Our reloading philosophies

[Random 8]

Reading and interacting with many of the posts since 2020 has made me think about the titled question. The recent powder substitution and ladder posts, which gored and maimed many sacred cows that I didn't always have the courage to do, have made me think more, and lead me to compose this post...for better or for worse.

For decades, gun rags, internet posts, blogs, fellow shooters have driven us towards perfection in reloading. Many theories, urban legends, junk science, and legitimate concepts and techniques have been spawned by this philosophy, and many metric tons of components expended. A lot of niche components...billed as absolute needs for application X...have evolved. "Advances" in bullet and gear technology have also come along, and taken the industry by storm, spawning new calibers and firearms designed to optimize their potential. Most of these have been aimed at increased precision at longer distances. My goal with this post is not to discuss these nuances in detail, nor label them as good or bad. Rather, it is for each of us to step back from the buzz and evaluate our own philosophy towards reloading.

I would describe mine as "good enough for government work." Haven't always been there. I used to chase perfection in many loads. Spread a lot of lead around the countryside doing so, and found some really sweet loads. A couple decades of forced component substitution have opened my eyes to the fact, that most of those results were also obtained with the substitute standards! Since about 2020, those of us who favored certain extruded powders have kind of been in a buy first, try later situation. That has worked surprisingly well. This should be tempered with the fact that my personal shooting does not involve any PRS, F class or Benchrest. IMHO, these are gear games first, shooting games second. You must have near perfection in your rifle and gear including ammo to be competitive regardless of your ability. My competition is in the CMP/NRA realm, in which the standards were developed around military ball and/or semi-match grade ammunition. Some headwinds to achieving perfection are built into the rifles allowed, and offhand stages in many events are a great equalizer. Good enough for government works for me here.

What is your reloading philosophy and how has it evolved over the decades? What do you see going forward?

 

[Kaldor]

Worry about the things that are important has been my point of view.
Some things like the couple of target rifles I own? I go all in on the correct components, and spend alot more effort on those loads.
For everything else? Minute of target basically. Can it knock down a deer reliably at 300 yards? OK, good, done. Can it bang steel at (insert number here) yards? Good enough.

 

[Walkalong]

Worry about the things that are important has been my point of view.

Yep, that’s the main thing

 

[Bazoo]

I mostly try to match factory ammo in both ballistics and accuracy. But I do it with cast bullets. Usually do a bit better than factory with my cast reloads without much effort. I trim cases for consistent crimp and try to make consistent bullets and cartridges, which results in decent groups most of the time. I do not chase accuracy in a rifle normally.

 

[entropy]

Originally with rifle it was to exceed the best factory hunting ammo while being able to choose the bullet used. With pistol it has always been to duplicate reasonably accurate (or in the case of Bullseye loads, very accurate) published loads. I also developed a load for .223 that nearly duplicates M193 ballistics, and is plenty accurate for hunting. Shotgun loads I've developed to match normal fps of target loads.

 

[N555]

Yes do what's important to you.
For my silencer pistol ammo I'm going for subsonic, quiet, clean burning and hollow point expansion. With consistent charge weights and seating depths accuracy happens kind of naturally.

For my reduced blast 223 ammo I'm going for accuracy, clean burning, cycles the AR since I alread gave up velocity by going to faster burning powder, h322. I accidentally discovered probably the most accurate 223 load ever using RE7 and 60gr sierra tmk bullets, but it won't cycle a normal semiauto.

Originally with rifle it was to exceed the best factory hunting ammo while being able to choose the bullet used. With pistol it has always been to duplicate reasonably accurate (or in the case of Bullseye loads, very accurate) published loads. I also developed a load for .223 that nearly duplicates M193 ballistics, and is plenty accurate for hunting. Shotgun loads I've developed to match normal fps of target loads.

Yeah I know right? Traditional M193 has terrible accuracy.
I load my own ammo for accuracy and get groups that are one big hole at 25yd with A2 sites where .mil guns with .mil ammo struggle to repeatedly hit "the 400yd guy" on the target at 25yd. With excellent ammo the 400yd guy would have one big hole in the middle.
No wonder people thought "the m16/AR-15 platform isn't that accurate". Shooting 1 inch at 25yd is trash.

 

[entropy]

With that load, I got one group of 3 shots at .14" at 25 yds. Most were still under a 1/4" inch though. That smallest group was with a Savage Axis, the ARs did about 1/4".

 

[.45Coltguy]

Not a bench rest shooter, but I strive for accuracy. Especially in rifles. Pretty much learned on my own, but started reading Ken Waters "Pet Loads".
That taught me certain things I hadn't thought of. Cross referenced some of his data and it was/is solid data. With newer powders, improved bullets, you still have to do some research. Just a K.I.S.S. approach and common sense will usually prevail. Handgun loading, same approach. This is my philosophy. Works.

 

[Bill M]

Most of my shooting is USPSA, (although I'm not the competitor I once was!), so I don't need more accuracy than a 6" plate knockdown at 25 yds. Rifle loading, I spend time and work up loads for each rifle, except for the blasting ammo I keep to supply my kids, I strive for "milk jugs at 100" accuracy for those! It is an enjoyable day to meet at our favorite spot in the forest, and spend time blowing up jugs and swatting 12", and 18" steel plates, then I can start working on getting everything ready for the next trip! (Not often enough for me!)

 

[PWC]

.

 

[N555]

With that load, I got one group of 3 shots at .14" at 25 yds. Most were still under a 1/4" inch though. That smallest group was with a Savage Axis, the ARs did about 1/4".

M193 bullet, primer didn't seem to matter, looks like I used 25.5gr, some 223 load data has that as the max.
I was getting pretty consistent 1/2 wide, 5/8 inch tall groups at 25yd using A2 sites on a rifle and a 1x red dot on a carbine. I was shooting 10 shot groups.
It would seem what works in a rifle usually works in a carbine, probably in a bolt rifle too.

 

[tominboise]

I used to chase every last reduction in group sizes on hunting rifles. I've since mellowed out and once I find a load that is good enough, I stop developing and just shoot. Handguns I used just grab a load and run a bunch through the Dillon, but I have started running a ladder and at least trying to optimize the load a bit. Then I run a bunch on the Dillon.

I also made a vow to myself to not load ammo until I use up the ammo I have loaded, and not to buy any components until I run out of something. I have lots of stuff stored away so I may never buy anything again (I am 65).

 

[PWC]

Years ago I used to think I that what I had could do "all that". I used to shoot and reload for the fun of it to see how I did and how improved with what I already had. I was not willing to invest the $$ required to chase one hole perfection. As stated above:

"PRS, F class or Benchrest. IMHO, these are gear games first, shooting games second. You must have near perfection in your rifle and gear including ammo to be competitive regardless of your ability. My competition is in the CMP/NRA realm, in which the standards were developed around military ball and/or semi-match grade ammunition. Some headwinds to achieving perfection are built into the rifles allowed, and offhand stages in many events are a great equalizer. Good enough for government works for me here."

 

[wanderinwalker]

Worry about the things that are important has been my point of view.
...

This, 100% and many times over.

I also find it helpful to be realistic about what to expect and what you can use. As another (former) NRA Highpower competitor, I learned if you mash the trigger with the front sight in the 8-ring, the bullet goes into the 8-ring, and time spent reloading was time spent not practicing. So make the ammo "good enough" and get out to practice. When the ammo holds you back, return to the loading bench and re-examine your processes. Even before the current supply crunch I could come up with 4 powders and 6 bullets for .223 Remington that could be made to shoot well enough to win a Highpower match. I once ran short of Varget and spent a weekend tracking down an alternate (Reloder 15), threw together some loads for both short line (probably 77-grain HPBTs loaded to magazine length) and 600-yard (definitely 80-grain HPBTs single-loaded), shot them enough to get rough zeros and took them to a big 3-day weekend "away" match where I scored my first LEG points. Since that experience I've actually been rather blasé about powder selection; as long as it's in the ballpark playing the same game, it'll probably work fine.

For my standard hunting rifles I just pick a couple of suitable bullets, a suitable powder or 2, and try some combinations. Anything in the 1-1.5 MOA range is better than acceptable for New England hunting, and isn't hard to achieve.

Handgun ammo is even simpler: it just has to fit and function and not be over pressure. It's incredibly rare for reloaded pistol ammo to not shoot well enough to be usable; I can list the number of times I've had a truly wildly inaccurate pistol/bullet/powder combination in 25 years on one hand.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Reading and interacting with many of the posts since 2020 has made me think about the titled question. The recent powder substitution and ladder posts, which gored and maimed many sacred cows that I didn't always have the courage to do, have made me think more, and lead me to compose this post...for better or for worse.

For decades, gun rags, internet posts, blogs, fellow shooters have driven us towards perfection in reloading. Many theories, urban legends, junk science, and legitimate concepts and techniques have been spawned by this philosophy, and many metric tons of components expended. A lot of niche components...billed as absolute needs for application X...have evolved. "Advances" in bullet and gear technology have also come along, and taken the industry by storm, spawning new calibers and firearms designed to optimize their potential. Most of these have been aimed at increased precision at longer distances. My goal with this post is not to discuss these nuances in detail, nor label them as good or bad. Rather, it is for each of us to step back from the buzz and evaluate our own philosophy towards reloading.

I would describe mine as "good enough for government work." Haven't always been there. I used to chase perfection in many loads. Spread a lot of lead around the countryside doing so, and found some really sweet loads. A couple decades of forced component substitution have opened my eyes to the fact, that most of those results were also obtained with the substitute standards! Since about 2020, those of us who favored certain extruded powders have kind of been in a buy first, try later situation. That has worked surprisingly well. This should be tempered with the fact that my personal shooting does not involve any PRS, F class or Benchrest. IMHO, these are gear games first, shooting games second. You must have near perfection in your rifle and gear including ammo to be competitive regardless of your ability. My competition is in the CMP/NRA realm, in which the standards were developed around military ball and/or semi-match grade ammunition. Some headwinds to achieving perfection are built into the rifles allowed, and offhand stages in many events are a great equalizer. Good enough for government works for me here.

What is your reloading philosophy and how has it evolved over the decades? What do you see going forward?

Like most philosophic explorations, mine begins with a question: What do I want to put a hole in?

Everything else - components, costs, materials, methods, everything - evolves from the answer to that question.

A $1 bullet is cheap compared to the value of 70-80lbs of trimmed, cryovac’d pork. Compared to the cost of “organic, farm-raised, free roaming” pig, that $1 bullet - and the 100 or so it took developing it - is practically free.

For plinking water bottles in a fallow field, 10-cents is pretty pricey for a 9mm. I can have just as much fun with a ha’penny .22LR. Well, almost. A nickel .45Auto is a lot more fun and well worth the difference in time and labor.

That’s my philosophy on the matter of reloading.

 

[LocoGringo]

For my rifles, I am going for 1 MOA or better while maximizing velocity. I have developed a low recoil load for my son's rifle and I have developed a subsonic load for my 6.8 SPC that has a barrel designed for subsonic, but those 2 loads are specialty loads. I'm trying to maximize performance out of the rifles I have. If I can put 5 shots into a 1" group (or better) with close to maximum velocities out of the particular length barrel that rifle has, it's a "win" for me. None of my rifles are for gun "games".

For my competition 9mm pistol, I developed a load to hit steel hard for a particular stage in a particular competition that no longer exists, but I have a lot of that ammo left. I'll use it until it's gone and then develop a lower power load that can be safely used in any gun and that is accurate enough for gun games.

 

[.308 Norma]

What is your reloading philosophy and how has it evolved over the decades?

I can't say that I have a "reloading philosophy." I enjoy it, and "over the decades," I've spent many hours doing it.

What do you see going forward?

I guess I'm just not far-sighted enough. "Going forward," I'm not seeing anything other than finding two, real good 44 Special loads - one stout, all-around load for my Ruger "Bisley" Blackhawk using 240gr cast bullets, and another, lighter 44 Special load for my new lightweight (and hard kicking) Charter Arms "Bulldog" using 180gr cast HP bullets.
Finding "perfect" (and I get to define "perfect") loads for those two guns should take me a few weeks, and that's about all the further I can see "going forward."

 

[41 Mag]

For me it boils down to finding a load that shoots accurately in the particular rifle it is developed for. Growing up we had a seemingly endless supply of the mil-surp LC '06 ball ammo. We used it to practice up for hunting season, then we took a box, pulled the bullets, neck sized the cases, and inserted a 150gr Sierra spitzer. Accuracy was minute of deer for the most part with their sporterized 03A3's, but I witnessed my pop and uncles hitting things as small as fox squirrels grackles at ranges I didn't shoot until I was in my early 20's.

When I got to loading the majority of my own ammo I strived for the elusive one hole groups, and accomplished to some degree a few of those type groups with certain loads. I had a variety of powders and bullets in various weights for one or more dedicated use. I found however that they didn't drop a deer any quicker or with less destruction to edible portions than the somewhat rudimentary fodder we had shot in my youth. As such I guess you could call it mid career, I changed to working with only a mid to heavy bullet for caliber, and using a single or possibly two powders to cover most if not all of my loads. With most things based off a .308 or '06 case it was pretty easy to just pick a 4895 or 4350 powder and run with it. These two covers most if all of my needs and kept things simple.

Nowadays my philosophy is using these same principals as I am not a competitive shooter, and I don't do a lot if any bulk blasting ammo. I load overall for hunting deer or hogs which can be accomplished with the same ammo. I choose mid weight bullets for caliber, and the same ol powders. They result in on average 1" - 1.5" groups and reliably put meat in the freezer. As mentioned in previous post the KISS regime works well.

Going forward my anticipated path is to educate my grandsons in the processes of loading their own ammo. Once they get the basics down and have the means to support their own shooting habits they can run with the ball from there.

 

[Wolfshead]

I’m not a competition shooter.
Everything I do is for hunting purposes, and that is why I got into reloading.
So I’m always searching for consistency.
i don’t have the latest, greatest, or easiest equipment set up.
i have the same single stage press as when I started. I hand clean every piece of brass I load. I weigh all my powder loads on a beam scale by hand.
The same pretty much every time.
I try to find the most accurate load possible.
I would love to have less than MOA accuracy if possible so that I know that when I shoot at a specific POA it is most likely to hit there.
I record my cold barrel shots as often as I can to understand where the load is going to hit at that distance as in hunting situations.

 

[jmorris]

For decades, gun rags, internet posts, blogs, fellow shooters have driven us towards perfection in reloading.

I don't think it's bad to want to perfect something; however, "perfect" for what, I would say that in itself is a moving target but it can actually be a different target all together based on

our own philosophy towards reloading.

I don't always load towards the same goal, so what is important to me is simply different, from time to time.

 

[sqlbullet]

I feed guns to build the culture for my children. That means lots of 9mm, 223, 30-06 (they all have M1's) and lately 45 ACP (they all are getting CMP 1911's as they turn 21). As long as it feeds, goes bang and hits the can that is good enough.

I dream of having the time and energy to do serious load work-ups, and have a couple of rifles that beg for that dedication to a good load. An SPR clone AR-15, a 6.5 Grendel, a 260 Remington, a DMR style AR-10, and a 90's era Rem 700 PSS in 300 Win Mag. I get a little close to that dream each year, but not there yet.

Until then I will continue to crank out the volume so there is ammo for the family.

 

[Charlie98]

What is your reloading philosophy and how has it evolved over the decades? What do you see going forward?

Back Home, Years Ago, I used to strive for the most accurate load evarrrr, while maintaining top velocity. In everything. 35 years of hindsight later, and I actually laugh at some of the steps I was taking in my process to turn out 'accurate' ammos, and some days I wonder how I still have all of my fingers and toes.

Since then, I've developed a more-or-less strategy towards handloading. I don't need one-hole accuracy out of generic handgun loads I use for practice... 'combat accuracy' is adequate. I need MOBC (Minute of Body Cavity) accuracy from my service rifles when it comes to generic blasting ammos. I do spend a little more time and money on handloads for my bolt gun, and other cartridges that can benefit from it, but those are few and far between.

Worry about the things that are important has been my point of view.

That may sound all well and good... but my spin on that is my point of view over time has changed what I think is 'important,' based on experience, education, and, of course, learned discourse between fellow handloaders...

Yeah I know right? Traditional M193 has terrible accuracy.

One of my Roads to Dissolution was exactly that... trying to make a purse out of a sow's ear. Carefully crafting my handloads... using generic 55grn FMJ bullets in garbage brass... and expecting match accuracy. My fragile self-esteem was crushed when my results turned in worse patterns... er, I mean groups... than that horrible Norinco 'M193' ammos.

 

[slinkster111]

If you are reloading for shotgun targets, I think there are many variables that will not affect whether a clay target will break. In todays environment you need to be flexible as far as components. Many times loads consist of what is available. Powder companies are dropping many old time favorites, Solo 1000 and 700X for example. Red Dot is rare also. Wads are also hit and miss as far as availability. This has caused me to try several loads that I would not have considered several years ago. These new loads still break targets if I do my part. So I guess my point is sometimes we are forced to change, we just have to do so safely.

 

[Necessary_Nutrient]

Because I reload, I can shoot nearly anything relatively cheaply. The real cost savers are 45 Colt, 480 Ruger, 500 S&W, 44 Special and 6.8 SPC. I've found that 223, 40 and 45 are also quite efficient especially since I bought most of my powder and quite a few primers between 2019-2021. If I had to do it again, I'm pretty sure I would NOT have geared up for 9mm since factory prices are way down and I am stubbornly, committedly never going to go with a multi-stage setup.

I buy Starline brass for most rounds, lots of times it's parted out on Gunbroker at good prices.

Some rounds, like 480 and 500, I've never fired a factory cartridge and may not ever do so.

 

[reddog81]

I mostly try to match factory ammo in both ballistics and accuracy. But I do it with cast bullets. Usually do a bit better than factory with my cast reloads without much effort. I trim cases for consistent crimp and try to make consistent bullets and cartridges, which results in decent groups most of the time. I do not chase accuracy in a rifle normally.

That's approximately where I'm at also. It's kind of crazy how much ground you can cover between .38 Special, .30-06, and 45 ACP and/or 9mm. All those have been around for 120 or more. Basic reloading components and procedures are all that is needed to do it.