Huge Difference in Powder Charge for 280 w/7828 Why Nosler?

[blacktailhunter]

Why is there such a huge difference between #5 and #6?

with 160grn Partition, #5 shows:
54.5 as a start charge for 2752fps
56.5 intermediate for 2847fps
58.5 as a max charge for 2942fps

#6 shows:
50.5 as a start charge for 2571fps
52.5 intermediate for 2659fps
54.5 as a max charge for 2752fps

The old start charge is the new MAX charge! Did Nosler make a mistake somewhere? This seems to be a bigger differential than just a different style of pressure testing. Most of the other powders are exactly the same or don't differentiate more than a grain from one manual to the next. Also, since the velocities are the same almost straight across the board, I suspect that Nosler did not do a complete re-test but rather did a virtual reprint, so the new manual is not really new information. What's up with that, Nosler? :?

 

[JD338]

Not an official answer but it could be a different testing method or burn rate of the powder tested.

Lets see what Nosler has to say.....

JD338

 

[blacktailhunter]

I thought that too with the SSC version now available. It is just too odd that the 54.5gr charge lists the same exact velocity in both manuals. It seems that different pressure testing equipment would not reflect this so precicely.

I'm waiting for Nosler to answer as well.

 

[fredj338]

FWIW, my 280 tops out @ 57.5gr under a 160grNP for 2850fps form my 23" bbl.

 

[blacktailhunter]

I thought this was a Nosler forum with moderators representing Nosler. Why isn't anyone from Nosler answering? Looks like I'll have to ask via e-mail and see if that wakes someone up. :?:

 

[steve4102]

I thought this was a Nosler forum with moderators representing Nosler. Why isn't anyone from Nosler answering? Looks like I'll have to ask via e-mail and see if that wakes someone up. :?:

I'm interested to hear what Nosler has to say as well.

 

[JD338]

I thought this was a Nosler forum with moderators representing Nosler. Why isn't anyone from Nosler answering? Looks like I'll have to ask via e-mail and see if that wakes someone up. :?:

I'll try to get an answer for you.

JD338

 

[blacktailhunter]

Here's the response I recieved from Nosler via e-mail.

Improved pressure measuring equipment allows us to bring the loads up to SAAMI
pressures.
Loads in Book #6 is perfectly safe.

So, if I understand this response correctly, the previous manual has pressures that are below SAAMI standards, but are higher in powder charge and velocity. This is a very incomplete response, and I am very disappointed in Nosler's customer support. Maybe if they jacked the price up on their 60 year old bullets by 30%, they could hire a competent suport staff. Oh yeah, the price increase didn't help did it? This is enough to sour me on Nosler. They need to at least show some sort of effort. This is not a job well done, Nosler, and you should be ashamed.

 

[Guest]

I think you're overreacting a bit, Blacktail. I have looked through the manuals from Nosler, Hornady, Speer, and Barnes (limited data through email contact with Barnes), and all of them claim to have switched to newer, more precise measuring techniques, and all of them have lowered charges on some of my favorite rounds. In some cases, the charges are below the old start charges, even. Now, I believe that some of this is truly pressure measurement related, and some of this is related to the lawyers. That's a discussion for another time and place, as it is not readily resolvable. I say all of this to say that it is no surprise that the data in Nosler #6 is lowered.

Now, as to your response from Nosler, I read their response to say that they were able to work up safely to SAAMI max with each load they tested, via new testing methods. In so doing, they are able to print a manual which they feel is safe for all handloaders and all rifles. Now, does it mean that the loads in prior releases are not safe? In some cases, yes. I know people who start at the max charge in the manual, and work up a grain or two if they're not getting the velocity they want. They ignore things like flattened primers, ejector marks, and such, because 'the manual shows 3000fps, and I'm going to load to 3000fps in my rifle.' That's not how I load, but to each his own. I did not read Nosler's response to say prior publishings were below SAAMI specs at all. I read it to say that prior data was the best they could achieve with then-current technology. Perhaps you could ask them to clarify the answer before you post demeaning statements about the company and the people who work there.

If you want to quit Nosler over this, you'll need to quit Speer, Hornady, and Barnes, as well, because they'll all give you the same basic answer (I know because I've asked...). As I don't load Sierra bullets, I can't say whether their data is down in recent publishings, nor how they'd answer the question, but it has always been a bit lower than comparable data anyway, so you'd better quit them, too. I guess you're down to boutique bullets and factory ammo now, huh? Good luck with it.

Insulting the people who work (very hard) at Nosler because you are unhappy about how you interpret their response to your question is neither fair nor adult in nature. Discussion of the issue is what these boards are all about, rather than disparagement of character. I'm not trying to dog you here, but I feel compelled to point out that misdirected anger doesn't do you, me, Nosler, or anyone else any good.

 

[Nosler4]

I spoke with the ballistics guys and when they re-shot the load, they found that the max load for IMR7828 was hot--so they reduced it to a safer all-around load. Keep in mind, we have to list a load that's safe for everyone.

We really do have more sophisticated pressure testing tools now then when we worked up that load for book 5. So the email you got was not inaccurate--maybe just a bit lacking on details :?.

The listed velocity is an average for that powder charge--the fact that the average is the same isn't too surprising as we're shooting in the exact same location under the same conditions. I'm sure lots of folks get a different velocity with our loads than we do--lots of things can cause that.

As it says in the front of the #6 manual, "The load data represented in this guide supersedes all previous data." I'd use what we've listed in the #6 manual. We do not recommend you load above the most recent suggested powder charges.

I think Dubyam has some good points at the end of his first and throughout most of the second paragraphs.

Hopefully that clears up any confusion. I'm open for questions :grin:.

 

[steve4102]

Well, I have to partially agree with Blacktail on this one. If a company such as Nosler accepts and replies to customer concerns via email then they should at least make an effort. A response lacking it detail, substance and effort just smacks of arrogance or annoyance. Not what the fine people at Nosler are noted for.

Now that we are on the subject, Why doesn't Nosler list pressures in their manuals?

 

[Nosler4]

I agree, that was a pretty weak tech support answer, a more complete answer was certainly warranted -- I really don't think they meant anything adverse by that response though. I'm sorry it may have come across that way.

We don't list pressures because they can vary so much from one gun to the next. In one rifle, maximum loads may shoot without any problems but in another, midrange loads could pop primers. There are too many variables for us to feel comfortable saying "this is the pressure you'll get" so we don't list it. We would hate for someone to assume that a load is within the pressure range of their action and to then load to maximum and blow an action apart--that'd be bad news.

 

[steve4102]

We don't list pressures because they can very so much from one gun to the next. In one rifle, maximum loads may shoot without any problems but in another, midrange loads could pop primers. There are too many variables for us to feel comfortable saying "this is the pressure you'll get" so we don't list it. We would hate for someone to assume that a load is within the pressure range of their action and to then load to maximum and blow an action apart--that'd be bad news.

I guess I am not following your logic here. The max load listed in your manual sufferes from the same variables as the max pressure. Max pressure goes "hand in hand" with max charge weight. Without achieving max pressure you cannot list max charge weight. What is wrong with publishing a max charge weight along with the actual pressures?

 

[Nosler4]

The actual pressures will vary, even though the load is perfectly safe. But you're right, they are both affected by the same variables in a given rifle. Thats why we provide a maximum load erring on the side of safety within SAAMI pressure specifications to provide a load everyone can use.

Because there are so many variables, we recommend that loaders start with a charge at least 5% lower than the listed maximum--just to be safe.

 

[old #7]

Nosler 4 wrote

The actual pressures will vary, even though the load is perfectly safe. But you're right, they are both affected by the same variables in a given rifle.

I think the words given rifle should be underlined.
All rifles are different.
Achieving maximum pressures in my gun may take more or less powder than your gun. Lets not forget about number of groves, twist rate, quality of the barrel and temperature sensitivity. Loads tested in the dead of winter will post different results than the heat of the summer. I am sure Nosler uses a controled environment for load development.

Technology changes almost every day.
Look at the automobile industry. The 50's and 60's were the golden years of "high performance" engines.
My wifes Tahoe doesn't have a distributer and the new corvettes are way faster than the old ones.

 

[Guest]

Another reason not to post pressures is that we handloaders are bound to take that to mean we can push them. Consider a load listed with 61,800psi for some magnum cartridge with a SAAMI max pressure of 64,000psi. Now, as a handloader and tinkerer, I'd look at that and say to myself, "I can push that up a tad, I've got a 3200psi cushion built in."

But, this load is with some powder like Hodgdon Retumbo that I've never worked with before. And, more importantly, that I don't know the behavior of, which in the case of Retumbo, is to spike quick and hard when close to max. So I load up a grain and a half above max (don't want to go too high because I'm 'careful') and my loads are shot in June, when the temps are 80deg at the range. I manage to get the first couple of shots off, but the third shot wedges my bolt shut, because the pressure spike from the heat of the gun and the over-charge becomes such that my load chronos a couple hundred fps high, and is probably something like 80kpsi. Many handloaders don't know how every powder behaves (I don't), and will make these kinds of mistakes more often when they believe they are being safe, based on some published pressure figure. I'll say it again, the lawyers have as much or more to do with this than the technology of measuring pressure. Good luck with the loading, and 10-rings to everyone!

 

[Powerstroke]

I for one can see somewhat of both sides here, but certianly fall on Nosler's side. " We " all have to be grouped together here in Noslers eyes into the " safe" category. Secondly, if I'm looking for a thourough technical explaination I pick up the phone rather than an e-mail. E-mail can certianly be taken the wrong way and is obviously short. The phone allows me control of the situation and more time for additional questions that are raised.
Obviously when finding any issues / concerns from one manual to the next it's a good idea to throw the flag and get some answers.

I have 10 reloading books plus the web that I cross check loads with. ( probably a drop in the bucket to what some have ) I feel that it's Noslers, Sierra's etc responsibility to get me in a safe ballpark to start with. It is MY responsibility to ensure I work up loads in a safe manner. At some point the consumer must realize some responsibility.

And what does a price increase have to do with any of this? Sure we don't like it. In the big picture, NOSLER is a PROFESSIONAL BUSINESS. I'm fairly CONFIDENT that through-out the year they see an increase in expenses and supplies. I'm sure an employee or two see's a yearly spiff? raise? for the sake of cost of living?
Nosler.....please don't raise your prices from here on out. I'm sure your company can absorb the additional expenses......you'll be in business how long like that?

Now where's my .17 Cal B-tips? :grin:

 

[steve4102]

Another reason not to post pressures is that we handloaders are bound to take that to mean we can push them. Consider a load listed with 61,800psi for some magnum cartridge with a SAAMI max pressure of 64,000psi. Now, as a handloader and tinkerer, I'd look at that and say to myself, "I can push that up a tad, I've got a 3200psi cushion built in."
!

Ah, the old protect me from myself philosophy. Supply me with enough information to be functional, but not enough information to completely educate me.
Keeping me in the dark is safer than complete disclosure. Hmmm, where have I heard that before?

 

[old #7]

I think it is the resposibility of the individual to educate themselves.
All of the information is there.
A company that publishes load data can not know what everyone else will do with it.
You bought the scissors, Nosler is providing information on sharpening the scissors while telling you to be carefull but, you will be responsible if you choose to "run" with them.

 

[Guest]

Another reason not to post pressures is that we handloaders are bound to take that to mean we can push them. Consider a load listed with 61,800psi for some magnum cartridge with a SAAMI max pressure of 64,000psi. Now, as a handloader and tinkerer, I'd look at that and say to myself, "I can push that up a tad, I've got a 3200psi cushion built in."
!

Ah, the old protect me from myself philosophy. Supply me with enough information to be functional, but not enough information to completely educate me.
Keeping me in the dark is safer than complete disclosure. Hmmm, where have I heard that before?

I'm not saying Nosler should protect you from yourself. I'm saying they have to protect themselves in the rotten, ridiculous litigious society we find ourselves in these days. If everyone who had accidents because they did something stupid just took responsibility for it, Nosler could publish everything they want. As it is, be glad they have the stones to keep publishing load data at all.