PDA

View Full Version : Layman Cast Bullet Manual #4 - Review



Rocky Raab
02-11-2012, 05:21 PM
As requested, here is the review I wrote for the October 2011 issue of Handloader.

Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook, 4th Edition

Even the folks at Lyman say it was a loooooong time coming. Some 30 years have elapsed since the last Cast Bullet Handbook was released, but the much-anticipated 4th Edition finally hit the streets late in 2010. For the many reloaders who cast their own bullets and even for those who buy commercially-cast ones, the manual is a welcome addition to the loading bench.

The new edition includes almost 8,000 load combinations using all current Lyman bullet moulds, plus selected loads using moulds from RCBS, Saeco and Lee – a first. Many newly-birthed cartridges are included, as well as sesquicentenarians popular with the blackpowder crowd. A comprehensive how-to section discusses introductory through advanced cast bullet production and loading techniques. Most chapters are authored by noted cast bullet guru Mike Venturino, with chapters by other authorities.

To prepare for this review, I reviewed my tattered and smudged copy of the 3rd Edition, then read the 4th Edition cover to cover. The new edition has about a hundred fewer pages (320 versus 416), containing 96 pages of introductory material versus 120 in the older. The entire 130 pages of ballistic data found in the 3rd Edition have been dropped; those two reductions account almost exactly for the total page count difference. The older book has load data for 78 rifle and 23 handgun cartridges whereas the newer one has 99 rifle and 34 handgun rounds. In both books, some cartridges chambered in rifles as well as handguns are double-listed.

Added to the cartridge count in the 4th Edition are the Ruger Compact Magnums, Winchester and Remington Short Magnums and such newcomers as the 327 Federal. There are even cast bullet loads for many of the Ultra Magnums, plus Weatherby and STW rounds.

Physically, the book is in the handy 8½x11” format and the crisp and open graphics layout crafted by Lyman’s Elizabeth Friedman makes everything easy to read in fonts large enough even for old duffers. Illustrations of every bullet are offered, as are SAAMI drawings of each cartridge. Components used are fully detailed, with footnotes where substitutions occurred. Loads with potential of good accuracy are shown in bold type and suggestions for best powders are given. Overall editor is long-time Lyman casting cognoscenti Thomas J. Griffin.

Cheers and Jeers From the Peanut Gallery

Rather than offer only my own dubious opinions, I elected to monitor the comments of over a hundred shooters via several internet message boards for a period of six weeks. The comments were enlightening, and uncovered a few points I had not noticed. Overall, the community of casters seems to cheer the new edition. However, one jeer was that there are a large number of proofreading lapses in the text. One poster asked if the text contains so many errors, how can the load data be trusted? That’s a difficult point to reconcile. Regarding the data, many cartridges highly suited for cast bullets are absent. Among the missing are the 221 Fireball, 6.8 SPC, 30 TC, 30 Rem AR, 307 Win, 308 Marlin, 338 Marlin, 356 Win, 357 Maximum and several others.

Counter to the absent cartridges were objections to some that are present. The impression is that some rounds like the 56-60 Spencer, 40-65 Winchester and several Sharps cartridges are included mainly because Mike Venturino uses them. The observation – which I cannot dispute – is that no more than a couple hundred shooters anywhere shoot those cartridges and that the pages might have been better filled with more popular rounds.

It was also pointed out that data for the 41 Magnum contains no mild or mid-range loads, whereas data for the 45 Colt contains no heavy loads. Indeed, there is no data labeled “Ruger and T/C Only” as was common in the past and in other Lyman manuals. That’s something I did notice, being a 45 Colt fan. Many people hunt with the 45 Colt and cast bullets, usually with loads that are above original specifications. Data for such loads should have been included, in my opinion.

Inexplicably, the listing for the classic 30-30 – arguably the most popular cast-bullet rifle cartridge extant - contains data for only three moulds, none of them lighter than 150 or heavier than 173 grains. Other 30-caliber cartridges have data for numerous useful bullets from 115 grains up to 220. While I welcome the inclusion of a Lee mould among the three shown, the wildly popular 30-30 deserves much broader treatment.

The manual contains all current Lyman moulds, but not discontinued ones. While I understand space limitations, the fact is that moulds can last darn near forever. To claim that this book is “The only complete source for cast bullet data” is a bit overarching on that account.

Finally, there is widespread agreement that Chapter 18 on The Metallurgy of Cast Bullets by Dr Robert Block is – to be blunt - indecipherable. Home bullet casters are highly interested in lead and its alloys, but this 17-page PhD treatise is so far above most readers’ heads that it hardly ruffles hair. There may be legions of casters who can follow it (and more power to them) but this writer is excluded from their ranks. From the comments I read on the internet, I am certainly not alone. (Thank goodness!)

On the positive side, Lyman deserves kudos for including moulds by competing makers. This, as far as I know, is unprecedented. Many popular bullet styles aren’t offered by Lyman and to take the time and energy to provide data for those other products shows how deeply Lyman is committed to shooters and the use of cast bullets. Proponents of plumbous projectiles owe them applause.

Also laudable is the inclusion of a wide variety of powders. Cast bullets are amenable to both fast and slow-burning powders, and Lyman data reflects that. Popular powders such as the 4198s, Accurate 5744, Reloder-7, IMR 4759 and many more are included throughout. Loads reflect Start and Max charge levels and pressure readings are included with most loadings at both levels. Notably, every bullet shown has its ballistic coefficient and sectional density listed along with the alloy used in the testing.

In summary then, the Lyman 4th Edition offers bullet casters and shooters a much-needed and long-awaited supplement to their library of manuals. It may not be a single source of all things cast, but it definitely extends the spectrum of knowledge about cast bullet shooting. If you have the 3rd Edition on your shelf, the 4th Edition will continue your education and fill in a three-decade gap. If you shoot cast bullets, you need this book. Thanks, Lyman – and may the 5th Edition be already in work.

Copyright: Rocky Raab, 2011

Wolfer
02-11-2012, 06:03 PM
Very good review IMO, neither for nor against just the way it is.
One can never have too many reloading manuals but that being said I only have 5 or 6. I bought the Lyman reloading manual that came out before the last one, I don't have it in front of me so I don't know the no. With jacketed my most favorite powder is H4350. After getting the book home I discovered they had no data for H4350. I still find the book an interesting read and have read it many times. I consult it a lot for handgun loads but for me and full power rifle loads it is completely worthless. I guess I didn't realize such a small group of people shot H4350

cajun shooter
02-11-2012, 08:00 PM
Rocky, I have not seen the fourth edition so I can't comment on it's contents. I can however say something about your other wise non bias approach to posting your review. The statement that the old Sharps calibers were of interest to only a few hundred people.
If that is so then I can't see how two Sharps rifle makers are able to keep the doors open.
You also have a business by the name of Buffalo arms that does well with only two hundred customers to keep them going.
Then you have a magazine that is published by Steve Garbe of SPG lube fame who makes a good living off these same two hundred people. Kinda hard to believe that Mike Venturino has written three books to sell to just two hundred people.
I have always enjoyed reading any posting that you have done and up until this have been in 100 % agreement with any material you have written.
Had you not posted the " which I can not dispute" part of that sentence then it would have been a darn good review. I look forward to seeing a copy. Later David

runfiverun
02-12-2012, 02:12 AM
having read the 4th edition.
i'm gonna buy another third edition...
i don't have any xmp-5744, but if i did, i have the accurate reloading manual and it is full of cast data for it already.

Rocky Raab
02-12-2012, 11:05 AM
In my own defense, I did say a few hundred, not a couple hundred. For you, however, I'll concede the point and offer the phrase "comparatively few shooters" in its stead.

btroj
02-12-2012, 11:09 AM
I found it to e a fair, objective review.

I find the manual to be an addition to, not a replacement of, the Lyman #3 manual. It has new bullets, new powders, new cartridges.

Thanks for the review Rocky.

RayinNH
02-12-2012, 11:55 AM
I've had the book about a year now. All of my shooting is with surplus powders for which there is no data, or powders that have been around for at least fifty years. The only data it has provided is for Trail Boss, the most unimpressive powder I have ever used. The cartridges that I load for have all been around for at least 75 years. Not much in it for my reloading tastes...Ray

captaint
02-12-2012, 01:00 PM
Thanks for the review Rocky. While having the Lyman 3d edition, I haven't yet decided if I need the 4th or not. Maybe later. enjoy Mike

Recluse
02-12-2012, 02:48 PM
Thanks for the review Rocky. While having the Lyman 3d edition, I haven't yet decided if I need the 4th or not. Maybe later. enjoy Mike

Agree.

Rocky, I read your review when I got my issue of Handloader via e-mail (I do the three-rag electronic subscription). I thought it was a very well-written, honest review--so much so, in fact, that I removed the 4th edition from my shopping cart at Midsouth because there wasn't really anything in the new edition I'd use or prefer over the 3rd edition. :)

I'll eventually get around to buying a 4th edition just to support casting and handloading publications, but like prs, it will probably end up gathering dust in the shop.

Almost every single one of my loads today--both cast and jacketed--as well as load development end up originating from my own notes and log books I've kept over the years.

If I ever buy a new caliber of firearm (ie 40 S&w *shudder*), then I'll probably flip through a few published manuals to look for a starting point, jot down a few notes, then put the books back to gather more dust.

:coffee:

462
02-12-2012, 04:03 PM
I've followed this topic, on its many threads, for over a year, and read Rocky's Handloader review, when it came out. I decided that spending the $20 on casting and reloading equipment and supplies made more sense, than buying the handbook.

A few weeks ago, I changed my mind and added it to an order. I've read it twice, except the metallurgy chapter, as it goes beyond what my PhD. from the School of Advanced Hard Knocks allows me to comprehend -- not so with the metallurgy chapter in the 3rd edition, by Dennis Marshall.

Mike Venterino's articles are well written, however, I don't think a Booliter with a modicum of experience will gain much, by them

I may refer to it, occasionally, but its absence would not be missed. I can't say the same about the 3rd edition, though.

41 mag fan
02-12-2012, 04:24 PM
I've got the 4th edition myself. Needless it is disappointing.
I've got the 3rd edition also, been several times, I've referred to both issues, and now the 4th edition is left on the shelf, while the 3rd still sees usage

Kind of makes me think of a comparison by what others post on Lyman molds.
Lyman molds over the last few yrs have slid in quality.....only stands so has their 4th edition manual.
Maybe a new replacement CEO or president of Lyman is needed to bring back some quality to the company.

Mal Paso
02-12-2012, 11:49 PM
I just looked for my 4th edition. Took a while, couldn't remember the last time I had it out.

I was disappointed with the 44 load data. All done in a 4" universal receiver with bullets sized .429 does Not relate to anything I do with a 6 gun.

From Ingot to Target: A Cast Bullet Guide for Handgunners

Better read. Unbelievable price.

Ford SD
02-16-2012, 11:27 AM
Ok
Small correction fixed below
I should have posted with the book on Front of me

Last night I was looking at Lyman cast book #4

All of the data for 357mag pg 186/187 on the rifle section &
All of the data for 357mag starting on pg 257 of the pistol section, for 100% of the powders used in the data, Lyman used MAGNUM Primers (CCI 550)

You have to read the test components used to figure it out --
Normal data (special) has a * to say this load uses magnum primer
(for only a few powders)

the (*) is what I have looked at for years -- in all the other reloading books

So read the test components on the first page of your reloading Data

Don't just look for the (*)

Don't know how many other calibers could be like that

Just a heads up:groner:

and I will try to post with data in front of me instead of going from memory

chboats
02-16-2012, 11:47 AM
I agree with what everyone is saying about the 4th edition. I have a question about the logic of some of the Start and Max loads listed. In a 308 using 2400 powder under the 311299 boolit the start load is 18gr and max is 24gr. In the 30-06 with same powder and same boolit, start is 15gr and max is 21gr. If a light load is a problem for a powder why would the 06 have a lighter start than the 308 and why is the max for the 06 lighter than the 308? The primers used are different but they wouldn't make THAT much difference. I don't under stand their logic.

Carl

Rocky Raab
02-16-2012, 12:29 PM
I had not noticed that, Ford. I'll have to check it out.

If they used different primers, chboats, perhaps the primer DID make that much difference.

runfiverun
02-16-2012, 01:36 PM
especially if they were using mag primers there too.....

Mal Paso
02-16-2012, 02:08 PM
Last night I was looking at Lyman cast book #4

All of the data for 357mag/ 44 mag rifle/pistol for 100% of the powders used in the data
Lyman used MAGNUM Primers

You have to read the test components used to figure it out --
Normal data (special) has a * to say this load uses magnum primer
(for only a few powders)

the (*) is what I have looked at for years -- in all the other reloading books

So read the test components on the first page of your reloading Data

Don't just look for the (*)

Don't know how many other calibers could be like that

Just a heads up:groner:

Actually if you look close they only used Mag Primers on the H110/296 loads.

They used the * to denote Gas Check on the first page. After that * means Mag Primer when next to the Powder.

Still doesn't excuse their testing. Out of a sealed test barrel they were getting over 100 fps Less than I get with the same barrel revolver.

beagle
02-16-2012, 03:30 PM
Rocky,

I have the 4th edition and the third, second and first. All of them have much to offer and I'll not trash any of them.

I did appreciate the use of updated powders and Mike did a heck of a job on the BP cartridges as that's his thing and I expected that.

Having been in this hobby now for 50 years, I just don't think that it is possible to assemble a reloading manual that will please everyone. The task and variables are just too great and the cost would be prohibitive....plus it would involve a set of manuals that would resemble a set of encyclopedias.

Sure there are problems with #4 but it gives us a lot more data on newer cartridges with newer powders than has been available and I think Mike did a good job on it.

That's why we have cast boolit sites....to upgrade our casting and shooting knowledge before the books get out./beagle

Rocky Raab
02-16-2012, 04:08 PM
Well said, beagle.

Ford SD
02-16-2012, 04:57 PM
Ok
Small correction fixed below
I should have posted with the book on Front of me

Last night I was looking at Lyman cast book #4

All of the data for 357mag pg 186/187 on the rifle section &
All of the data for 357mag starting on pg 257 of the pistol section, for 100% of the powders used in the data, Lyman used MAGNUM Primers (CCI 550)

You have to read the test components used to figure it out --
Normal data (special) has a * to say this load uses magnum primer
(for only a few powders)

the (*) is what I have looked at for years -- in all the other reloading books

So read the test components on the first page of your reloading Data

Don't just look for the (*)

Don't know how many other calibers could be like that

Just a heads up

35remington
02-16-2012, 08:13 PM
I'll reprise what I said earlier......in terms of accurate load data; that is, data that is likely to result in a load that shoots well, the 4th is a considerable improvement over the 3rd for a great many calibers.

Many fine cast bullet shooting cartridges are listed with very fast shotgun type powders and nothing else in the 3rd edition, and these powders often leave accuracy on the table, with the upper loads listed often being near useless in terms of good results. Oftentimes the very lowest loads, or even lower loads than the listings must be used for accuracy to occur with the very fast powders. To completely ignore such powders as RL 7, the 4198's, 4227, etc. was and is a serious omission.

Any higher speeds are not attainable with accuracy with the powders used in the #3 for many cartridges. Some suggestions border on the ridiculous. The "shotgun powders only" philosophy for the #3 was and is its greatest failing.

Take, for example, the treatment of my favored 25-20 WCF, 257 Roberts, and 22 Hornet. In the #3 all were shotgun powders only, and few loads were of any real utility.

The 4th only listed the 85 RCBS CM in the 25-20, (to my surprise, being a Lyman manual) but several good candidate powders are presented, all of which have potential in my own comparable results. Since this is a popular plainbase mould for this caliber, among very few offered for the 25-20, its inclusion was actually a great service.

Page through the two manuals. The improvement in terms of powders that work, compared to those loadings that just go bang, is substantial in many instances.

Thank goodness we weren't saddled with powders like Unique, Red Dot, Green Dot, 700X, PB, etc. and nothing else for many calibers like the #3 inflicts on us. Look up data for the 22 Hornet, 25-20, 218 Bee, 257 Roberts, 6.5 Swede, 280, 32-20, 32-40, 38-55, and others in the #3.

For loads likely to produce better results, I'd take the #4 over the #3, on average, if I were to have only one.