What is the best reloading manual nowadays?

[HexHead]

I use Hodgdon's website, Lyman 49 and occasionally will look something up in Hornady's latest. My fav though in the latest Nosler manual. I pretty much use Nosler exclusively for my rifles and .44 revolvers.

 

[ElevenBravo]

I usually buy the manual for whatever bullet I'm using. I use the Hornady manual a lot, and I find that the Nosler manual to be pretty good. There's a Berger manual sitting on my shelf that I barely use.

 

[Gravedigger56]

I favor the Hornady manual simply because I currently only load Hornady bullets. I also use the "one caliber" manuals.

 

[gonoles_1980]

I have Speer and Lyman like most of the rest.

 

[baseball2013]

Lyman #49 and Hornady #9 get a lot of use on my bench. The Hodgdon website also comes in handy due to my powder selection of Autocomp, Titegroup and CFE Pistol.

 

[steve4102]

Correct.
That is because everything in the Lee book is old data tested and published by the powder & bullet companies years ago.

Lee doesn't have a ballistic lab, and they don't have any current 'TESTED' data.

It's all just reprints of old stuff no longer covered by copyrights.

rc

Sierra also does not have pressure testing Equipment.

They do publish their own manuals with their own data, but that data is NOT pressure tested.

They simply test their loads in regular firearms, then read brass and guess what is a safe load or not. No Thanks, I'll stick with those that use real pressure testing equipment.

 

[kerreckt]

I like Lyman's because it covers a broader range. It has good cast info, as well as, jacketed. It seems more in tune with what and how I do. I find it balanced. I check the powder manufacturer's website as well for any new info,from time to time.

 

[25-5]

I like the Lyman, and Hornady 9th Ed. Hornady has loads for the M1 Garand and M14. Hogdon has a good web site with reloading info too.

 

[Hondo 60]

Probably Lyman's & if you use a fair amount of 1 manufacturer's bullets, then their manual as well.

The bullet mfgs all publish their own manuals, but say for instance, Speer's manual isn't a lot of help if you use a lot of Hornady bullets and vice/versa.

 

[David4516]

I'll let my collection speak for itself (see attached photo): Hornady is my favorite. I have several editions of the Hornady manual, and my favorite is actually my oldest, the 1980s version.

Speer is a close second choice.

Nosler and Lee are OK.

I might have to check out the Lyman book, sounds like THR really likes it...

 

[cheygriz]

I have Lyman, Hodgdon, Speer, Sierra, Hornady, Barnes and Accurate.
they're all good.

The Hodgdon gets used the most. But I check any NEW load in at least three of them.

 

[DR915]

I buy the Hodgdon reloading Magazine every year. They have the new powders they add every year and some great reading. But one Magazine or one book is not enough. I always cross reference with others. Never can have too much data!

 

[jmr40]

I use Nosler, Hodgdon, Alliant, and Ramshot websites. The only hardcopy I have is a Lee. I rarely use it.

 

[highlander 5]

Lyman #49 as it has both jacketed and cast bullet data. 2nd for me would be Speer not sure if it's #13 or 14 now.

 

[Candyman87]

I use Lyman #49, Speer #14, Sierra #5 and a couple other random ones.

I also reference hodgdon.com often since almost all of my powder is theirs or Alliant.

 

[RunninLate]

I too have a number of manuals on the bench and usually use the Hornady because 90% of my jacketed bullets are Hornady. But I do load a lot of Xtreme and Missouri bullets. That is when the Lyman Cast Bullet manual comes into play.

When looking at another bullet (besides Hornady) I will look at a couple different places (manuals and websites) and compare the data. The main thing, I never load at top of the scale. I do not know if it helps but I will also look at the BC of each bullet when making the comparison.

 

[Average Joe]

Lyman 49th

 

[rbt50]

they are all good, I have been buying them all ever since the 60;s

 

[Nature Boy]

^^ I like brt50's answer ^^

Get em all. There's good info in each one. Plus, how can you honestly call yourself an anal retentive reloader if you don't have at least one of each major manual?

 

[Blue68f100]

I generally buy the caliber specific books. They contain most all the data from all sources combined into 1 book. I use the online data by powder mfg as a reference to the published data in books. I still have the Lyman, Serria, Hornady, Speer and few others on hand too.

Cant have too many sources..

 

[HOWARD J]

I have 95% of all published manuals
I only load min loads as I for the most part shoot at indoor range 75'
with a rifle does not need any more power.
140 mile round trip & a walk to 100 yard target does not agree with my back.
Ain't life a *****

 

[PJSprog]

I've always used the Lee manual. I also always cross-reference any new loads with the info on the Hodgdon website these days. As noted by others here, always a good idea to check more than one source. Anyone can make a printing mistake.

 

[cosh]

That.. Echo PJ on checking Hodgdon web updates.

 

[SSN Vet]

I'm not saying that the Lee manual is the best, but I do like the way that for each bullet selection, the loads are listed in order of velocity from highest to lowest.

I've been wanting the Lyman #49 for a long time now.... maybe for Christmas.

 

[NINEX19]

I'm not saying that the Lee manual is the best, but I do like the way that for each bullet selection, the loads are listed in order of velocity from highest to lowest.

Agreed. I have several that I always use to cross check in addition to powder mfg. websites. I have found Lee to have the most data for bullet weight/shape vs powder. It has never let me down. I am usually always able to find the load I am looking for.

I own a Lyman 49 ed. I really, really try to use it and never seem to find a powder/weight combo that I am looking for. I do not understand why people like the Lyman publication so much. I have really found almost no use for it. It does have lots of cast data and I do not load cast/non jacketed, so that may be the reason.