LoadData, opinions please.

[15meter]

Bought a year's worth of Load Data, doubt I'll renew, not enough cast boolit data and the search function is not as accurate as I would expect it to be in this day and age.

When I chose lead as a parameter and search a particular cartridge and it returns that there are no lead bullet loads then I stumble across multiple lead loads when manually going through the different files, that tells me their relational database isn't as good as it should be.


Are you happy with it? Are you getting enough out of it to justify(for your use) the cost?

Opinions and comments please.

[Nueces]

I think the data there is just reprints of magazine articles from Rifle and Handloader, tables only, no prose. You are right, there is no real data base underlying it. The only way I have found cast loads is to do as you did and search everything. But I keep it anyway. Dunno, I sorta like it.

[Markopolo]

i have subscribed to them before, and am currently again. there have been many changes over the years... i am pretty used to it.

[ddixie884]

I have never subscribed as it seems like a lot of money for a few loads that can't be found either on line or in books...........

[sharps4590]

I subscribed once. I doubt I will again for the reasons ddixie and 15 meter mentioned. That and I can extrapolate a load if I find another obsolete cartridge I want to work with. The one cartridge I joined for I had already calculated more loads than they showed. I was hoping for something more concrete from them. Ha...

[georgerkahn]

"Back in the day" of Ken Waters (my forever mentor!!!), Mike Zemany, and a few others -- Handloader magazine was almost revered! Their concept of putting all the magazines on CDs for sale was (imho) paralleled with similar using load data published in paper issues. I have subscribed to LoadData -- still do :( -- but do not plan on renewal.
I have found AmmoGuide.com to be much more user friendly to me, as well as providing many, many more loads. Hence, this has become my major on-line resource.
I have both the original one-volume with supplements as well as the two-volume editions of Ken Waters Pet Loads which pretty much has all the data I need to load the 28 or so calibres I play with.
An added thought: I became most happy with a loading of x grains of y powder pushing z bullet. For what would I require further? (As an explain comment ;) -- I'm toooo old to start buying new powders and have too much $$$ tied up in my wee mould collection to buy and try more... IF, on the other hand, I was in my 30's (or younger) I'd surely might look at it differently?)
geo

[hporter]

I have subscribed for years, and will continue to do so.

Although I have a dozen reloading manuals on the bookshelf above my computer in my reloading room, I go to loaddata first for a preliminary look at loads for the bullet weight and powder I want to use.

I am not sure about the comments on their relational database, because it works just fine. The only issue I have run into is that you have to use the correct name for a cartridge or powder in order to filter by it. For example if you put in 300 BO, instead of 300 Blackout, you will get no hits. If you put in 300 Black Out, you will get no hits. The cartridge is listed as 300 Blackout in their caliber database table and that name must match. But if you put just 308 in the search box, it will pull all loads with 308 in the name such as 308 Norma Magnum and 308 Marlin Express to name a couple.

The same goes for powders. If you want loads for Alliant Reloader 7 and type "Reloader 7" in the powder search box, you will get no hits. It is in their powder table as RL-7. This is not a big deal if you use loaddata on a regular basis, as you quickly learn these quirks. You can also filter by powder manufacturer, and select Alliant, which will pull all the loads using an Alliant brand powder. You can then see how they list the powders, and then go back and type RL-7 in the search box to find only Reloader 7 loads.

The cast vs jacketed filter is fairly new. I imagine it will take a while to go back through the load tables to add a field for bullet type. But I already find value in selecting the cast bullet filter.

The loads in the database come from Handloader magazine, Rifle Magazine, Pet Loads, but also Speer, Hornady and other reloading manuals too. If I were just starting out reloading and had no manuals yet, subscribing to this website would give me access to most of the well established manuals as well as other data found in Wolf Publications. I also like the fact they cite which Handloader or Rifle Issue the data comes from, as I have a lot of back issues of both those magazines and I enjoy reading the whole article for the load data, especially if it came from Brian Pearce.

Another benefit (to me) is that I can subscribe to Handloader, Rifle, and Black Powder Cartridge electronic versions for $25 a year for all of them. I was getting tired of only finding one or two articles of interest in Handloader and Rifle, so I let my subscriptions lapse. But now for $25 a year, I can read all of them each month, and also access past issues - which is very useful for looking up the articles linked to the load data you just pulled up.

If it sounds like I am a fanboy, yes I am. So many people are spending $30 now for 100 primers, it almost seems silly to say that $35 a year for the information found in loaddata is expensive. I know we all must live within our means, and I respect that. But I just don't think that for the value it contains, it is over priced. Especially when you can print out the load sheets, and stick them in a 3 ring binder so you have a permanent copy of the data you used.

BTW - you can go to the website and search for loads to check out the interface without subscribing. It will pull everything that matches your query, but it won't show you the powder charge information without subscribing. If you are curious, go to the website and type 38 special into the caliber box and you will see very quickly the amount of load data available, and more importantly the variety of places where it comes from (powder manufacturers, bullet manufacturers, reloading manuals, magazine articles).

As always, I pull my trusty Lyman Cast Bullet manuals down and thumb through them to double check whatever load I decide on as a safety check. Just as in all published data, there can be mistakes and safe practices must be followed.

[Daekar]

I am subbed and I will continue to do so for at least a few more years. I like to try different things frequently and I value the ability to quickly get data that will affirm or discourage my latest harebrained scheme.

[oldsalt444]

Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? Lots of free load data out there, plus I've got a big stack of loading manuals dating all the way back to the 1960's.

[farmerjim]

Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? Lots of free load data out there, plus I've got a big stack of loading manuals dating all the way back to the 1960's.

Me too. I have manuals back to the 60's when I started reloading and about 15 off the internet. Bills great load may or may not work in my gun. [I]'ll have to find it myself with the manuals as a guide.

I have 21 Gb of load data on my computer in addition to my paper manuals.

[beefyz]

I had them for 2 years basically because i had started reloading for 3-4 cartridges new to me. It gave me a quick starting point; showed me what others may have been using with success. But eventually other sources provided all the data i would ever need.
100% agree " I became most happy with a loading of x grains of y powder pushing z bullet. For what would I require further? (As an explain comment -- I'm toooo old to start buying new powders and have too much $$$ tied up already" +1