cast boolit velocities,,,, 'how come?'

[mikeym1a]

a recent post I read elsewhere caused me to stop and check my loading for my .45acp. I did it right, it was under the max for the time the Speer #8 manual was printed. But, I noticed something else.... That manual lists a jacketed 200gr boolit with 7.7grs of Unique for 1000fps velocity, and also a 200gr cast semi-wadcutter with 6.0 grains of Unique for 840fps velocity. How come? Wouldn't the lead hold up just as well at 1000fps as it would at 830? I mean, the rifle rounds run much faster without lead stripping. What is it that I don't understand?

[220swiftfn]

IIRC, the Speer manual is the one with the notation under the lead loads "The loads listed are not necesarilly maximum loads, but are velocities most often used for target shooting" or somesuch.......



Dan

[mikeym1a]

IIRC, the Speer manual is the one with the notation under the lead loads "The loads listed are not necesarilly maximum loads, but are velocities most often used for target shooting" or somesuch.......

Dan

I never noticed that. Print must have been small. I used the jacketed load data, buy not the max, and never had any trouble with lead stripping, so, I was curious. Glad it was a simple thing. However, this does raise another question. My newer Speer manuals have a lower max charge of 7.4grs Unique, whereas the older manual listed 7.7grs max. Did the powder change, or did Speer become more conservative in their estimates?

[P.K.]

I never noticed that. Print must have been small. I used the jacketed load data, buy not the max, and never had any trouble with lead stripping, so, I was curious. Glad it was a simple thing. However, this does raise another question. My newer Speer manuals have a lower max charge of 7.4grs Unique, whereas the older manual listed 7.7grs max. Did the powder change, or did Speer become more conservative in their estimates?

I think it was fear of litigation. In some cases more testing from multiple fire arms can show better performance than a universal reciver but for the most part it prolly had to do with lawyers more than anything.

[Lloyd Smale]

because i doubt there using hand casted bullets. probably swadged commercial bullets made out of pure or near pure lead.

[chboats]

Most if not all of the manuals have lowered there max loads. Partly more conservative but mostly electronic measurements in place of crusher measurements.

Carl

[H.Callahan]

Wasn't it Speer #8 that was somewhat notorious for having some rather "energetic" loads, too?

[runfiverun]

it was either 7 or 8.
if I sold bullets and was doing a reloading manual.
I would make dang sure my product was the one highlighted by the best accuracy potential and highest velocity.
it wouldn't hurt if the profit margin on those same bullets were the highest either.

[mdi]

Most if not all of the manuals have lowered there max loads. Partly more conservative but mostly electronic measurements in place of crusher measurements.

Carl
Today's better testing equipment and a switch from CUP to PSI tend to show slightly lighter loads...

[Pilgrim]

Jacketed bullets offer more resistance than cast, so a max load for jacketed should be entirely safe with cast. There must be another reason for the lower max. Could be old data (jacketed) vs. new (cast), then the better measuring equip. could account for the difference, maybe.

[mikeym1a]

Today's better testing equipment and a switch from CUP to PSI tend to show slightly lighter loads...

That makes me curious. As long as the limits were respected, the old loads developed under 'cup' testing didn't cause good firearms to fail. If it was a 'safe' load under 'cup' testing, they why wouldn't it be a safe load under 'psi' testing? What prompted the shift? Sounds like lawyer stuff to me, but then, I'm a bit of a skeptic, have been told I'm not too bright (in less than polite terms) on several occasions.

[Gohon]

If it was a 'safe' load under 'cup' testing, they why wouldn't it be a safe load under 'psi' testing?

Doesn't higher than thought speed equal higher than thought pressure?

[res45]

because i doubt there using hand casted bullets. probably swadged commercial bullets made out of pure or near pure lead.

+1,Speer is testing with there own commercially mfg. swadged lead bullets which are very soft. Before I started casting my own I used to shoot there Speer 158 gr. SWC-HP and got good expansion at the lower velocity.

[Jim..47]

When I first started casting I looked at the loading tables and had the same questions in mind. I ended up shooting the J data for cast. That was for my Contender pistol with barrels: 44 Mag, 30-30, 45/70 Gov., and even .223. Never noticed a problem or any leading. The 44Mag with 245 gn. cast bullets loaded with 17 gn BlueDot is a real powerful load.

[1Shirt]

Lawyers!!!!!!! We live in a litigitous society-----unfortunately!
1Shirt!

[rintinglen]

Well, in part Lawyers, but better testing equipment and reformulated powders have changed the results. You want your loads not to exceed SAAMI specs, so that you are in compliance with the standards. Better, cheaper testing equipment allows for relatively fast data accumulation that is more accurate, if only because they can run longer tests to minimize random deviations.
Bottom line though, is the bottom line. What you don't want to do is hurt someone when a marginal firearm of Questionable manufacture gets used with a top end load. Bad for the customer base when you start blowing up client's guns, they stop buying your products and start suing you.