Internet load data quality? Which sources do you use and why do you trust them?

[bearcove]

Posted a question about Hornadys new manual as to content. A poster said he uses Load data .com. I have been there and other sights that have data from many sources. The answer seems fine in my gun no excessive pressure signs. This may have changed, but I think maybe not.

Most folks seem to look at the case head to determine pressure signs. The primer flattening, Imprinting of ejector notch or other marking, this is a relative measure of pressure that may only apply to that gun and the headspacing of the reload in that gun. The most common cause of a flattened primer is excessive headspace, common with factory ammo loaded to work in any gun chambered for it. It is caused by the case setting back against the bolt face.

Measuring case head expansion will give more info as the powder charge is increased and you approach max effective pressure you will have a reduction in velocity gain. This is better I think, but only applies to your gun.

But what is the actual pressure? Eliminating the safety factor by overloading would seem to make a mistake worse.

I started loading for wildcats in the 80's but wonder about some of the data sources available now, What do you think?

Rod

[HangFireW8]

Case head expansion method requires indexed measurements on NEW cases with a 10,000th micrometer. Few are equipped or able to do it properly.

Primer method works fine in bolt action rifles if the cases are first sized to minimum headspace AND a load ladder workup is used. I hear what your saying about the pitfalls but they apply to loose fitting cartridges and loose lockup rifles.

I cross reference all loads against trusted sources with similar weight and type loads... Then I still do a load ladder workup if it is new territory. Only exception is the few "do not reduce" magnum loads.

[wddodge]

I use load data from the powder mfg compared to the data from the projectile mfg and load from there. While I find load data found in forums to be interesting reading, that is all it is...... interesting reading. I can't remember one time that I've loaded a round that didn't come from a powder or bullet mfg website or manual.

Denny

[bearcove]

I mainly use data from Hogden for stuff like my 375 ruger, just starting on it, but wish they had IMR 4198 data. Its their powder and would be a good application, I think. They make it and the old load manuals like speer show reduced loads with it. Will start with 4895 cause I feel safe in a bottle neck case at the 50 gr ballpark in it for a reduced load. But I'm working from a comfortable spot not the edge. I'll have to brush up on the load ladder and try it. My days of pushing the edge have passed me by.

I got my 375 ruger so I could drop 100 fps or so below the min loads and find a sweet spot that was pushing hard with my 35 whelen. I quess i'm counter trend. The guys that review the 375 ruger on the blogs say its crazy to buy a 20 inch 375 ruger because you lose 150 fps. I figure I can shoot a 270-300 gr bullet 200fps faster than my 22 in 35 whelen. They want 3 inches less drop at 300 yrds.

I'm right they are wrong for me. But it all goes back to load data, everyone wants to make the 375 Ruger FASTER than the H&H but I don't want to do it always, thus alternative data sources.

I know what I'm doing and wonder if other people do.

[bearcove]

Case head expansion method requires indexed measurements on NEW cases with a 10,000th micrometer. Few are equipped or able to do it properly.

Primer method works fine in bolt action rifles if the cases are first sized to minimum headspace AND a load ladder workup is used. I hear what your saying about the pitfalls but they apply to loose fitting cartridges and loose lockup rifles.

I cross reference all loads against trusted sources with similar weight and type loads... Then I still do a load ladder workup if it is new territory. Only exception is the few "do not reduce" magnum loads.

The tools are cheap but ability is learned.

[dragon813gt]

Only data from a manufacturer. I don't use data from random people. I'd rather go it alone w/ Quickload and a chronograph. While I don't have the equipment to measure pressure. I've found Quickload predictions for velocity to be spot on as long as I enter all the information correctly.

I have my grandfather's notebooks and he used a lot of surplus powder. He taught me how to work up a load of an unknown powder so any of the canister powders are easy.

[EDG]

The only thing that protects you from a typo is data from several trusted sources.
Using data from any single source without a sanity check is foolish.

Try to find trusted data from at least 5 sources and toss the highs and lows out.

Can't find that much data? Then you are rolling the dice.

[kfarm]

I use every bit of info I can get. If I'm starting out with a new load I'll research the Internet, look at powder and bullet mfg then run it thru quickload. Then I'll start a tad low. I don't think there is anything wrong with posted loads if you use it wisely along with other info. I'd never just take someone's data and run with it. No need to reinvent load data but with all these new powders coming out well never be done.
Wanted to add since I only shoot mostly old guns I don't hotrod them anyway. My hot loads are pretty mild for most.

[jmorris]

Even before the internet existed I didn't rely on a single source for my load data. I certainly would not rely on a single source now. You can search the largest library in the history of mankind faster than you can set your dies up. No reason to rely on a single source.

[Ole Joe Clarke]

Posted a question about Hornadys new manual as to content. A poster said he uses Load data .com. I have been there and other sights that have data from many sources. The answer seems fine in my gun no excessive pressure signs. This may have changed, but I think maybe not.

Most folks seem to look at the case head to determine pressure signs. The primer flattening, Imprinting of ejector notch or other marking, this is a relative measure of pressure that may only apply to that gun and the headspacing of the reload in that gun. The most common cause of a flattened primer is excessive headspace, common with factory ammo loaded to work in any gun chambered for it. It is caused by the case setting back against the bolt face.

Measuring case head expansion will give more info as the powder charge is increased and you approach max effective pressure you will have a reduction in velocity gain. This is better I think, but only applies to your gun.

But what is the actual pressure? Eliminating the safety factor by overloading would seem to make a mistake worse.

I started loading for wildcats in the 80's but wonder about some of the data sources available now, What do you think?

Rod

How is a flattened primer caused by excessive head space?

[pworley1]

I have found the data from Castpics here to be very useful.

[bearcove]

A case is pushed forward by the firing pin. If it not pushed too far the firing pin will set off primer. Then the pressure will set the case back to the bolt face. This movement will flatten the primer and the case head. It can also show other pressure signs such as an ejector cutout. Usually just a flat primer.

[bearcove]

First example of this for me was making 357 Herrett brass, I was getting misfires and the ones that fired had flattened primers. Oversized and the shoulder was set back. The rim was thinner than the cut in the barrel and the gap between the barrel and breach, they were moving from the primer being striked by the firing pin. Then set back against the breach. Fireform loads giving high pressure signs, a flattened primer.

[HangFireW8]

Bearcove covered it. The only thing I would add is that a true overpressure will erase the pin indent or even make it an outie.

[bearcove]

Go to Mike Bellms web sight I wish it was there 35 yrs ago. Very good explanation of what headspace really is. I made it work but didn't know why.

[bearcove]

I guess the point is if you have properly headspaced ammo and you are getting extruded primers and imprints of extractor cutouts these are signs of being WAY over pressure not just a little.

[David2011]

A case is pushed forward by the firing pin. If it not pushed too far the firing pin will set off primer. Then the pressure will set the case back to the bolt face. This movement will flatten the primer and the case head. It can also show other pressure signs such as an ejector cutout. Usually just a flat primer.

Something else that often happens in your sequence is that the primer is pushed out of the case on ignition and pressed back into the case as pressure builds and the head of the cartridge is forced back against the breechface. It is my belief that is where the corners of the primer (actually, I guess it only has one corner) get squared up. I wish Felix was here to weigh in. . .

To answer the original question, my first piece of reloading equipment was a Sierra #2 manual that I still have. I now have many reloading manuals and a handful of manufacturers' handouts as well. On the Internet I go to powder manufacturers' websites and for lighter cast boolit loads I'll refer to Handloads.com.

For newer powders I'll spend hours reading what other people have done and then compare their loads to manufacturers' website data. Example: 8208XBR in the .22 Hornet. Not much out there yet but the minimum to maximum with the bullet I'm using is 11.0-12.0 grains.

David

[dromia]

I always start with data from sources that have pressure tested the loads, so for example Lyman pressure test Lee don't.

Loaddata.com lists these sources in a very accessible form so I use it quiet a bit.

[dragon813gt]

I always start with data from sources that have pressure tested the loads, so for example Lyman pressure test Lee don't.

Of course they don't. All they do is reprint that data, that's been pressure tested, from the other sources. You will get the powder and bullet manufacturer's load data all in one spot.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I believe ladies in a disreputable branch of the hospitality industry feel driven to persuade others to take the same route. I expect 99% of the loads published by private individuals on the internet are safe, but you are likely to use more than 100 loads in your lifetime.

The first step is to ask yourself whether this is a cartridge and a performance level for which you can't get a good load from a long-term commercial entity with a reputation to keep up. Usually the answer is that it is, so why not use it? If not, I would check whether my Loads From A Disk program couldn't produce a close match with pressure figures.

[smokeywolf]

Although I use internet sources, mostly powder and bullet manufacturers, I always cross check with my books and a ledger that Dad started back in the early 1950s.

[lancem]

I'm the loaddata.com guy. I just posted a reply in your other thread OP and saw this one and thought I'd add in here for those that might wonder about loaddata. Yes tested loads from the powder mfgs, bullet mfgs, petload data, and loads from Rifle and Handloader magazines. Also cast loads from Lyman, and other "known" sources, sort of like owning all of the manuals but having instant access to all of them at once listing the cartridge you are looking for. For example, if I search just 30-06 all of the load data for the 06 will come up separated by source. If I want I can refine the search by specifying the powder say IMR-4895, then only loads using that powder will be listed, or just by powder manufacture. The fun part is say you get a pound of ABC123 powder and you wonder if it might work in any of the cartridges you load, then you just search ABC123 for powder and every cartridge that has load data for that powder is listed with all of it's sourced load data. Without buying in you can see how it works by going to www.loaddata.com and in the search enter your cartridge, or go advanced and refine your search. You will see everything I can see as a subscriber except for the actual charge, that is blanked out. Check it out and see what you think, I find it very useful, and if you want 5-10 sources to compare a load it doesn't get any easier than this. $29.95 a year and I believe you get a 3 ring binder to keep your printed out loads in for the price. I just did a quick search on there for 30-06, I didn't want to count them all but at least 75 sources and probably 1000 loads.

[bearcove]

Sounds useful, The source is listed with the load?

[lancem]

Sounds useful, The source is listed with the load?


yes, check it out.

[mdi]

FWIW, when I first started looking at web reloading forums a bunch of years ago (mid-late '90s?) I happened on a post suggesting a load of Unique for a .357 Magnum. It was a full grain over max. The post stayed on line overnight before OP came back and deleted it and confessed to a typo. I wondered how many new reloaders could have tried that load? I had seen questionable loads on other sites/forums and that was enough for me. Now I pay no attention to any load data from any forum expert, range rat, gun counter clerk, pet loads website, or gun shop guru. I occasionally will look in at a powder manufacturer's website, but normally check the data against my published manuals.

I did join loaddata.com, but found no better data than was supplied in my manuals...


Once, long ago I asked on a forum about liability for posted load data, not only on that forum, but on pet load websites where anybody can post load data. Who checks the data? The prevailing answer was; no one is liable, and to check the data against that in a published manual. I shortcut all that baloney and just get my data from one of my 9 manuals. That worked 29 years ago and still works today (no, I'm not a dinosaur, just don't trust an anonymous screen name with my fingers and eyes)...

[Moonie]

I always cross reference data at handloads.com, my manuals and the manuals of powder manufacturers to come up with safe starting loads.

[DukeInFlorida]

Here's my two cents worth, as an NRA Metallic Cartridge Instructor, and as a somewhat self proclaimed expert on the subject of reloading, and the safety of load data.

1) The ONLY safe data is data which is scientifically developed in a test gun, and proven to be safe. Who provides THAT data? Typically only the powder and bullet manufacturers, in their published load data books. They have a vested interest in keeping you safe. Their insurance companies would quickly put them out of business if their load data wasn't tested and safe within SAAMI pressure specs. You can get up to date load data of the tested sort by purchasing the latest versions of the published load data books. I suggest that you have more than one to refer to. You'll see variances in load data from one book to the next, and you'll need some perspective when making your own load decisions for YOUR GUN, which might be similar or different than the test guns used to develop the published data. You can also visit current on-line load data , also published by the same testing companies. Hodgdon and Alliant, for examples, have up to date load data charts on line for free. And, all of it is tested and safe! Those companies also publish booklets with load data that you can get free for asking, or for a nominal postage charge. I always give my reloading students copies of those booklets in their student packages for reference. Finally, you can CALL any of the powder or bullet manufacturers and talk with their tech department. Give them the cartridge info, and the powder that you might like to use, and they will offer safe and tested advice on load data!! Or, they might tell you NOT to use that powder for a load, and explain why. Especially helpful if you have a bullet weight what doesn't show up in a published (tested) chart.
2) Everything else is "HERESAY"......... that is a legal term which most judges dismiss as not having a lot of value. Places like handloads.com are collections of load data info that people send in, HIGHY UNTESTED!! Subject to typing errors, or misplaced decimals. Or, typing IMR4895 when they meant IMR4198..... In other words, I would NEVER use any load data from such places as a starting point.... I'd always start with published data, previously referred to, and then see if among safe load data, someone has a load that they like for a particular gun, etc. However, and here's my disclaimer...... NEVER USE any HERESAY load data as a place for starting to load anything whatsoever....

I cant make it clear enough!!

[Harter66]

Well I have a couple of stories about cross checked from 3-5 sources and bad results . Blue Dot in a 357 comes to mind and having to drive start loaded cases out. Then there is the 6.8 Remington that sprayed brass around primers 2.0gr under max with no signs . Or the 22-250 with an actually low load that each shot showed progressively higher pressures for no reason. So much for the super varminter in a 98'.

Me I use a Hornady, Speer, Sierra and 3 Lyman books with Powder manufacturer net data . So far except as above it has kept me out of trouble.