How do you choose your powders?

[longwinters]

I have noticed, in the calibers I reload for, that Nosler uses IMR more frequently than Hodgons. I also notice that for some reason Hodgon velocities seem a little slower than the IMR. What is the reason for going with more of the IMR powders?

Long

 

[NOSLER]

A lot of it, is just that with so many powders to choose from, we only have room in our books for a few. I wish we could put every powder in our manual, but the book would then retail for around 49.00

I don't know about you but $24.95 is much better. Please put some suggestions in the forum about powder selections, and I will try to put them into book #6.

 

[Shark Bait]

Will book No. 6 have more realistic load data than previous versions? No offense, but I rarely use Nosler data any more as I find your data is way below industry norms. I always have had to work up considerably from your data in order to get an accurate, normal velocity load. Looking forward to seeing real world data without a lot of legal influence. I imagine there is a way to do this, as Sierra, Barnes, etc. are able to.

Regards,

Dave

 

[AlanR]

"I wish we could put every powder in our manual, but the book would then retail for around 49.00. I don't know about you but $24.95 is much better"

For a complete manual as such (with load data to SAMMI spec), I would most certainly pay $49. There is no manual like that currently available. I think it would sell like gangbusters.

 

[mshaffer]

I honestly think that AlanR is on to something. I WON’T buy #6 unless it has a plethora of data, everything that you could think to put in it. I wouldn't mind paying $50 or maybe more if it were exhaustive. We’re paying top shelf prices for top notch premium bullets; we don’t want to be short-changed on the manual.

 

[su35]

I have found #5 to be very realistic. In fact I have had to back off on some loads in the WSMs and the 260 by a grain or two because of heavy bolt lift.

Also very realistic is when Nosler shows "Most accurate load" for a given charge and powder. I cant think of a time when it wasnt the most accurate load when I tried that particular load.

Best manual out there when it comes to being realistic in my book.

I think if Nosler were to test the latest powders for its latest book and then we can use our older manuals for the older powders. No use using
rehashed data. Unless there is a new bullet out.

 

[Shark Bait]

I have found #5 to be very realistic. In fact I have had to back off on some loads in the WSMs and the 260 by a grain or two because of heavy bolt lift.

I must disagree. Perhaps with some of the newer calibers the data is getting better, but I have found it very, very conservative when developing loads for the .25-06, .270 WCF, .308, .30-06, .300 Weatherby, etc. I always, without exception have to increase powder charges to get decent velocity and accuracy. If it works for you that is great, but I can do better than 2800 F.P.S with a 150 Gr. bullet in my .30-06. I would like to hear other opinions on the Nosler data.

 

[2ndtimer]

I think that the Nosler data is fne, when you take into account the litigous society we live in today. Obviously, each rifle is an individual, and if Nosler showed loads that were safe under their controlled lab conditions, and went right up to the absolute maximum in their test barrel, then Billy Bob goes out and buys a different rifle that happens to have a minimum dimension chamber, loads military brass, and a magnum primer on a hot day in Arizona, there may be some problems. And if Billy Bob was injured "because of a dangerous load published by the evil manufacturer", Billy Bob will find out just how many personal injury attorneys practice within a hundred miles of where he lives. And after Nosler finishes paying their defense attorneys, we can all ante up an extra 20% on the prices of their fine products. The other question: does the deer, elk, or prairie dog really get deader with the added 100 feet per second velocity?

 

[Shark Bait]

I think that the Nosler data is fne, when you take into account the litigous society we live in today. Obviously, each rifle is an individual, and if Nosler showed loads that were safe under their controlled lab conditions, and went right up to the absolute maximum in their test barrel, then Billy Bob goes out and buys a different rifle that happens to have a minimum dimension chamber, loads military brass, and a magnum primer on a hot day in Arizona, there may be some problems. And if Billy Bob was injured "because of a dangerous load published by the evil manufacturer", Billy Bob will find out just how many personal injury attorneys practice within a hundred miles of where he lives. And after Nosler finishes paying their defense attorneys, we can all ante up an extra 20% on the prices of their fine products. The other question: does the deer, elk, or prairie dog really get deader with the added 100 feet per second velocity?

Well I guess we know who the Nosler manuals are targeted at then - "Billy Bob". Given that I am not a Billy Bob, I guess I will just have to continue to get my data from other sources like Sierra, Hornady, Barnes, Hodgdon, etc. I am glad they don't target their manuals to Billy Bob. As far as 100-200 FPS increases, I find that most of my rifles are more accurate when pushed to near maximum loads. I think the old adage of lower velocity loads are more accurate is outdated. My experience has been much different. Good Shooting! :grin:

 

[squirrelsniper]

A lot of it, is just that with so many powders to choose from, we only have room in our books for a few. I wish we could put every powder in our manual, but the book would then retail for around 49.00 I don't know about you but $24.95 is much better.

For a complete manual as such (with load data to SAMMI spec), I would most certainly pay $49. There is no manual like that currently available. I think it would sell like gangbusters.

I agree, if Nosler would publish data for every suitable powder, then I wouldn't have any complaints about paying $50 for the manual. As it is, as far as I know there is no such manual in existance, so what often happens is that I buy a manual, then it doesn't list all the powders I want, so I buy another manual. In the end I spend over $50 anyway, so it would be nice to just get all the data in one manual.

As for the data itself having low maximum loads, well yes, many manuals these days have maximum loads with just a bit of safety margin in them. To my knowledge there's only one source to get realistic data, and of all people, it's from one of the powder companies. However, if I was in the same position as the manufacturers and facing the potential for lawsuits, I would likely do the same thing just to cover my rear-end, as it won't do anyone any good if the company gets sued into financial trouble.

Also, although it's really unsafe, most experienced reloaders only look at manuals as a guide for powder choice and starting loads, and will work up to a max load for each individual rifle. Like I said, doing that can be extremely dangerous, but myself and several others do it anyway, so this argument about conservative listed max loads sort of becomes a moot point in that case.

 

[tsr1965]

I am in total agreement, and would love to see the hordes of information available. I would like seeing more powders, and loading data for more rounds(especially handgun data for rounds like the 260 Rem). I have seen college text books with not this much info sell for more than a Ben Franklin. We are all interested in the top of the line, not only in components, but in knowledge, and service. To that note, thank you NOSLER from everone in these very informational forums.

 

[GeorgeS]

I select powders based on load density and pressure. I like 85%-90% load density in most of the cartridges I load for, and I don't use powders that exhibit pressure spikes when going up a grain.

I use a lot of Hodgdon, with IMR next.

George

 

[Paul Barnard]

Interesting thread developing here. Looks like people are willing to pay for the "unabridged" Nosler Reloading manual. Offer it in two versions. I'm cheap, I wait for the new manuals to come out and buy the old ones on clearance.

I have noticed that Nosler has pulled the throttles back on some of its loads. Look at some of the 6MM Remington data in #3 then in #4. I can't seem to find my #4 right now or I would point out specifics. Unfortunately for companies to maintain financial viability in today's legal climate they must conduct there business with an eye toward product liability.

You gotta admire Nosler for having the cojones to attempt a forum like this in which they are an active participant. It can subject them to more liability and if not handled properly can turn into a great big PR blunder. Shooters and hunters can be pretty demanding you know?

Paul

 

[NOSLER]

Paul-

We treat this forum like a trade show. We are here to answer questions, ones that we can of course. If we don't feel comfortable answering, well I will be pretty up front and post that. There have been a few already regarding WSSM's, I will do my best to refer you to the right site, or call our customer service. We feel 100% confident in our answers or we wouldn't be here.

Thanks for your posts!