Older manuals

[Buck13]

Currently, in addition to online data, I have the latest Lee and Lyman reloading manuals. I was thinking of getting a used copy of Speer #11 or #13. Is there any real reason to have these other than nostalgia or as paperweights?

Any other manuals (current or dated) that you find useful? I load primarily .44 Mag, .357 Mag, .38 Spl, 10 mm, and .32-20 for handguns. I'm tempted to get a rifle in .243 Win, 25-06, or something else in 6.5 mm, but I have no solid need for it right now.

 

[243winxb]

http://castpics.net/dpl/ Older data at this site.

 

[gamestalker]

You know, I still have my old Speer #10 and I'm darn glad I do. Aside from the fact that it contains a lot of useful information that I refer to when I'm teaching others, it also has some old data that I still use.

For example, I recently used it when I needed some 22-250 data that was no where to be found in current published data sources. And although the bullet I was using was at the cut off for the particular powder I was using in all the current data sources, that bullet weight and powder was published in my old Speer, and I had used it years before with great results. And this hasn't been the only time it has been useful in that regard.

Now I know that a lot of powders have been reformulated since 1978, and a lot of data has as well been retested, thus found to not be suitable for some previous applications, but not all of it.

GS

 

[Mostly Lead]

Is there any real reason to have these other than nostalgia or as paperweights?

I enjoy reading through the process or steps from the various manuals, new or old. Sometimes it helps to hear the same thing from another point of view. Might help clarify some point that isn't well understood.

For example, I keep a copy of Lyman's 45th edition because I enjoy the illustrations. But also have a copy of their 49th edition for load data.

The vintage of your load data should match the vintage of your powder and all my powder is recent. Others may be in a different situation...

 

[243winxb]

Speer Manual Number #8

Beware of Speer Manual Number #8. Some maximum loads are over pressure. Work up as always, keeping in mind the Speer startling load may be maximum. Check newer modern data agains the old.

 

[Buck13]

Beware of Speer Manual Number #8. Some maximum loads are over pressure. Work up as always, keeping in mind the Speer startling load may be maximum. Check newer modern data agains the old.

I wasn't thinking of going back that far. I've heard of too many powders being reformulated, and I don't want to become a historian of the propellent industry to keep track of that. More interested in cheaping out on a slightly battered used volume that's not too outdated.

 

[Ironicaintit]

I have speer #10 and #11, and still kinda use them. Some of my powders are still "old formulas". Ya gotta watch it though, some of them really are hot loads.

 

[kcofohio]

The prospect of surplus military cartridges and plentiful supply of once fired military brass for the 223 has encouraged predictions that this round will ultimately surpass the 222 Remington Magnum in popularity. Based on the trend in die sales as reported by several manufacturers, this prediction seems to coming true. Whether this round will ever catch up with the popularity of the older 222 Remington remains doubtful, however. Factory chambered sporting arms for the 223 are still few and far between;....

This quote is from Hornady's Vol. II, page 72, on the intro of 223 Remington. 1st printing, June 1973.

I find older publications interesting. I mean, who knew back then, or could foresee the mass market of the ARs.

Plus, I still find loads for 8mm in there that are useful today.

 

[cfullgraf]

I've kept all my old reloading manuals. I do not look at them often, but sometimes it is nice to have another set of data to look at.

Over time, aka new editions of the manuals, I see that many loads get reduced. Some may be the result of some legal concerns from the company, some may be to better testing equipment, and some may be a result of the powders changing. So, caution is the word when using older data.