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

[eb in oregon]

Once upon a time (around 1997) pistols in 7.62x25 were being imported in great numbers. There was essentially no loading data at the time nor ammunition that wasn't corrosive surplus, or really expensive import. Though being similar and virtually identical to 7.62x25 Mauser it was loaded to higher velocities, with some exceptionally high velocities in some loadings. So, having bought a surplus CZ52 I embarked upon an adventure in developing different loads. The days spent doing so are a blur. But I chronographed and tested numerous loads. I tried to stay in the burn rate of the original cartridges, but made some slight deviations according to the burn chart. I had numerous powders at the time and used those of the appropriate burn rate. Most worked good, one at least wasn't up to snuff. I was fortunate to have documented and written of the project and Hand Loader magazine published my work. October 1999, issue 201. I didn't make any money, but it was satisfying.

 

[DizzyJ]

For me it has nothing to do with safety (although that is part of published data to a point), it has to do with efficiency and time.

I don't have the time to spend working up thousands of loads, especially when others have done the legwork for me. This also includes formulas on the internet (I have used from time to time).

If there's a powder not listed in a particular manual I may still use it if it's commonly used by those who shoot the cartridge I'm loading for. There are a lot of components out there that just aren't a good fit for the particular cartridge. I'm not going to waste my time and resources trying out so many of them that my barrel gets burned out before I find a good one.

All of my rifle loads are created with accuracy and speed in mind though. This will differ greatly from someone else who just wants it to go bang and exit the muzzle.

 

[Stomper]

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

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....



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.

Hell NO, I'm not an engineer…. I'm SKILLED labor!

 

[Mikej]

Hell NO, I'm not an engineer…. I'm SKILLED labor!

Yeah-butt. "Murphy's Law"!

 

[Capn Jack]

3 things I'm extremely careful with are:
Lil'Gun Rifle power
BullsEye Pistol Powder
Seating depth
Most other things are fairly forgiving.

 

[arakboss]

For me it has nothing to do with safety (although that is part of published data to a point), it has to do with efficiency and time.

I don't have the time to spend working up thousands of loads, especially when others have done the legwork for me. This also includes formulas on the internet (I have used from time to time).

If there's a powder not listed in a particular manual I may still use it if it's commonly used by those who shoot the cartridge I'm loading for. There are a lot of components out there that just aren't a good fit for the particular cartridge. I'm not going to waste my time and resources trying out so many of them that my barrel gets burned out before I find a good one.

All of my rifle loads are created with accuracy and speed in mind though. This will differ greatly from someone else who just wants it to go bang and exit the muzzle.

I would probably be considered more of a bang and exit type.

 

[DizzyJ]

I would probably be considered more of a bang and exit type.

Nothing wrong with that at all.

 

[Koda]

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

In the near future I will be loading for an Akley Improved which there is virtually no published load data for. My research tells me I can safely start on the high end of published data for the standard chamber and work up from there until pressure signs -start- to show. I think thats reasonable, I think.... but then the heavier projectiles Im interested in I cant find any load data on so there's that... but when the time comes I'll call the bullet manufacturer, Im confident has load data.

 

[spookshack]

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.

Mr. Owl would disagree. One, two,…..

 

[Certaindeaf]

I got someone to try to push start a chainsaw in front of the boss once.
Same thing really.

 

[Grendelhunter]

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.

Link to said YouTube video?????

 

[arakboss]

Link to said YouTube video?????

I can not find the video. I think I had a Brandon moment and confused a video of a guy loading 350 Legend with the SBR SOCOM with this thread on another forum link here:

Tried Out A New Powder: Shooters World SBR-SOCOM. 300BLK and 7.62X39 - AR15.COM

Firearm Discussion and Resources from AR-15, AK-47, Handguns and more! Buy, Sell, and Trade your Firearms and Gear.

www.ar15.com

Here is the video of the guy who had used the SBR SOCOM powder in 350 Legend.

 

[ron]

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 agree excellent point. You don't have to reinvent the wheel. I am loading for the best accuracy sure many combinations may work but not as accurate. The Sierra load book lists "Accuracy Load" duplicate that load and try and beat it.

People waste way too much time on load development when they should be working on marksmanship.

This is what Highpower shooters preach. Spend more time on shooting and less on load development.

 

[P7M13]

In the near future I will be loading for an Akley Improved which there is virtually no published load data for. My research tells me I can safely start on the high end of published data for the standard chamber and work up from there until pressure signs -start- to show. I think thats reasonable, I think.... but then the heavier projectiles Im interested in I cant find any load data on so there's that... but when the time comes I'll call the bullet manufacturer, Im confident has load data.

Which Ackley Improved?
I think going with the max loadings of the parent cartridge and then working up can potentially be a mistake. What I've done is find cartridges of the same caliber with case capacities as close to yours, determined by grains H2O. Then use the load tables for that cartridge.
For example, using 6.5x55 Swede as an example, converting it to a 40° Improved version (i.e. Aclkeyizing it) gives it a case capacity closer to 6.5x284 Norma. I have worked up loads using tables for that cartridge as a template, working up from below the low end of that cartridge.

 

[Koda]

Which Ackley Improved?
I think going with the max loadings of the parent cartridge and then working up can potentially be a mistake. What I've done is find cartridges of the same caliber with case capacities as close to yours, determined by grains H2O. Then use the load tables for that cartridge.

25-06. Not max loadings but the upper end, id probably start at the middle. I forgot to bookmark it but was reading something about finding the case percent difference then applying that to the standard load charge, not certain but I have time to research this since Im still waiting on the new barrel and it will probably be a while. Ultimately Im not worried about it as long as I start, safely with standard data and work up but its just that there is no load data for the heavier bullets Im looking at.

 

[DizzyJ]

25-06. Not max loadings but the upper end, id probably start at the middle. I forgot to bookmark it but was reading something about finding the case percent difference then applying that to the standard load charge, not certain but I have time to research this since Im still waiting on the new barrel and it will probably be a while. Ultimately Im not worried about it as long as I start, safely with standard data and work up but its just that there is no load data for the heavier bullets Im looking at.

Remind me who's barrel you're going with?

 

[Koda]

Remind me who's barrel you're going with?

My gunsmith mentioned to me he can get me a Krieger.

 

[DizzyJ]

My gunsmith mentioned to me he can get me a Krieger.

That's a great choice.

 

[Koda]

That's a great choice.

I cant complain and said go for it. I could have held out for a different barrel but have to factor in supply and demand these days right now im still in limbo on when even that barel will get here, other brands had many months of lead times.
If all goes well I need time to work up a handload for fall hunting or I will have to hunt everything with a 3030 this year(which I can but...). On my needs and shooting experience the Krieger will be more than enough barrel for me.