Load Work Up, Imagine How Many Combinations Exist For One Cartridge.

[arakboss]

A four digit pin code with numbers from 0-9 in each of the four spots has 10,000 possible combinations.

Imagine the possible combinations that exist when reloading a cartridge. Different primers, different cases, different powders and different projectiles. I am thinking there must be 10s or 100s of thousands of combinations for one cartridge type? Add in the powder charge weights, bullet weights, bullets diameters and profiles, bullet coatings (moly or PC), crimp or no crimp, etc. There could be millions of combinations for one cartridge.

This makes me think that if you limit yourself to by the book loads, you are barely scratching the surface of potential loads that are available.

Read More

 

[oremike]

I guess that depends on what your goal is. I do that by eliminating variables. Case in point, if I want to make a good hunting load for a 30.06 I don't look at building a load with cast bullets and trailboss. Others might go down that road but I want to use the caliber to it's potential so opt for a jacketed bullet and powder better suited for that application. Back to the goal, If I want a 180gr bullet at 2700 FPS that shoots a 1" group at 100 yds I stop there and make that load as my hunting load because it's met my goal. Kind of like buying a pickup, when I find the one I like I buy it rather than to keep looking in case I missed something.

 

[P7M13]

Yer thinking too hard....

 

[DizzyJ]

A four digit pin code with numbers from 0-9 in each of the four spots has 10,000 possible combinations.

Imagine the possible combinations that exist when reloading a cartridge. Different primers, different cases, different powders and different projectiles. I am thinking there must be 10s or 100s of thousands of combinations for one cartridge type? Add in the powder charge weights, bullet weights, bullets diameters and profiles, bullet coatings (moly or PC), crimp or no crimp, etc. There could be millions of combinations for one cartridge.

This makes me think that if you limit yourself to by the book loads, you are barely scratching the surface of potential loads that are available.

The book has narrowed it down to components that work well and often times eliminated components that don't.

Start with known matched components for that cartridge and play with powder charge and bullet seating depth from there.

 

[Stomper]

Yer thinking too hard....
View attachment 1162120

He must be an accountant, they do that sorta thing.

 

[arakboss]

The point I was attempting to make is that there are likely many more combinations of components that will work safely for a given cartridge that are not included in manufactures load data books. I think many of the Safety Sallies out there assume that if a particular load recipe isn't in the book then it's not safe, or that changing one or multiple components of a recipe is not safe.

It is possible that there are just so many safe combinations out there that the manufactures couldn't begin to test and list them all. Fortunately we have a lot of reloaders out there who experiment with new recipes and post their results on the internet for others to evaluate. Of course we know how Safety Sallies feel about stuff on the internet.

I believe you can be reasonably safe and put together your own recipes with a little common sense and use of the great internet.

What made me think about this last night was a guy on youtube who was using Shooter's World SBR SOCOM powder for a 7.62x39 load. There wasn't manfs data he could find for his components so he improvised and it turned out to be a great load.

The powder was cheap so I ordered some.

 

[Lilhigbee]

"Safety Sallies"

The Safety Sallies on a forum I was looking at the other day do not allow the posting of ANY load data, published or otherwise.
This is what happens when lawyers and insurance companies control the world.

 

[arakboss]

"Safety Sallies"

The Safety Sallies on a forum I was looking at the other day do not allow the posting of ANY load data, published or otherwise.
This is what happens when lawyers and insurance companies control the world.

I have seen that myself recently.

 

[arakboss]

"Safety Sallies"

The Safety Sallies on a forum I was looking at the other day do not allow the posting of ANY load data, published or otherwise.
This is what happens when lawyers and insurance companies control the world.

Society in general has become ultra risk averse these days.

 

[bbbass]

A four digit pin code with numbers from 0-9 in each of the four spots has 10,000 possible combinations.

Imagine the possible combinations that exist when reloading a cartridge. Different primers, different cases, different powders and different projectiles. I am thinking there must be 10s or 100s of thousands of combinations for one cartridge type? Add in the powder charge weights, bullet weights, bullets diameters and profiles, bullet coatings (moly or PC), crimp or no crimp, etc. There could be millions of combinations for one cartridge.

This makes me think that if you limit yourself to by the book loads, you are barely scratching the surface of potential loads that are available.

I never worry about primers and cases.... I just buy a lot of books.

If you are going to color outside the lines on reloading rifle rounds, PLEASE be careful, do the research, and KNOW what you are doing!!!

 

[arakboss]

I never worry about primers and cases.... I just buy a lot of books.

If you are going to color outside the lines on reloading rifle rounds, PLEASE be careful, do the research, and KNOW what you are doing!!!

I remember when the teacher instructed us to color within the lines:

 

[Caveman Jim]

Whatever trips yer trigger, wildcatter.
Many, including myself, use manufacture data and are satisfied with repeated proven results.
I'm not a dreamer, I'm a doer, as in git er done and go chute em.

 

[eb in oregon]

It is possible that there are just so many safe combinations out there that the manufactures couldn't begin to test and list them all. Fortunately we have a lot of reloaders out there who experiment with new recipes and post their results on the internet for others to evaluate. Of course we know how Safety Sallies feel about stuff on the internet.

A life time ago I was a long haul truck driver. My partner and I drove to Iowa (from Oregon in December) to pick up a trailer full of ground corn cob, destined for Speer in Lewiston Idaho. As the load was being removed and stored I took the opportunity to speak with a ballistician that worked for Speer. I asked him "How come your newest book doesn't list Unique for the .45 Colt?" His answer was "You can only put so many powders in a book, there is only so much room. However as long as you stay with powders of a similar burn rate you shouldn't have a problem." There is a specific reason for burn charts, but common sense takes precedence over anything else.

 

[TTSX]

4. There are 4 possible combinations. Bad, good, better, kaboom

 

[oremike]

I get what you are saying about load development, I have done the same useing what I can find and what I know to do different than the norm. Right now I'm looking at making a 180gr full wad cutter load for 41 mag. I'm wanting about 800 FPS but all the data for this weight of bullet is for 180gr JHP's at 1400 FPS. I have a good idea as to what will work so called the balistictian at Accurate Arms and he verified what I was thinking and gave me a couple other ideas. This is for my personal ammo only, ammo I make for sale has to come from a reliable and repeatable source and books are handy that way as once printed the data is static.

 

[arakboss]

Whatever trips yer trigger, wildcatter.
Many, including myself, use manufacture data and are satisfied with repeated proven results.
I'm not a dreamer, I'm a doer, as in git er done and go chute em.

Us dreamers need the Doers to prove out our thoughts

 

[Mikej]

He must be an accountant, they do that sorta thing.

So do engineers. Just sayin' Isn't that you?

"Safety Sallies"

The Safety Sallies on a forum I was looking at the other day do not allow the posting of ANY load data, published or otherwise.
This is what happens when lawyers and insurance companies control the world.

I'd like to know what site that is? That's Cray-Cray!

It's hard to get across to people how I look at reloading data. This is close and an important part of my view....

The book has narrowed it down to components that work well and often times eliminated components that don't.

Start with known matched components for that cartridge and play with powder charge and bullet seating depth from there.

I asked him "How come your newest book doesn't list Unique for the .45 Colt?" His answer was "You can only put so many powders in a book, there is only so much room. However as long as you stay with powders of a similar burn rate you shouldn't have a problem." There is a specific reason for burn charts, but common sense takes precedence over anything else.

Those recopies in the book are nothing more than results the writers of the book got with the recipes they used.

Before someone wants to step up and tell me I'm dangerous, and they are so much more special, know that I'm with the book loads 95% of the time. And I also take results (pressure/Velocities) of other loads into consideration when going out on my own. The power burn rate is an important part of my process. If you're a fairly smart person you'll know that there are many indicators of what's going on in that chamber when that primer goes off. Recoil, smoke, flash out the barrel, ejection pattern, unburnt powder left in the case, sooty brass. And others like flattened, cratered or punctured primers telling you yor're pushing the upper limit.

 

[Caveman Jim]

Us dreamers need the Doers to prove out our thoughts


View attachment 1162214

Maybe, but we'd prefer to say "Good Job" instead of "I told you so."
So many people get that pic wrong, he's taking a dump

 

[Mikej]

So many people get that pic wrong, he's taking a dump

No. He'd be holding a book. Very similar posture though.

 

[Pepe-lepew]

Load work up and optimizing accuracy of loads is something I rarely ever have done. There is tons of information on the best powders, good components and good loads for most common cartridges from other shooters. I see no reason to waste time or money on testing different components or starting at minimum charge weights.
Most the danger in reloading is poor procedures and quality control that lead to double charges or slam fires. I built in several quality control steps to make safe ammo.
People waste way too much time on load development when they should be working on marksmanship. Who cares if you have a 3/8" moa 1000 yard load if you can't read the wind or that 1/2 moa hunting load won't help overcome buck fever.