Been reading some old post

[Gm weatherby man]

Why is it that some " reloaders" think that the make their gun a " magnum" by loading their gun past list specs for powder. The goal to me it to have the most reasonably acurrete load and to know that I made it that way. 8)

 

[FOTIS]

For me accuracy is pertinent and paramount. As far as loading past established limits, whoever does it is walking on thin ice.

 

[Elkman]

I usually quite when I get to "most accurate" . Most accurate is usualy around an 1 inch I am really not fussy, and when I find a good load I am done pretty much forever unless they quit making that powder again. I seldom revist my loads. When we ran out of surplus military powder in the early 70's I was terrified that I would not be able to get my rifles dialed in again. But then I found that my win mag and 7mm mag like 4350 as well as they liked the other. Havent tried a new load for either since then.

 

[DrMike]

I assume that many people get a perverse pleasure out of doing what the experts won't do. They are convinced that bullet and powder manufacturers are ruled by lawyers and won't give us the straight skinny. Such actions are foolish at best and positively dangerous at worst. The goal is accuracy. I stress to people all the time that little bitty holes through the boilers is what kills animals, not velocity.

 

[Guy Miner]

"little bitty holes through the boilers"

Big holes work good too.... :grin:

 

[DrMike]

Big holes work good too....

Maybe better! :grin: I do like my 35s.

 

[baltz526]

The older i get-the slower i go.

 

[Guy Miner]

Yeah Baltz me too, but what about loading? :grin:

 

[Guy Miner]

Kind of funny, some rifles I push pretty hard, others I'm content to let them just sort of ramble on at an easy pace.

My son's .257 Wby is destined to see some warm loads. Factory specs and no more, but warm loads all the same. Weatherby factory loads are right warm themselves! What's the point in a .257 Weatherby that doesn't churn up a lot of velocity?

Pretty much the same thought process with my .25-06 and our little 6mm Rem. They toss small bullets, and the only thing they've got going for them is velocity, and ease of shooting. Without velocity... I don't think I'd be real impressed.

The .30-06 though, has an old, tired barrel, and does just fine launching a 165 at a modest 2750 fps. I've used the same load from that rifle for quite a few years. Nothing fancy, but it works.

The .375 H&H is fairly new to me, and I found great satisfaction with the 260 Nosler at a modest 2620 fps. Very effective and accurate out at 300 yards. What more do I need?

So, some I push. Some I don't. They all seem to work.

Guy

 

[PJGunner]

I assume that many people get a perverse pleasure out of doing what the experts won't do. They are convinced that bullet and powder manufacturers are ruled by lawyers and won't give us the straight skinny. Such actions are foolish at best and positively dangerous at worst. The goal is accuracy. I stress to people all the time that little bitty holes through the boilers is what kills animals, not velocity.

I'm inclined to agree with you in part but also disagree in part. There isn't much one can do to get a bg increase from modern round like the .300 Win. mag., .243 or .308 Win. to just name a few.
However, certain cartridges have never really been loaded to their full potential because of the weak firearms they were originally chambered in. The 7x57 Mauser in 93 and 95 Mausers, or the 1895 Winchester and 1903 low number Springfields immediately come to mind. The ,257 Robt. is also handicapped because of those 93 and 95 mausers that wee rebarreled to the .257.
I see no reason why those three cartridges cannot be loaded to a higher level if used in a strong modern action. If a Remongton M700, Winchester M70 or Ruger M77 can be chambered to round such as the .270 Win., 7MM Rem. mag., .300 Win. mag. can stand pressures to 65,000 PSI, then why can't the .257, 7x57 and 30-06 not also be loaded to that level? Bolt thrust from them would be even less than from the magnum rounds at 65,000 PSI.
I've often wondered if those people who do the load work ups for the loading manuals haven't worked up to those higher levels for their own personal use? After all, they do have the equipment.
My point is it rifle "X" is strong enough for the most potent of high pressure rounds, why wouldn't it be safe to load the .257, 7x57 or 30-06 to those same levels in that rifle? I'm not saying one should handload irresponsibly but for some cartridges? I know, some idiot would take that info and use it in the wrong gun and get hurt. Still, the question remains. How much better would the three cartridges I mentioned be if they were loaded to their full potential?
Paul B.

 

[Antelope_Sniper]

Paul, when I started loading for the 7 STW many of the "Max" loads were 45k PSI. I couldn't help but wonder why they were listing leaver action pressures for a round that was only suitable for a bolt action riflle. Needless to say, I just used this data the best I could to get me close to a reasonable max of 65k PSI.

It's also important to remember that just because someone is over the max listed powder charge, doesn't mean they are over max pressures. Changing brass can drastically change your pressures. If the book calls for Remington or Nosler brass, and you are using Winchester, your pressures will generally be less. In addition, the pressure testing equipement is only accurate FOR THAT EQUIPMENT. How much different is your chamber and throat? In addition, I'm pretty sure that Nosler had a bad lot of H4831 when they worked up the loads for their #6 Manuel. The loads are remarkably cold, and not where they should be when compared to other similar powders. As with everything, reloading requred a lot of judgement. When in doubt, if your rifle tells you to stop.....then stop.

 

[SJB358]

I kinda fall in line with what Guy said. I load some warm, since heck, they are magnums and I would shoot a smaller cartridge if I wanted less speed. I do load the Whelen a little warmer than most load books show, but nothing out of line with what they are advertising for their speeds. Common sense is our most beneficial tool I think. Scotty

 

[Desert Fox]

I'm with Paul on this one. Another case in point is the 280 Remington. I loaded this cartridge up to 57 grains of IMR 4831 for the 150 grain Nosler BT before I settled on 56 grains for accuracy. I found this load from an old IMR reloading guide. They rated this load at 50,000 CUP. I still use the same brass that I had since I started reloading for this cartridge. Accuracy is paramount when I'm crafting loads for my rifle. Velocity is only secondary.

 

[DrMike]

My concern is not the fellow who knows pressure signs and is prepared to exercise restraint; my concern is the individual who deliberately tickles the dragon's tail just so he can brag or the newbie who is unaware and takes as gospel the incautious words of someone who is an idiot. Rifles are each different, and any handloader must know that he is responsible for what he produces. Each one is responsible to realise that ultimately, pressure will become excessive and he avoids getting into trouble. I have rifles and cartridges that I push to achieve maximum potential. However, I will not publish those loads or encourage the newer handloader to assume that because it was safe in my rifle it will work in his rifle. Too many people pick a load out of a manual and load it up without working up to ensure that it is safe for their rifle. I've seen too many fellows at the range using a piece of wood to open the bolt because they didn't understand what they were doing. I encourage those who sit in my courses to look for accuracy rather than velocity.

 

[SJB358]

I have been coming around to that train of thought, but I still like to see my rifles/cartridges do what they are supposed to and STILL be accurate. So far, I haven't ever had to hammer a bolt open and very seldom do I push much about book specs, unless I know it can be done and I am not getting speeds that should be happening. The chronograph is really the main piece of gear that allows us loaders to push our loads some without doing it dangerously. At least, in my mind. Scotty

 

[skinner313]

All the speed in the world doesn't do anything if you don't hit what ur aiming at!

 

[longwinters]

Not that I have tons of guns, but of the 3 rifles that I spend the most time with, none of them are shooting published hottest loads. My most accurate loads tend to be a grain light.

Long

 

[Guy Miner]

"All the speed in the world doesn't do anything if you don't hit what ur aiming at!"

True words indeed. I like to work up a good, reliable load, then shoot the heck out of it until I'm really familiar with the rifle and the load. Good point.

Guy

 

[Guest]

I side with all the comments here. We live in an era of bragging velocities. I got caught up in it with the 300 Ultra Mag as well until this past year. 100 fps more isn't going to kill game any faster, yet has the ability to endanger the shooter etc. Stupid to use new brass every time to gain that additional velocity. I'm into the accuracy bullet selection thing myself.

Don

 

[2ndtimer]

Another observation on this topic is that, over time, even your rifle changes. When I first got my .270WSM, I was enamored of its claimed velocity levels, and the factory offerings seem to be loaded to the max to support those claims. I never exceeded published maximum powder charges, but some of those were pretty stout. Over time, I have noticed a slight loss of velocity and accuracy in my rifle. I presume this is due to some throat erosion. Theoretically, my same loads are producing lower pressure due to the eroded throat of the barrel, so I could try to increase the powder charges slightly, as well as seat the bullet out a little farther to possibly recoup some of the lost velocity and maybe accuracy. I haven't tried this yet, and the rifle is still quite capable of hunting accuracy (140 gr Nosler AccuBond 2950 fps at 1 MOA), so it may be a while before I experiment. The real bottom line is even the published data is acquired through a unique barrel and that data has to be a little on the conservative side so that it can be deemed safe in a wide variety of modern rifles. Starting low and working up to a safe accurate load is for your unique rifle is ultimately the responsibility of each handloader/shooter.