Reloading Manuals

[jim4065]

I have the Reloaders Reference program and several older manuals (such as Metallic Cartridge Reloading, Pet Loads, both Lee's, and some bullet makers manuals (Nosler, Sierra, etc.). The problem is that they're all out of date to a greater or lesser degree.

If you were going to buy three new manuals to use in addition to Reloaders Reference, which would you get to cover all metallic reloading using today's powders for both cast and condums? If you could only have one which would it be? Hate to spend the money but I'm realizing that my books are mostly outdated. :-?

[dromia]

The latest:

Lyman

Hodgdon

Speer

Hornady

Only one then the Lyman.

[Down South]

I'd vote Lyman too. Plus Lyman has load data for all of their booilt moulds.

[MT Gianni]

Dromia hit it on the head. I would swap the last two depending on who's bullets you shoot more of.

[Willbird]

I'd go
Lyman
Hogdon
Lee

Plus you can go online and find a lot of data at the powder mfg. webpage

[1hole]

Today's "conventional wisdom" says the powder companies have changed their burn rates over the years. Also that we can get better info from the makers of our bullets or our powders. And that lawyers specifiy more conservative loads today. I say, balooney, or at least something close to that.

Powder is organic chemistry. The makers have never been able to exactly duplicate any two consecutive lots of powder but it's not from a lack of trying. They specify, for themselves, just how much latitude in burn rate any lot can have and still qualify as "cannister powder" to be used for retail sales. Fact is, even that effort has never been more than partially successful so it's understandable that the various loading maual maker's results are somewhat different, even between editions by the same maker.

The manual makers also use different firearms than ours. It is only a happy accident if our weapons actually give the same results as theirs! Their barrels burn out too. They can't even be expected to duplicate the same data with changing barrels so data differences aren't due to lawyers at all. I don't believe any manual makers would bother to provide less than the very best data they can, no matter what powder or bullets were made by the parent company. Saying differently makes no more sense than the common idea that a firearm or ammo maker will deliberately provide inferior products to Walmart and that's just not true. After all it's THE MAKER'S NAME on the items, and their reputation on the line! Ditto any manual maker. Sure, they will feature their own product line, but they aren't likely to publish erroneous data on competitors products! That practice would only end up biting them in their own butts.

I buy new loding manuals for one reason; to get data on NEW cartridges and powders. Not for"changed" old powders or even new bullets. I follow the addage of "starting low...", etc, etc, and find that path accomidates ANY component differences quite well.

Lyman is always my choice of new books because they give the widest range of data.

[EMC45]

Lyman, Speer, Lee. In that order of course.

[bcarver]

some may not agree with me but old info is good if you are using old bullets,powder and chamberings.
My manuals are Hornady, lyman, nosler and speer. Listed in order of use.
I check all before working up a load. I bought Nosler when I shot Nosler bullets.

Manuals are only starting points anyway.

[shotman]

Lyman IS no 1 dont get a bullet or powder company one, they will not give recipes for other companys. Lee is ok but Lyman is 100% better

[atr]

my manuals are Lyman, Speer and Sierra,,,old Ideal and very old Lyman....I have found that even my 1960's vintage Speer manuals still work just fine....the old Ideal and Lyman manuals are for cast.....
I think several manuals (so you can compare) are much better than just one...
my vote
Lyman
Speer
Sierra

[mike in co]

buy a program......quickload....

they load a ton of data, lots of variable. tuneable powder....me thinks one could add a mil surplus powder if you knew how it compared to known data.

everyones bullets, lots of cast, you can add case data from your lots of brass.

yes you have to pay for updates, but its cheaper than the next reloading manual...

mike in co

[Doc Highwall]

One thing I have learned is do not get rid of your old loading manuals. Years ago I was not interested in the 38-55 and the newer manuals did not have loading data for it, and when it became more popular like in cowboy action shooting it was nice to know that I had the old manuals to research the data for my 1885 in 38-55 especially the old cast boolit manuals by Lyman and the mould numbers. I have one of the group buy moulds like 359430 coming I will be able to look up loads for this 200 grain boolit for my Marlin 1894 Cowboy in 38 spl with some luck.

[MT Gianni]

Accurate manuals give cast loads also.

[jim4065]

Thank you, one and all. I'll put the new Lyman manual on my next order.

[Bret4207]

How about the "wouldn't buy" category?! First one I wouldn't buy is "Any Shot You Want" from A-Square I believe. Complete waste of money.

[dromia]

I have mixed feelings about the Lee, an interesting read but a very specific almost personal approach which doesn't quite sit right with me in a general book.

[94Doug]

I'd also buy a bunch of older Lyman/Ideal manuals..... the reloading data may be dated, but the other information in them is timeless. And they still are cheap.

[ddeaton]

Is the Lyman pistol manual worth having, or does the standard reloading manual cover this? I have neither yet and plan to get one.

[bullshot]

I'm a sucker for manuals. I buy most of them. I will admit I tend to use Lyman's as the go to manual. I found that doing some comparison between the manuals should open ones eyes. May loads listed as Max in one manual is somewhere near starting in others. I find that Lyman's manual is not as conservative as others. That being said I also am a start low and work up reloader. Having an accumulation of older manuals , as Doc Highwall says, good resource for cartridges that fall from grace and now you own a firearm in one of those calibers.

[shotman]

dromia I bought a pair of Lees I thought Herters was out of business till I looked Lees

[jim4065]

I have mixed feelings about the Lee, an interesting read but a very specific almost personal approach which doesn't quite sit right with me in a general book.

Yes. It's as if we consider (the best) reference books to be both infallible and impersonal - untouched by human hands as it were. Richard Lee's book is disturbing because it shouts the superiority of his products (and therefore - himself). If portions are the words of a charlatan, can we accept the data at face value?

Does the Bible sell crosses?

[primersp]

hello
i have see on e-bay a rcbs reloding for cast bullet at 49 us and is not finish
this manual is collector?
i have one and i prefer the lyman
is somebody use a program name loadtech?
it's seem the compagny is out business
regards

[Char-Gar]

I want to echo 1hole in regards to old loading data. Powder does vary, from lot to lot and old powder does not vary that much from new powder does from lot to lot. Of course, that does not include old powders that have been reformulated like 2400.

I have every Ideal/Lyman manual from 1930 to date and would not be without them.

[jcwit]

Regarding Richard Lee, and the Lee Reloading Manual, look at it this way. Have you ever walked into Micky "D's" and see signs telling you how much better Burger King is.

Think about it.

[Heavy lead]

I have and use the most in this order:Nosler, Barnes, Accurate Arms, Speer, Hornady. At least as much I use the Alliant, Hodgdon, and Western/Accurate Arms websites. Also I have received great service by contacting Western about some specific loads. Also I have a lot of Handloader magazines that are tabbed and in with reloading manuals. I get data from all over, analyze it a lot, then make sure all makes sense up stairs before I do anything. I have found some manuals to be way wrong, but I realize the conditions were also way different. With all that said, in this new day of the internet, I cannot see myself buying another manual. There are too many more up to date sources now, seems like as soon as you buy one it is already out of date.

[jim4065]

Regarding Richard Lee, and the Lee Reloading Manual, look at it this way. Have you ever walked into Micky "D's" and see signs telling you how much better Burger King is.

Think about it.

Hmmm. Not sure if fast-food restaurants are analogous to reloading manuals. However, the Nosler manual certainly touts their bullets. Maybe it's just the personal bragging which seems inappropriate.

Don't misinterpret this - I'm a fan of Lee products, including his loading manuals (and I have both first and second editions). When he writes it sometimes sets my teeth on edge - but no more than the relentless typeface used by Microsoft Word in the manuals. (At least it's not all caps.) :killingpc

[wiljen]

How about the "wouldn't buy" category?!

First Edition Barnes Manual was right up there in the don't bother category. Any edition of COTW as a reloading manual - great reference - lousy reloading data.

[jcwit]

Was just using fast food as an example as I'm sure you realize. lol
About any thing can be used cars, appliances, ect., ect.
No one thinks or claims the comptition is better..

[Heavy lead]

The Barnes manuals don't get you anything at all unless you use their bullets. I do and find them to be great manuals. But if you never use them, it would be a complete waste of money.

[jim4065]

Wouldn't Buy (again) Category

"Complete Reloading Guide" by John and Robert Traister.

[rmb721]

I use Lyman and Speer. I also have Hornady, Sierra, and Nosler.

I have the Lyman's from #44 to #48. I especially like #46 for the mould reference tables and shellholder chart.

I have all the Speer's up to #13.
#2 and #4 are wildcat caliber manuals and are hard to find.

[hiram1]

Hodgdon

Speer

Hornady
are good ones

[dromia]

Wow this is an old thread, I do hope Jim has got himself sorted with a good manual by now. :D

Got to add the Lyman 4th edition Cast Bullet Manual now though, even has other manufacturers moulds in it.

[MikeS]

I have a few older Lyman manuals, as well as the first Lee manual. I find that Lyman touts their stuff just as much as Lee does his. Another thing, At least in the first edition, I found that Lee's book read more like a book, and less like a manual in the first section. In the second section, the actual reloading data I didn't like at all, I found it hard to follow, the Lyman data is much better organized IMHO. As for Lee saying how great his stuff it, I would hope he feels that way about it, I mean if he said something like "We make this O style press, I don't like it, but customers asked for it, so we made one, but the RCBS one is really better" that would turn me off to his stuff even more! I find that for the most part Lee's stuff is pretty well though out, although sometimes the execution isn't the best.

I have some Lee equipment, I also have Lyman, and RCBS. I use what works for me, and if that means mixing & matching, so be it.

[cajun shooter]

I have always purchased the Lyman manuals first. That includes all that they print such as the Cast Bullet Catalog and BP books. I then have the Speer Manuals from #1 to #14. There is one Speer that has a out of whack 357 magnum load with a powder I can't recall. Just compare any loads with others when looking to change. I believe in one idiot load getting through the safety officers but not two or three.

[Wayne Smith]

My first manual was Serria since they were just up the road from me in southern California. Lee touts his stuff, so does anyone else, but he has done no - that's 0 - testing of any loads. All the bullet and powder companies do their own testing. I'd rather go to the horse's mouth. For cast loads the Lyman manuals aren't beat yet.