Pet loads, re-loading data base on CGN

[Overland]

Hmmm... How about all the details so that someone could duplicate the load? Rifles vary, so it would not necessarily be accurate in another rifle, but still a better reference than ballistics tables.
for instance, primer,powder, case, bullet, barrel length and twist, COL, ambient temperature, neck sized or full length, neck turned or not, etc. and so forth.
and maybe a photo of the fired primer for the worry warts.

 

[jethunter]

It would be interesting if we could get real reloaders to use it, but i have a feeling we'd end up with people just cut and pasting from other sources to make themselves look clever and increase their post count. Like 75% of the stuff on CGN, for that matter.

And regardless of our opinion of liberal government, self-responsibility, and nanny states, the site owner probably will need to consider the liaility question as well. Yeah it sucks but that's the world we live in.

Not a big deal if it doesn't happen because there's already many resources available online for anyone with an internet connection. It would be re-inventing the wheel in some respects.

I'd be willing to give it a go but really don't have high expectations. I've developed some pet loads for antique pistols that i'd share if the format was decent. In some respects i think the current system is better - i can decide whether to answer a loading query in the forums because that gives me the ability to present the data directly dependant on the situation.

 

[Kelly Timoffee]

I'm talking about the resourse to end all resources.

Have it seperate from our forum type layout.A totally new icon to click on.

Then have a search function within the chambering: 168 grain bullets in 30 cal, or Varget powder, or, 1 in 8" Twist, you get the idea.

Have it in a format that is easy to navigate and search, have cartridges listed in a easy to red style.

Maybe an option for adding photos of targets, and NO place for others to comment on it,only the author can edit or add.

Maybe if we get a software guru to allow the load ballictics to be tabled for comparison.

As for the ones worried about "blowing themselves up" and legalities and having others babysit, FoodTV.com has great cupcake recipies, BUT make sure you check the disclaimers about nut content first.

 

[jethunter]

I'm talking about the resourse to end all resources.

Have it seperate from our forum type layout.A totally new icon to click on.

Then have a search function within the chambering: 168 grain bullets in 30 cal, or Varget powder, or, 1 in 8" Twist, you get the idea.

Have it in a format that is easy to navigate and search, have cartridges listed in a easy to red style.

Maybe an option for adding photos of targets, and NO place for others to comment on it,only the author can edit or add.

Maybe if we get a software guru to allow the load ballictics to be tabled for comparison.

As for the ones worried about "blowing themselves up" and legalities and having others babysit, FoodTV.com has great cupcake recipies, BUT make sure you check the disclaimers about nut content first.

Don't worry, nobody is going to put their nuts in your cupcake.

If you want stand-alone, did you mean starting your own site? Cool, then you can actually have the authority to make rules. Down side is you'd need to put your money where your mouth is and pay for it. Should be easy with your plans and business accumen. I salute you, any goof can give advice but it takes balls to do it yourself. BTW, there's a bunch of stand-alone reloading sites already and I can't think of one that's actually worth a s**t. How would you recommend to make this one better?

 

[Kelly Timoffee]

With the input of other members here of course to make it better.Take an idea, present it to people, discuss it, debate the pro's and con's, maybe some of our members that are savy with software and design want to participate in the discussion. Also, I have presented some of my ideas, can we have yours?

When did I talk about a stand alone site???What I was refering to would be kind of like the CGN reloading data base, that is on this site but seperate from the regular forum format.

What do the big wheels here think?I am sure the idea has been tossed around before.

Don't worry, nobody is going to put their nuts in your cupcake.

If you want stand-alone, did you mean starting your own site? Cool, then you can actually have the authority to make rules. Down side is you'd need to put your money where your mouth is and pay for it. Should be easy with your plans and business accumen. I salute you, any goof can give advice but it takes balls to do it yourself. BTW, there's a bunch of stand-alone reloading sites already and I can't think of one that's actually worth a s**t. How would you recommend to make this one better?

 

[dead meat]

I think it would be very useful, with all the new components on the market now it`s tough to try them all. As for liability the first thing you should learn is to reduce any recipe and work up for your particular rifle.

 

[saskcop]

This is a great idea. Hunting handloads section. Precision handloads section. Cast handloads section, etc. There are a lot of guys on here that really know what they are doing with handloading and I would love to see some of their information.

 

[mmattockx]

If you want to trust your eyes, face and fingers to whatever is posted on this site be my guest. I didn't say it was a bad idea just that I wouldn't trust load data from anyone without checking against authorities more reliable than most people here.

And yeah, I actually do care about reloading and gun safety, promote it with vigour and will not apologize for it. Don't expect that to change.

Did I say that I wouldn't check loads? Or work carefully up to a maximum, looking for pressure signs all the way? No, I didn't. But you immediately go on about dangerous loads and how you want verification before you use it. Fine, but you can do your own verification, just like everyone else. We are all supposed to be responsible adults here, why don't we act like it and let everyone think for themselves?

If you don't want to use the resource, simply don't.Read your books, stick with them.

Exactly. Stop trying to tell everyone else what they should be doing and how to do it.

Here we go again. Trying to hold someone else responsible for our retardedness. Check it out with a manual. If it's out of wack, don't use it. DUH! Some people really do need a Liberal Gov't to look after, and think for them. Who's liable...YOU ARE!!!

Mark

 

[ATOM]

I think the idea is a great one. Hope it happens.

That said, to castigate those concerned about safety is both rude and foolish - it's a very valid question. For instance, how many newbies show up each week on the reloading section and how many of them would be drawn to the pet load section as a starting point, without the experience or background to properly judge what they were looking at? We had a thread on the forum recently from an apparently experienced member who had deliberately and knowingly been loading way over the recommended limits; now he was having to take his rifle to the gunsmith to see if the expert could open his bolt after the rifle had self-destructed. I'd hate to see some beginner taking this experienced loader's pet recipes as a starting point.

Neither is the liability issue as simple as some would like us to believe. A key point of law, as I understand it, is that you cannot surrender basic rights. All wavers and warnings can do is make it more difficult to collect. (I got that from a lawyer when our karate club was considering a waver new members would have to sign.)

Consider that you can no longer buy .38/40 ammo loaded to its potential. Why? Because despite all the warning labels you want, too many idiots were ignoring the DANGER! THIS AMMUNITION IS INTENDED FOR NEW FIREARMS IN GOOD CONDITION. DO NOT USE IT IN OLD REVOLVERS! warnings on every box and wrecking their old guns. Then suing. The ammo makers decided the corporate risk, notwithstanding the clear warnings, was too great.

The big component companies can publish loads because each one had been worked up and verified by company experts. That would not be the case here and it would be too easy for some cowboy to publish dangerous data. Worse (and this is for those dedicated to the conspiracy theory concept), how long before some bloody-minded little person deliberately posted something dangerous just to discredit the database and CGN in general?

Liability is a very important consideration.


Like I said, it's a great idea. It just needs to be approached with due caution.

 

[Andy]

You guys are really piling on Claybuster, when he simply stated that essentially only a fool would blindly trust any load data, much less on-line load data - I certainly wouldn't.

As for the data, what has been described is pretty much exactly what we can find on the "Reloaders Nest", to which I have contributed, and only use with great caution. Any CGN version would need to be distinctly different. The submission of targets or even claims of accuracy of any load is pointless, as BS is easy, and each gun is its own beast - there are no universally most accurate loads.

 

[Overland]

The submission of targets or even claims of accuracy of any load is pointless, as BS is easy, and each gun is its own beast - there are no universally most accurate loads.

On the contrary - note the wimpy loads published in America for the 7x57, compared to the European figures listed in Wikipedia. Factory ammunition is crap here.
I can't duplicate European loads, lacking their components, but I have done well by experimenting on my own, with the only help from the very few handloaders who have posted on the internet.

As for safety, and legal liability, note that the definition of an adult includes: "Accepts responsibility for the consequence of his own actions".

 

[jethunter]

You guys are really piling on Claybuster, when he simply stated that essentially only a fool would blindly trust any load data, much less on-line load data - I certainly wouldn't.

As for the data, what has been described is pretty much exactly what we can find on the "Reloaders Nest", to which I have contributed, and only use with great caution. Any CGN version would need to be distinctly different. The submission of targets or even claims of accuracy of any load is pointless, as BS is easy, and each gun is its own beast - there are no universally most accurate loads.

There we finally have an intelligent response.

 

[jethunter]

...As for safety, and legal liability, note that the definition of an adult includes: "Accepts responsibility for the consequence of his own actions".

That's a perfect example for this thread. You made that definition up yourself. You aren't actually quoting any reference but you used quotation marks to make it look like you did. BTW, lots of legal adults don't accept responsibility for their own actions - NDP and Liberal supporters, for example.

That's how easy it is to post incomplete, incorrect, or self-serving information on the internet, even when we mean well. I'm not saying your definition is entirely wrong, just that it is not entirely accurate.

Merriam - Webster Dictionary: adult
1 : fully developed and mature : grown-up
2 : of, relating to, intended for, or befitting adults <an adult approach to a problem>
3 : dealing in or with explicitly ###ual material <adult bookstores> <adult movies>
​

A lot of people still don't know the difference between truth and opinion and that's why i don't put much faith in any reloading data sharing website, which btw is an old idea and done to death for 10 years or better, and didn't work very well.

If this idea is going to fly it needs to address those problems, and i honestly don't see how to do that. Great idea, like world peace and free love, but harder to make into reality than it is to talk about it.

 

[Kelly Timoffee]

Boy, you can sure see who wants to give it a try and who just wants to ##### and moan for the sake of #####ing and moaning.

What I can't understand for the life of me, is someone come's here, gives everyone grief about the idea, then says they just go use another resource anyways and that this wouldn't work. They are using the other sites aren't they?Obviously they approve of somebody's idea.

Talk about stopping positive progress in the world.

Back on topic, what would it take to get this off the ground and flying???

 

[Eagleye]

Yes, let's get with the program. I think it's a great idea!! Eagleye.

 

[jethunter]

Boy, you can sure see who wants to give it a try and who just wants to ##### and moan for the sake of #####ing and moaning.

What I can't understand for the life of me, is someone come's here, gives everyone grief about the idea, then says they just go use another resource anyways and that this wouldn't work. They are using the other sites aren't they?Obviously they approve of somebody's idea.

Talk about stopping positive progress in the world.

Back on topic, what would it take to get this off the ground and flying???

So who is giving you grief? I said the other sites don't work and tried to explain why, and then I asked how we would make this one work. Not criticizing you, just wondering how you would go about it, so no reason to get all prissy about it. Perhaps we can get back to the "adult" part of the conversations?

There is more involved than pushing a button and making a new website appear. Here are some questions that need to be addressed.

As asked by Andy: how do we institute some reasonable way to assure a minimum standard of the data? Or can we live with whatever is posted, as in 100% user beware?

Does this proposed site need a set of guidelines? what guidelines? the first guideline i'd throw out for consideration is this:

Guideline suggestion: we are looking for accuracy, so posted data should not be hotter than loads published by recognised authorites ie: if Hodgdon says 30.0 gr of "blasterX" reloading powder is max for a specific load, then do we want to allow loads that are hotter than that to be posted? hint: not an easy question.

Another suggestion: there needs to be a way to proofread and correct mistakes in data. Like when a guy gets the decimal in the wrong place or makes some other obvious mistake. Correction either by user or by an administrator. Typing errors happen all the time and this is one place where accuracy counts. (no pun intended).

So that's a start. There's no way to make anything happen by agreeing it would be nice to have it - we need to have some concrete guidelines in place, even if the guidelines are "there are no fricking guidelines, enter at your own risk" . Because at some point somebody would need to approach Greentips with a concrete proposal and having a real plan in place will have a better chance of succeeding than not having some kind of a plan.

So take your cheerleading suits off, and put your thinking hats on. If this idea bears fruit it will be through thought and planning, not from jumping on a bandwagon.

 

[caperbound]

I like the idea as a guideline. I can consider what members suggest, compare to whatever paperback manuals I have, pick what is prudent and I'm comfortable with and go from there. Especially will come in handy when there is a brand "x" powder that may not be any of the most popular handloading manuals but you know many people use this brand "x" powder.

I agree you cannot trust what is on the net but as well, books may mislead someone too, but multiple resources will give the person a little bit more comfort. One example where I have differing info is for a 45 acp recipe, lee's max and min is the same where my lyman book's min is lee's max and lymans max is 2.4 gr more.

 

[Budweiser2]

I think it's a great idea. Any pet load that I have looked up. Is not gospel in my eyes. I cross reference it with all my books. When I am satisfied I have all the info. Will then start low and work up. Not everyones rifle is the same.
Use common sense!

 

[warrenb]

It should have been a poll!

I would have voted yes.

I like to see other's loads. Its amazing how many loads get confirmed by others. The commonality is comforting.

 

[Kelly Timoffee]

I am not here to make friction with others, just want the topic to stay the topic, not discussions about Liberals, and peoples definitions or interpretations of what adult behavior is.


The reason I am asking for suggestions is because I DON'T KNOW. I have an idea of what it maybe should contain.I know what I would want it to contain but that is why I started this, get as much input from members as possible.

Will it fly? I don't know, but how do you know unless you try.

Maybe it should have access only by application similar to the EE.

As for liabilities, nobody is going to storm into someones house and take your birthday away when someone else loads a hot load and injuries themselves, I haven't seen a publisher of a manual have this type of issue.Simple disclaimers put together by someone who knows how to word it would help.

Financial issues, I'd be willing to be the first to donate to it, would others do the same?

SO, the BIG question still remains, who would have to be approached to make the addition to the CGN forum to do this or to see if it was even possible.I know it isn't my site so the idea may hit the gutter before it even gets started.

So who is giving you grief? I said the other sites don't work and tried to explain why, and then I asked how we would make this one work. Not criticizing you, just wondering how you would go about it, so no reason to get all prissy about it. Perhaps we can get back to the "adult" part of the conversations?

There is more involved than pushing a button and making a new website appear. Here are some questions that need to be addressed.

As asked by Andy: how do we institute some reasonable way to assure a minimum standard of the data? Or can we live with whatever is posted, as in 100% user beware?

Does this proposed site need a set of guidelines? what guidelines? the first guideline i'd throw out for consideration is this:

Guideline suggestion: we are looking for accuracy, so posted data should not be hotter than loads published by recognised authorites ie: if Hodgdon says 30.0 gr of "blasterX" reloading powder is max for a specific load, then do we want to allow loads that are hotter than that to be posted? hint: not an easy question.

Another suggestion: there needs to be a way to proofread and correct mistakes in data. Like when a guy gets the decimal in the wrong place or makes some other obvious mistake. Correction either by user or by an administrator. Typing errors happen all the time and this is one place where accuracy counts. (no pun intended).

So that's a start. There's no way to make anything happen by agreeing it would be nice to have it - we need to have some concrete guidelines in place, even if the guidelines are "there are no fricking guidelines, enter at your own risk" . Because at some point somebody would need to approach Greentips with a concrete proposal and having a real plan in place will have a better chance of succeeding than not having some kind of a plan.

So take your cheerleading suits off, and put your thinking hats on. If this idea bears fruit it will be through thought and planning, not from jumping on a bandwagon.