Northman999
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Southern Yukon
Fun.
Maybe don't trash your old reloading data just yet - I doubt your rifle suddenly changed what it can handle because the lawyers got to the bullet makers!!!
264wm vrs 7mm rem mag
- Thread starter brybenn
- Start date
Fun.
Maybe don't trash your old reloading data just yet - I doubt your rifle suddenly changed what it can handle because the lawyers got to the bullet makers!!!
Yep, I have been running 140 gr bullets out of several different 7X57s at over 2900 fps for over forty years, and still have all my fingers and ugly mug. Not absolutely certain, but IIRC there were few, if any, that developed loose primer pockets, and annealing cases meant some were loaded twenty times, and more.
I do know for certain that I never had a blown case in a 7X57.
Ted
I do know for certain that I never had a blown case in a 7X57.
Ted
Republic of Alberta
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- ,location, location
The hogdon data kinda sux but at least they list the pressure they tested to. Makes it easy to weed out the weak loads from the real ones.
Republic of Alberta
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- ,location, location
Lawyers arnt the only reason that loads are backed down. Enough is known now about the effects of cumulative metal fatigue to push company's into doing the responsible thing to keep peoples firearms in one piece.
Which brings up the question of what pressures- if any- were listed in the "old, pre lawyer" manuals? If there was no pressure listed, maybe the reason was that they didn't actually know!
Excellent point and even the old time gun writers had some degree of knowledge about it. They used to talk about how a "steady diet " of xyz load was bound to wear out a gun prematurely. Usually they were talking about revolvers and lever guns, but at least they acknowledged how hot loads can be cumulative.
beretta boy
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Orillia, Ontario
... and some writers like O'Connor sent his "hot" handloads off to the independent J.P. White Laboratories for pressure testing.
(Notwithstanding his iconic 60 gr. load, how he came to load 62 gr. of H-4831 ahead of 130 gr. bullets in his 270)
(Notwithstanding his iconic 60 gr. load, how he came to load 62 gr. of H-4831 ahead of 130 gr. bullets in his 270)
JOC was an intelligent man.
We bought the old surplus H4831 in 50 pound dense cardboard drums. I shot a few thousand of that 130g/62 gr load in several 270 rifles over the years. One Husqvarna had around 4000 rounds down the tube. It is the rifle I am carrying in the moose rack packing in the snow picture.
Still have one of those H4831 drums here. Use it to store my rolled-up topo maps. We were recycling before it was cool!
Ted
Still have one of those H4831 drums here. Use it to store my rolled-up topo maps. We were recycling before it was cool!
Ted
As a bowhunting/single shot aficionado... would that make me elegant???
BUT before you answer that... I can tell you this would be the first time that I will have been described as "elegant," particularly by a dude... even moreso, an old"ish," "backwoodsy" sorta dude...
I stand corrected.... Simplicity is elegance.
Ted
Two interesting points are raised by your post:
- why would more grains of H870 produce the same MV and pressure as fewer grains of Re33? It does not "compute", but Quickload is not without flaws, far from it - it's a software program, not pressure testing equipment; and
- I think that the "barrel life calculator", while a reasonable guide, has flaws, as it ignores other important factors. Powder "shape" is a major factor in barrel life - ball powders like H870 are known to be less "abrasive" than extruded like the others, particularly on the throat. The pressure of the load, but more importantly the MV of the bullets being fired, and the cadence of their firing, are major factors that are not (at least directly) accounted for in the formula.
When it comes to published data, I consider the action I am loading for... I will still "work up," but if I am loading for one of my No.1's I will start at the max load and go from there... would not try this in a lever gun or weaker bolt. In No.1's I always find my load somewhere "North" of the published max, especially the ridiculous Hornady manual... but I do not regurgitate this data online.
In strong actions I tend to do the same, but don't stray too far from published loads. For me, if I can't get five loadings before the primer pockets are too loose (regardless of the brand of brass), I back off 2-3 grs or more if that's where it's most accurate.
I think WRT H870 vs RL33 you can't just look at peak pressure. Also note I put % of capacity fill, not weight. The time spent at that peak pressure is also important. I believe that is why RL17 gives some extra jam vs H or IMR 4350.
The calculator is of course not perfect, but I suspect that it is better than just a guess.
