Loading over max

I have found a few things with quickload.

First, what I'd do is load up a couple sets of a couple charge weights you know are under your max. Fire them through the chrono and carefully make sure everything is as uniform as possible (I.e angle through the chrono, both vertical and horizontal angle, are the same, same temperature and humidity, etc). Then take that brass, and you want to put it on your digital scale after brushing out three inside as best as you can. Write down the weight and tare the scale. Fill it with water until the meniscus the water is negative (I.e the centre of the water is lower than the top of the case, but the edges come right up to the edge). Write this weight. Empty the case but don't re tare the scale as you will surely have some water left in from this first time. Now fill it all the way up until three meniscus is the other way, but the edges are still even with the top of the case. Add these two weights together, divide by two, and subtract the original case weight when empty. Do this for at least five, preferably ten cases. Find the average and the standard deviation. Hopefully it isn't that big of an sd. Now you have the fired water capacity (you use the fire formed water capacity for high pressure cartridges).

You already should have the measurements for your cartridges, including seating depth. Plug all the variables in carefully, including temperature. See what the powder charge you used gives for velocity. Now adjust the burn rate (Ba) of the powder to give you the velocity you got for that round, or the average of that charge weight if they are somewhat close within a given charge weight. If you case volumes are not very uniform you could end up with widely different velocity for a given charge weight. If you have a compressed load, you want to move the weighting factor a few tenths (maybe .5 at the very most) towards a straight walked case weighting factor, do that first then adjust the start pressure, i use 8000 psi if I'm on the lands 4k if I'm not, then adjust the ba to get your velocity to match. Now you know what ba and weighting factor and start pressure to use for that batch of powder on that case when the bullet is seated at that level. Now you can trust the quickload numbers more, but still work up to them and watch for pressure signs
 
Dogleg said:
Funny, my rifles tend to shoot best at maximum or very near. If a load only shoots at the bottom end I'll scrap it and start over looking for a max/near max load that shoots. High pressure tends to give tighter spreads, and at distance starts making a big difference. Also hotter loads are less prone to going to crap everytime the sun goes behind a cloud.
Click to expand...

Now, that is odd. I don't reload a ton of ammo, but in almost every case I can think of, mid-range gave me the best accuracy. Same with black powder. As a matter of fact, BP gave me the most noticeable drop-off in accuracy.
 
Papaclaude said:
Now, that is odd. I don't reload a ton of ammo, but in almost every case I can think of, mid-range gave me the best accuracy. Same with black powder. As a matter of fact, BP gave me the most noticeable drop-off in accuracy.
Click to expand...


I do get great accuracy mid range too. Just the ES is a little to big for my liking.
 
Chamber pressure is more important than a number in a book. My 9.3x62 has a slightly oversize chamber which means that the powder charge must be increased slightly to achieve the same pressure and as such the same velocity. Too, some brass is thicker or thinner which can change the size of the chamber. Data has changed over the years, but I believe that to be due to better pressure testing practices and equipment and changes in powder (any of you old timers find a difference between the H4831 you buy today and the stuff you scooped out of a barrel into a paper bag?). Blaming corporate lawyers is a red herring.

That said, if you're not an extremely experienced loader using a chronograph and meticulous loading practices then you are well advised to stay within published data.
 
BigUglyMan said:
Chamber pressure is more important than a number in a book. My 9.3x62 has a slightly oversize chamber which means that the powder charge must be increased slightly to achieve the same pressure and as such the same velocity. Too, some brass is thicker or thinner which can change the size of the chamber. Data has changed over the years, but I believe that to be due to better pressure testing practices and equipment and changes in powder (any of you old timers find a difference between the H4831 you buy today and the stuff you scooped out of a barrel into a paper bag?). Blaming corporate lawyers is a red herring.

That said, if you're not an extremely experienced loader using a chronograph and meticulous loading practices then you are well advised to stay within published data.
Click to expand...

I think, personally, that there is a lot of merit to taking chrono data into it to. If i load up some rounds and every single cartridge is a hundred or hundred and fifty fps low, and i see zero pressure signs, then I would be measuring my fired brass water capacity. Then compare it to the saami minimum spec. If it is larger, then I know that I can get away with a little more powder without going over pressure. The bigger the chamber (bigger the water capacity of a fired case), the more powder it will take to get to the same speed.... incidentally, if the powder is a bit on the slower end and the chamber is right at or even slightly above max, sometimes you can get a bit higher velocity and be within pressure (think of AI cases.....or even compare the 22-250 to the 223....more powder capacity/more powder of the right burn rate, more velocity at only slightly higher pressure.

This last bit is clearly advanced, but the first part, i think anyone with a chrono and half a head full of brains can do that kind of thing. Check your velocity and compare to a few manuals, compare to quickload, if you are low on both, and see no pressure signs, and you have more room in the chamber, you can load it up a bit me, generally. I guess is still a bit advanced, and no doubt I'll get pooped on for saying it, but watch out for pressure signs (any of them) and load right up. The number in the books isn't just a magical number, above which thermonuclear war breaks out. Oddly, often nothing happens above max. The reason velocity can go down around max is that you are far away from the optimal barrel time/accuracy node. If you have room/pressure space to go further, you would certainly hit another accuracy node (but of course, you may not/likely won't actually have enough room to make it to the next one, not with a factory chamber)
 
Papaclaude said:
Now, that is odd. I don't reload a ton of ammo, but in almost every case I can think of, mid-range gave me the best accuracy. Same with black powder. As a matter of fact, BP gave me the most noticeable drop-off in accuracy.
Click to expand...

Do you judge your accuracy by short range or long? Something I've observed is that handloaders that agonize over 100 yard groups come up with conclusions like mild loads work better, weighing charges doesn't matter, premium brass doesn't help and velocity variation doesn't effect grouping. Well they might be right;................. at 100 yards. Often 100 yard accuracy is nothing more than a fortunate accident of an optimum barrel exit time.

Take things out to two or three hundred and watch those different loads swap places. Get to 500 and a lot of loads just aren't cutting it regardless of looking great at a range where a rifle barely needs sights.

Drifting slowly back to topic, powders tend to perform most consistently at the pressures that they were designed to work at.

Another thing that I've observed is that when a rifle really shows a preference for mild loads its because there is something wrong with it. Bedding and poor lug contact are frequent culprits.
 
I've loaded them over max. It depends on the age of the gun and knowing where to look for pressure signs. Lots of books were printed without knowing too much about Eastern European calibers and therefore kept the pressure down for liability reasons. Those that shoot Eastern European calibers might notice that ammunition made in East Euro is much hotter than American made ammo of the same caliber.

Climb slow and pay attention.
 
Dogleg said:
Funny, my rifles tend to shoot best at maximum or very near. If a load only shoots at the bottom end I'll scrap it and start over looking for a max/near max load that shoots. High pressure tends to give tighter spreads, and at distance starts making a big difference. Also hotter loads are less prone to going to crap everytime the sun goes behind a cloud.
Click to expand...

I haven't reloaded for many calibers but for the ones I have particularly the .243 it seems the harder I drive it the tighter it shoots....within reason. In fact I use a couple types of factory ammo as benchmarks comparing indicated box velocity and what I get on my chrony, then cross reference that with my loads. The indicated velocity on factory ammo is very very close to what I see on the chrony and it takes near max loads to get anywhere near that. I'm not trying to have the fastest loads out there but i really don't see the point of loading a caliber hundreds of fps below its potential unless it's for a specific reason, recoil sensitivity of a young/new shooter etc...
 
[QUOTE=BigUglyMan;. Data has changed over the years, but I believe that to be due to better pressure testing practices and equipment and changes in powder (any of you old timers find a difference between the H4831 you buy today and the stuff you scooped out of a barrel into a paper bag?). Blaming corporate lawyers is a red herring.

I'm the old timer you're looking for!
When Jack O'Connor figured the famous load of surplus H4831, then called, "4350 data powder," of 60 grains of the surplus powder in a 270 behind a 130 grain bullet, we all jumped on it. Jack didn't say to start out light, so we just managed to get 60 grains of the coarse powder into a case and forced a 130 grain bullet into the case and shot them. I also scooped the powder out of 50 pound kegs into paper bags and amazingly, I still have a couple of pounds of the original powder, once called 4350 data powder.
A lot of years later I chronographed the load and found my 270 gave the bullet just a little under 3100 fps, like Jack said it would go!
When Hodgdon's ran out of the original surplus powder and either made, or had made for them, a new version of it they stated that the same loading data could be used for the new, as was used for the old.
In August of 1991 I got around to checking the two powders. I loaded ten 270 cases with the same primers and bullets, five loaded with the old surplus powder and five loaded with the new Hodgdon's canister powder and shot them over a Oehler chronograph. Here are the results.

Those with surplus powder, average 3078 with a es of 33.
Those with the new powder, average 2960 with an es of 45.

Within the last 3 or 4 years I ran the same powder test, old surplus and new H4831, using a 243. The results were very similar to the old test shown above, but I can't, right now, find the printed results.
 
Quickload is a program created by people who rarely if ever fire any firearm. Most programmers don't shoot and are most assuredly not ballistics engineers.
Going over max is unsafe if the amount over is excessive. How much excessive is, is a complete unknown.
Manuals do vary. The data reflects the conditions on the day of the test only. However, data in manuals is NOT "lawyerfied" in any way, shape or form.
 
Since there has been considerable discussion on this thread about heavy or light loading for accuracy, I am posting a copy of a page from the book, The Accurate Rifle, by Warren Page, who was likely the best ever bench rest and long range shooter. Here is what he says about loading for long range.
 
Those with surplus powder, average 3078 with a es of 33.
Those with the new powder, average 2960 with an es of 45.
Click to expand...

I was clocking two nearly identical .270s the other day. Both are nearly new M70s with 22" barrels. The load was 60 grains of current H4831 and a 130. I get 200 fps second difference in speed just between the two rifles with identical loads. One does 3100 and the other 2900.
 
Dogleg said:
I was clocking two nearly identical .270s the other day. Both are nearly new M70s with 22" barrels. The load was 60 grains of current H4831 and a 130. I get 200 fps second difference in speed just between the two rifles with identical loads. One does 3100 and the other 2900.
Click to expand...

My test was the same rifle. Just shot both batches, one after the other, with some time between the two, to take assay that variable.
 
sunray said:
Quickload is a program created by people who rarely if ever fire any firearm. Most programmers don't shoot and are most assuredly not ballistics engineers.
Going over max is unsafe if the amount over is excessive. How much excessive is, is a complete unknown.
Manuals do vary. The data reflects the conditions on the day of the test only. However, data in manuals is NOT "lawyerfied" in any way, shape or form.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely wrong here. The guy who created quickload originally was certainly a shooter, and he certainly did test MANY of the powders. He sometimes was forced, due to it not being available, to go off of closed bomb test results and other results, and often he got a number of other shooters who could get a particular powder to carefully test them for him... quickload is incredibly useful, if you tame into account ALL of the variables. Just plugging it in using default data is a horrible idea, and if one does that then they most certainly could run into trouble.

But if you take your data, your experiences with YOUR lot of powder, your case volume and cartridge dimensions, and use it to figure out different loads, then you have a very reliable source. Is it perfect? No of course not. But it's damn good. If you compare loads it comes up with, you will often find them comparable to manuals, sometimes a bit hotter, sometimes a bit slower.... it's very likely your powder lot bring slightly different.

Don't knock it just cuz you haven't tried it, or don't want to. It isn't for everyone, but it certainly can help come up with a good load faster. Every time I've used it to predict what the most accurate load will be it was damn close. Every time I've done the same but taken my velocity data for that powder and used it for another bullet etc, it's been dead on with it's charge weight, velocity, and the load which is most accurate. Dead on for velocity meaning within about 30 fps.... I wouldn't call that coincidence.
 
Dogleg said:
I was clocking two nearly identical .270s the other day. Both are nearly new M70s with 22" barrels. The load was 60 grains of current H4831 and a 130. I get 200 fps second difference in speed just between the two rifles with identical loads. One does 3100 and the other 2900.
Click to expand...

Quite likely barrel rifling dimensions, chamber dimensions, and throat/lead are very different on those. Maybe check out the slow one, but if it is that low, you can very likely load it up a bit more (if you aren't seeing pressure signs, though you will likely see some flat primers with a 270) to reach the same velocity.

But this is exactly why working up a load is smart, and having exact measurements for quickload is imperative
 
krprice84 said:
Quite likely barrel rifling dimensions, chamber dimensions, and throat/lead are very different on those. Maybe check out the slow one, but if it is that low, you can very likely load it up a bit more (if you aren't seeing pressure signs, though you will likely see some flat primers with a 270) to reach the same velocity.

But this is exactly why working up a load is smart, and having exact measurements for quickload is imperative
Click to expand...

Oh, it'll be some difference in the barrel, but that's just the way it goes. Chambers can make a huge difference, but these two will chamber each others fired empties and both take a .004" over shell-holder so head space is very close. Same distance to the lands as near as I can tell. I did try bumping the slower one up a grain or two but it doesn't want it.

No big deal, one's 100 over the book and one's 100 under the book. It sort of averages out. Both hold MOA to 500, so I'm not even motivated to try a different powder, at least not now.

I'm just going to pull the trigger harder on the slow one. That should work.;)
 
Dogleg said:
Oh, it'll be some difference in the barrel, but that's just the way it goes. Chambers can make a huge difference, but these two will chamber each others fired empties and both take a .004" over shell-holder so head space is very close. Same distance to the lands as near as I can tell. I did try bumping the slower one up a grain or two but it doesn't want it.

No big deal, one's 100 over the book and one's 100 under the book. It sort of averages out. Both hold MOA to 500, so I'm not even motivated to try a different powder, at least not now.

I'm just going to pull the trigger harder on the slow one. That should work.;)
Click to expand...

Lol good plan.

Kind of odd that they are so close in chamber but so far away in velocity. Have you tried to measure the bore/groove diameter? Just would be more out of curiosity....

But yea, pulling the trigger a bit harder should do it for ya ;) just make sure you really jerk it when you do it....it's called "an accuracy jerk" (different than a circle jerk....) Lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom