Who's data do I trust? Hodgdon or Nosler?

[bbearhntr]

So I've been working with this fickle little .223 WSSM for a while now and I was about to try another powder today when I noticed something strange... Noslers reloading guide #6 max charge of IMR4350 for a 60g PT is listed @42g. Hodgdon's starting charge for this same powder/bullet combo is 43.2g :!: Hodgdon's max load is 46g. Who do I believe? Where is a safe starting point? This swing is similar for the loads listed for H4350. Hodgdons starting load is at or near Noslers published max. Any suggestions??? :?

 

[DrMike]

Long answer short--trust your own data. Remember that when you work up any load, you are responsible for what you are doing. Start low and work up, watching for pressure signs. No load is safe until it has been proven so in your rifle. As has been mentioned before, there is a reason why the Nosler reloading data is referred to as a guide. There will be as much as ten percent lot-to-lot variation in burn rate, and differing primers and differing cases all contribute to different data. The chambers used vary, and each variation means a difference in pressure. The fact that velocities for the maximum charges over vary by about 60 fps is indicative that you are dealing with standard variation in components assembled when pressure testing was conducted.

 

[BK]

I think I'd be looking for confirmation from some other bullet builder's data... Speer, Sierra, maybe Barnes...

 

[freestylmx]

Ive found most published data is very conservative. I have a the new Hornady load book and my starting loads for my 223 and 308 are their max loads. Hodgdon seems most accurate to me. I would go by their data. I have found it better though to usually go by the bullet makers data seeing how they test for their bullets only. Just start where you feel comfortable and go up till you find the sweet spot and who cares what the stupid book says and dont let all the people that just parrot info like "youre rifle is going to explode if you go over max" thats BS. Just be smart when loading, use good cases and use the books as a starting guide but not an end guide

 

[bbearhntr]

Ive found most published data is very conservative. I have a the new Hornady load book and my starting loads for my 223 and 308 are their max loads. Hodgdon seems most accurate to me. I would go by their data. I have found it better though to usually go by the bullet makers data seeing how they test for their bullets only. Just start where you feel comfortable and go up till you find the sweet spot and who cares what the stupid book says and dont let all the people that just parrot info like "youre rifle is going to explode if you go over max" thats BS. Just be smart when loading, use good cases and use the books as a starting guide but not an end guide

I have found with this rifle that Noslers MIDDLE load for Varget gave me flattened primers, stiff bolt lift, and a split neck. That is why I was so concerned with the published starting load by Hodgdon. I'm still learning by the day here but I found it a little alarming that the spread between these two manufacturers would differ so greatly for these two powders only. All of the rest of the powders listed between them were within a few fractions of a grain.

 

[DrMike]

freestylmx,

Data is what data is. All the major bullet and powder manufacturers test their data. All work very hard to verify that they are within SAAMI specifications. When a powder manufacturer informs you what bullet was used, then the data is for that particular bullet and not another. Your advice to "just start where you feel comfortable and go up till you find the sweet sport and who cares what the stupid book says" is fraught with danger. Such advice will quickly lead to trouble for the unwary. Starting where you "feel comfortable" and ignoring hard data is a recipe for trouble. Cases don't generally rupture until pressure exceeds ~85k psi, which far exceeds SAAMI standards for any modern cartridge. Modern steels will handle ~164k psi before catastrophic failure. You can be generating excessive pressure without signs of problems. Moreover, you can be stressing the steel until one day there is a catastrophic failure. You might want to rethink your advice on hand loading and be a bit more conservative for your own sake, if not for the sake of others who may be unwary and/or untaught.

 

[treesnake]

Ive noticed some manufacturers load data will be for a 22 inch barrel and the Nosler data is for a 24 inch barrel. These would, if I'm learning correctly, have different min and max. I couldn't find barrel length listed in the Hogdon data.

 

[Guest]

The length of the barrel should have no effect on the allowable powder charges, since max pressure occurs long before the bullet reaches the end of the muzzle. I believe it occurs generally somewhere in the first 6" or so, but it may be further along than that. Barrel length will impact the velocities posted in the manual, as the same load will have higher velocity from a longer barrel (but generate the same chamber pressure). Think of a longer barrel like keeping your foot on the gas a few seconds longer in a car. Doesn't increase the car's HP, but it does increase speed.

 

[big rifle man]

Doc, Amen to your comments. Too many people are determined they are going to get the velocity they want one way or the other. Always start at suggested minimum should be written in stone. I've used some of the "conservative manuals" loading and found that max was reached before their max was reached. Every combination of components and the rifle itself are different.

 

[RiverRider]

I have a .280 that loves H4831 and the lot of that powder I am using seems to be typical. I also have a .243 that is a problem child as far as finding an accurate load goes and I have tried several powders in it, including the same H4831 I am using in my .280. I was not able to increase charges for my .243 up to the max level, as my max seems to be barely above starting loads. This rifle produces velocities of about 200 to 250 fps higher than the manuals predict with any powder I've tried.

I think this is one of the best reasons of all to use a chronograph. Primer appearance can be very misleading and measuring case head expansion relies on the idea that all brass is of the same hardness and is subject to errors in technique. On the other hand, velocity is a product of pressure and is a good way to monitor. I do not believe for a moment that there are "fast barrels" that magically translate a moderate pressure to a velocity that's far beyond the predictions...there just is no free lunch.

 

[runtohunt]

I too have been flustered with the variation in load data from different guides. I agree with Dr. Mike. I would use the load data from Nosler and work up from there. Dr. Mike's advice has always been sound as far as I can tell.

 

[300WSM]

bbhunter,

Something is not correct.

There will always be some variation between guides using similar or even same platforms but that does seem a bit excessive. As the bullet weights go up in a lot of calibers the variance between the two guides shrinks and is nearly identical. It is interesting that IMR's guide on the lighter bullets in a lot of calibers has such a great increase over the Nosler manual yet the heavier bullets they do not :roll:

Please take note that the IMR/hodgdon/winchester guide has the COL wrong. Actually they have it way wrong.
2.360 is the Max COL for that bullet caliber combo. Imr site has the max COL for that specific application to be at 2.150. Again, even the max COL would vary between bullets but using the same platform IMR/hodgdon has it listed at .210 shorter. (Yes...two hundred and ten thousandths shorter) :shock:
Nearly 1/4 of an inch shorter than what the other is calling for. No way! Having extensive experience with the WSSM family and even more experience with the Nosler family I can tell you that with the Nosler geometry of bullet that 2.360 is a pretty solid max COL. Sure some rifles could take that out a little further and certainly under that some but not .210 shorter.
I think (hope) that is merely a misprint on IMR's part.

Maybe IMR had a misprint on the COL but they have different COL's on the other bullets listed.

You can't be wrong using the guide listing the lower load data and starting there. Maybe your rifle can handle a little more than listed max but that is down the road and after some very tedious observation.

 

[DrMike]

The Nosler Guide lists SAAMI maximum COAL, not OAL as tested. The Hodgdon site is listing their OAL as tested, which is in line with data generated by Speer and by Hornady for their bullets. This is based on the depth of the throat in the test system and the bullet used.

 

[ScreaminEagle]

When I read a reloading manual, I can usually trust that it will be giving me a load that will be safe in my rifle. That's about it. The max charge is usually way to low, and don't get me started on published velocities! :roll:

Bottom line is, start a load and work up till you get some sort of pressure signs. Drop down at least a half grain, if not a full grain, and this is your max load.

I have found that the max load in all my rifles is about 3-4 grains above what Sierra suggests.

 

[300WSM]

When I read a reloading manual, I can usually trust that it will be giving me a load that will be safe in my rifle. That's about it. The max charge is usually way to low, and don't get me started on published velocities! :roll:

Bottom line is, start a load and work up till you get some sort of pressure signs. Drop down at least a half grain, if not a full grain, and this is your max load.

I have found that the max load in all my rifles is about 3-4 grains above what Sierra suggests.

You are gonna have some folks thumping the reloading manuals with that kind of talk. :lol:

Eagle, I agree with what you are saying. The only thing that is set in stone with me is the starting load. After that all bets are off. Different rifles do different things and some certainly are well capable of going over max and never have even the slightest of issue. Ever. Other rifles a max load very well might be in fact the max.

The biggest mistake people make is what I call backyard reloading. They have heard the millions of stories out there on how you can throw the books out...or that max charge doesn't mean anything...or a Dan Wesson will hold 5 grains over max but a Smith and Wesson will come apart. They hear all that stuff and then think they are joining the bad boy club and also have become a self proclaimed expert. :!:

 

[freestylmx]

freestylmx,

Data is what data is. All the major bullet and powder manufacturers test their data. All work very hard to verify that they are within SAAMI specifications. When a powder manufacturer informs you what bullet was used, then the data is for that particular bullet and not another. Your advice to "just start where you feel comfortable and go up till you find the sweet sport and who cares what the stupid book says" is fraught with danger. Such advice will quickly lead to trouble for the unwary. Starting where you "feel comfortable" and ignoring hard data is a recipe for trouble. Cases don't generally rupture until pressure exceeds ~85k psi, which far exceeds SAAMI standards for any modern cartridge. Modern steels will handle ~164k psi before catastrophic failure. You can be generating excessive pressure without signs of problems. Moreover, you can be stressing the steel until one day there is a catastrophic failure. You might want to rethink your advice on hand loading and be a bit more conservative for your own sake, if not for the sake of others who may be unwary and/or untaught.

I went back and reread what I said I can see it looks different than what I was trying to say.
I meant that start where you feel comfortable within the books data and then go from there. I didnt mean to just start where ever you want. I did come off a little arrogant it looks. I dont mean the books to be "stupid" as without them I wouldnt have known where to start or to look for certain loads/data. They are invaluable, just not gospel as where to start and stop...that is what I should have said

 

[FOTIS]

Everything out there is only a guideline or a reference! Nothing is written in stone and applicable to all guns.

Start low and trust your judgment which BTW gets better with time.

 

[300WSM]

Everything out there is only a guideline or a reference! Nothing is written in stone and applicable to all guns.

Start low and trust your judgment which BTW gets better with time.

+1+1+1
So true!

 

[ScreaminEagle]

Start low and trust your judgment which BTW gets better with time.

100% correct. I have gotten away from trying to get the fastest load possible, just for the sake of speed. All it does is hurt you in the end with shorter case life, barrel wear, possible injury. That's why I like to work up till I get pressure signs then back off at least a half grain or so. As long as the accuracy is still there, whatever I'm shooting at isn't worried about the difference in fps.

 

[bbearhntr]

bbhunter,

Something is not correct.

There will always be some variation between guides using similar or even same platforms but that does seem a bit excessive. As the bullet weights go up in a lot of calibers the variance between the two guides shrinks and is nearly identical. It is interesting that IMR's guide on the lighter bullets in a lot of calibers has such a great increase over the Nosler manual yet the heavier bullets they do not :roll:

Please take note that the IMR/hodgdon/winchester guide has the COL wrong. Actually they have it way wrong.
2.360 is the Max COL for that bullet caliber combo. Imr site has the max COL for that specific application to be at 2.150. Again, even the max COL would vary between bullets but using the same platform IMR/hodgdon has it listed at .210 shorter. (Yes...two hundred and ten thousandths shorter) :shock:
Nearly 1/4 of an inch shorter than what the other is calling for. No way! Having extensive experience with the WSSM family and even more experience with the Nosler family I can tell you that with the Nosler geometry of bullet that 2.360 is a pretty solid max COL. Sure some rifles could take that out a little further and certainly under that some but not .210 shorter.
I think (hope) that is merely a misprint on IMR's part.

Maybe IMR had a misprint on the COL but they have different COL's on the other bullets listed.

You can't be wrong using the guide listing the lower load data and starting there. Maybe your rifle can handle a little more than listed max but that is down the road and after some very tedious observation.

I checked my distance to the lands more times than I can count and the longest I can seat a 60g Partition is 2.170. That is up against the lands. The first time I measured, something didn't work out as planned and i had my bullets jammed into the lands and accuracy was terrible! Thats when I remeasured over and over again and found 2.170 to be max. I am starting with Noslers lower charges and working my way up from there in the next few days. I ordered a chronny from Midway so I am putting this whole thing on hold until it gets here.