Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Load Data subscription?

$35 bucks a year seems kinda steep when one can get lots of load data on line today for free. Question for those who subscribe or have subscribed: Is it worth the $$? Thanks

I had it years ago and found it useful. Recently “resubscribed”. It’s good for comparing data from numerous sources and it also allows you to print data from multiple sources in the same forma, three-ring punch, and make your own “loading manual.”

Also, you can get data using a number of different components.

On the down side, it’s an outmoded and not really user-friendly platform. Sometimes it doesn’t readily find what you want so you have to do some poking around. Yeah, I think it’s kind of expensive as an annual subscription and I don’t know that they do a lot maintenance on it. At that price it should include a Y
year’s subscription to Handoader .

I subscribe, mostly for odd cartridges. If I only had "standard run of the mill" cartridge rifles I'd probably not subscribe.

I don't subscribe every year. I last subscribed maybe 5 years ago then again this year. I have printed off all the cartridges I'm interested in. But if I buy a 33 or 35 Winchester or some other new to me cartridge I'd subscribe before the next 5 year period. Try to find 35 Brown Whelen, 375 Whelen AI, a 6mm-06 or other wildcat loads for instance - Load Data may have what you're looking for.

Also, trying to find old Handloader tests or Rifle tests can take a bit of time. Many of these tests are in Load Data.

Thank you, Gentlemen...very helpful.

I have joined for the past three years. It was useful for the obscure cartridges as someone mentioned above. It was the only source I could find for the 6.5x57 Mauser with Hodgdon powders (ADI manufactured). Even the ADI manufacturer here in Aus couldn't help me. There are also good articles published frequently.

Have had it for years. It's worth it to me. Now, at work, we use it all the time.

Alan

my issue is i only need data for the old 351 and 401 SL rifles from winchester, but not worth paying just for the two loads, if i could get it from someone that would be nice.

I've been a subscriber since it's first year, and its worth the money to me. Doesn't cost anymore than buying a new manual per year. I have a pretty good collection of loading manuals from about 1957 to present which get used too, but it's really convenient to just enter the cartridge, bullet weight, and powder on hand and see what comes up. For really obscure rounds it is useful to just put the cartridge name in just to get a hand full of loads.

It's worth the money to me. Then again I have almost every loading manual I could buy for the last 40 years. Anybody want to pay an outrageous price for the A Square I bought at publication price?

I have found that some majors list more data in their manuals than they offer free on line. In today's world listings for older powders I have or newer powders when the old powder is unobtainable are worth the money to me.

Some of the time Load Data isn't worth the money and once in a while it's worth all that and more. Time was it was a great value as Wolfe, somewhat like the big Lee book, included a great deal of data assembled by the majors. That was stripped from the online access some years ago perhaps over royalties.

Agreed the interface is imperfect and could be better at fuzzy searching. I find it pays to keep trying when nothing at all is returned.

Just the same it's a broader computer search than anything else I know of or have even heard rumor of. If I didn't renew I'd miss it and be back subscribing pretty quick.

It’s a good way to see what’s unlikely with a specific cartridge and bullet weight.

Worth it for me.


Okie John

This site has been very helpful, loads reported by shooters for various calibers. Always check reported loads against a reloading manual:

http://centerfirecentral.com/viewer.html

For me it was well worth the price.....for one year.....but it's usefulness was gone after that as I wrote down all the load data I liked.

$35.00 is steep, really? The value of a baby sitter for 2 hrs or a bottle of wine. It could save you hrs of load development , powder, bullets and primers.

I like it. There's a lot of info there. It would cost a bunch more to buy all the loading manuals for data covered by that site.

DF.

Are the loads listed in Load Data all safely within industry pressure limits or are they simply loads someone found somewhere at some point in time.

In other words, are they universally safe to use in a modern, well manufactured firearm?

The listed loads are all safe to use "in a modern, well manufactured firearm."

They've all been published in either HANDLOADER or RIFLE magazine, and all the more recent loads (say the past decade) have been vetted to conform to published data.

The other part of the deal is that data continues to be added as more articles are published, with newer powders and bullets in newer cartridges.

Didn’t know that. Good to know, thanks.

I really like Ken Waters' Pet Loads. As useful as it is, it's dated. For us ole farts hanging onto our stash of vintage powder, it's great

But, with the Load Data site, you get current info with modern powders from Handloader and Rifle plus data from Norma, Nosler, Sierra, etc.

I use it a good bit and to me it's worth the yearly fee. I renew every year.

DF

This. Imagine if Pet Loads got updated every couple of weeks.


Okie John

To a point, per the data, but we don’t have Waters’ Pet Loads commentary on the loads, how they performed and in the guns he used.

DF