963, with no mentors, and "gasp", no internet. I bought a used Hollywood press, which I still have, from one of my college professors, and a rudimentary reloading manual and sat down and started reading. Then I started doing, all on my own. I experimented some along the way and developed some of my own data, but it was all based on known data from reloading manuals. It took time and thought, but today I reload for 31 different calibers, and I've learned a lot from my experience along the way. In fact, the summer before last, I learned that even I could load a squib round, after successfully reloading over 3/4 million rounds since I started.......

If you don't care for the manual you purchased, then buy another, and another. I own manuals from all the major companies, and subscribe to a couple of on-line reloading sources as well. Between them, I can come up with a load for most any bullet in any of the 31 calibers I load for. All it takes is a little initiative and common sense, plus an understanding of what goes on when the firing pin hits the primer.......

Hope this helps.

Fred

 

[ReloaderFred]

Oh, and when I started reloading, there was no 9mm ammunition or data available in the Western United States. In 1965, I purchased a Star 9mm, but couldn't find ammunition, brass, dies or data for 9mm anywhere. I finally turned some .38 Special brass down by chucking it in my drill press and using a file to get rid of the rim and make an extractor groove, and then cutting it to the proper length for the chamber. I cast some 146 gr. .38 bullets and worked up some loads in the 50 rounds of brass I had made. It worked, right up until the time I sold the gun for $75.00 to someone who thought they might know a source for some European 9mm ammunition.........

Even though the 9x19 round was invented in 1902, it wasn't common in the U.S. until about the early 1970's, when Joe Foster designed the Model 39 S&W pistol for the Air Force, which they never adopted. When the Illinois State Police adopted the Model 39, it then started to gain some notice, but before then, the caliber was pretty much an oddity here.

Hope this helps.

Fred

 

[rondog]

I need some more books. I have the Lyman 49th, and the latest Lee. Not terribly impressed with either, it can be tough. Another reason why I print labels for my ammo boxes with all the info on them. I can just use those as my recipes and make more of the same.

 

[grubbylabs]

I cast as many others do and you will learn real quick that their is a lot of educated guessing that goes into developing a load for a specific cast bullet. Especially if your mold is a custom mold that is not a clone of a Lyman, RCBS or other popular mold. You learn real quick to find and use multiple sources. I don't use the net much to find data, but I use from Hornady and Speer their current and previous editions, and both Lymans. For my 308,45/70 I also have the a small booklet that I cant remember the name of, but it lists data from bullet,powder,and mold makers. They are great books.

Five grains and a slightly difference profile is not going to make a huge difference if you working up from a safe starting point.

I just finished working up loads for my AR, I started with Hornady data and worked up to their max, however, Hodgdon has a higher max for that powder and bullet combination, so I went past Hornady max and right up to what Hodgdon had listed as max. I am glad I did too, because Hodgdon's max gave the only acceptable results.

 

[savanahsdad]

I need some more books. I have the Lyman 49th, and the latest Lee. Not terribly impressed with either, it can be tough. Another reason why I print labels for my ammo boxes with all the info on them. I can just use those as my recipes and make more of the same.

WARNING !! I spent over $800.00 on used books this year , some of those old book are a must have for a die-hard reloaded ! even found that "80's" NRA book other had posted about , got it for $18.00 still had the dust cover on it , and I now have about 80% of all the "HANDLOADER MAGAZINE" ever printed only missing a few years, and I have most of the Lyman books and I have at least one of all the other brands,

OP; that Lyman #49 is a great book as others have said FMJ or HP in a 9mm no biggie , , now with a rifle bullet like a .277 Sierra 140 SPBT don't take that data and stick a Barrns 140gr all copper bullet in it,or you will have a bad day , I switch out a Sierra with a Nosler , thinking they were the same type , .. first round blew the primer ! turned out the Nosler at the same COL was touching the lands where the Sierra gave me .020 jump , so you need to watch jump and bearing surface with rifle rounds , and with most handgun rounds if you start low and work up you should be fine , (cast is another story , bearing surface, hardness , gas-check ,......) any way,, Lyman is giving you the load data for the longer bullet (HP) you will be more than safe with the FMJ

although I love my books , I get most of my data from "loaddata.com" these days

 

[frankmako]

i like to look old book stores and such to find old reloading books. you can find some good reloading data in the older books. today i still use/go to my first load books that i got in 1970. it is a lyman book and a spear book. they have some good data in them.