Ammoguide.com or loaddata.com, which would you choose and why?

I chose both.

Ammoguide for all the neat tools and features and Loaddata for all the tested information.

Both well worth it to me.

I use Loaddata.com. Hodgdon has a lot of good load info on their site (especially for the 284 win in a bolt action). Those are my main two online sources. I used to use data off of reloadersnest, but many of those are not pressure tested loads and some of them are way hot.

Xx

I ONLY use book (hard copy) data only. I feel that using data off the net is akin to shooting other peoples handloads no matter the source. Muddy

Ive always found it best to have 3-5 hard copy hand loading manuals handy to cross check loads as anything that is obviously much different from the published manual data is suspect.

I use Hodgdon, Ramshot, Barnes, Alliant, Nosler, etc. basically compare everything I can get my hands on. What they publish online is the same as their books. I will consider individual loads, but generally only if I can compare to bullet or powder manufacturer published data. Or, alternatively, I just use a more robust workup to their loads. But to your actual question, I have not subscribed to either, but what I have seen, Loaddata is simply a sampling of the published loads, just in one place.

I look at every data source I can find. I don't mind the redundancy.

Yeah. That stupid Hodgon/IMR/Winchester powder company doesn't know WTF they're talking about.

If they'd put that info into a book, they'd be onto something.




Travis

I use the data off of the powder manufacturers website then work up with a chronograph. It's been a long time since I've cracked open an actual reloading manual.

There's nothing magic about a reloading manual, it's just what they found in a test barrel that likely bears little resemblance to my own rifle. I can do much of that myself out of my own barrel.

Knock on wood, in 30 years I've never blown a primer so I'll keep doing what I'm doing. A chronograph will keep you out of a lot of trouble. It's amazing that some will trust a book over what their own rifle is telling them.

Let's see...Hodgdon/IMR/Win, Alliant, Nosler, Accurate/Ramshot all have online loading data that they keep updated. VV and Norma too, I believe, but I don't use either brand of powder lately. There is SO much information available online from these and then private sources. I'd not trust any one source as a Bible, whether in print or online. I'm with you, Crow hunter. Data is just information. It may or may not apply to you or your guns.

Fairly sure Nosler, hogdon, etc don't update their hard copies as often as they do the data they publish on their websites. Especially as to typos. I'm more confident with the online data but will usually check several different sites for comparison

I also compare everything in recent print that I can get my hands on, as well as the online info from powder companies. I keep Nosler, Barnes, Hornady, Speer and Sierra manuals at home, and pick up the freebies from the powder companies as well. I very often refer to the online info from Hodgdon/IMR/Winchester, Accurate/Ramshot, Alliant, and VV.

If I use online reloading info from places like here, loaddata, reloader's nest, etc., etc., I compare it to the above sources and proceed with caution, using the chrono.

I keep the freebie manuals from the powder manufacturers because sometimes they have good info on powders or cartridges that newer sources have deleted and/or discontinued.

Subscribed to LoadData for a year but dropped it because, while there are an infinite number of loads listed, it was difficult to determine if the information was solid (& safe) or just a recipe that had been printed somewhere.

I would have been helpful to have more information on the data sources.

Exactly right. I don't expect everyone to follow my lead here, but I've migrated most of my load research to Hodgdon.com. Granted, I'm limiting myself to Hodgdon, IMR, and Winchester powders, but usually I can find something that works.

I also never take someone's recipe off the web and try it. If someone says they have great performance with x powder and y bullet, that's fine, but I find out the MAX load, knock off 5-10% off that for my first load and work up from there.

Typically, given a new chambering and a new rifle, I'll settle on what I think is a good first load, and load 5 of that and then work up in 5 round increments, usually .5 grain or so per increment. Somewhere in the first 25 rounds, I usually find something that seems to work well, and then I usually don't press it beyond that. In 15 years of loading, I don't think I have ever settled on a MAX load and certainly nothing beyond MAX.

As I said, I'm not like a lot of folks around here. Given a 25-06, I'll try and make it shoot like a 257 Roberts. Given a 30-06, I'll try for 308 WIN velocities. Given a 35 Whelen, I'll try to make it work like a 358 WIN-- the point for me is to reduce pressure, recoil, cost, and wear and tear on the brass. I find it is much easier to load down than it is to load up.

i assume you are kidding, as in fact they do.

I have lots of books and if I want internet loads I look at Hodgdons site.

Lets not forget the fires expert Steve.....
http://stevespages.com/page8a.htm

Lots of good information and he's always around here somewhere.

I've found Loaddata to be reliable in selecting potential combinations for testing. I always chronograph my recipes and compare to loading manual velocity for safety.

I use Hodgdon powders for the most part for hunting rounds and have found lower pressure loading data for the 30-06 and the 30-30 right on their website. Checked velocity with my Chrony and the results were similar

Really like the 180 grain 30-06 load that only shows 44,000+ CUP for a high velocity load.

Followed Hodgdons LE loads for 30-30 just like they are laid out online and have success with low listed pressure also.

The other powders I use are Accurate (2types) and W748 but am 2-3 grains lower on rifle loads and use the start loads for handgun practice rounds. In my CC pistol I carry factory rounds.

Recipes? Kitchen.

Load data? Bench.

Online manufacturers data, chronograph and sound reloading practices. To paraphrase "Start at the start, kiss & find pressure."

Works.

I often wonder a bit, at the people asking about what loads to use in their guns on the forums, and some of the answers. To a certain extent, I guess they don't know where to look, or are overwhelmed by the info that is available, or perhaps think there will be some magic formula available. Or is it related to the phenomenon I see elsewhere, of people not being able to, or being willing to, think thru a problem to a solution.
It really is a bonus to have all that data available, but, the basics are the basics, and quite often a lot of the data shown for a given cartridge, is common across the board, for a given bullet weight. There is usually a reason for that.
Online info can be very useful for finding data for obscure or obsolete stuff, that is not in a manual, but certainly needs to be verified still. Sometimes that is a process and a half in itself. It is interesting how much info the various companies have that is not published, and in talking to them, they sometimes will tell you they ran into issues, so it didn't get published, for that reason. Or, they just flat haven't had the time and money to do that combo.

Use Hodgdon online data a lot, but also use Ramshot/Accurate a lot as well. Alliant, occasionally.

And I have books as well.

With components being scarce and you might have to buy different stuff because of that, more data is needed to match things up. On line is a big help. That link to Steve's site in another post is a good one. First time that I have seen it. miles

My policy is to avoid using whatever Travis uses.

Yup, the internet is dying, hard copies are the way of the future.

I use a lot of data off the Internet, from sites by the bullet manufacturers, powder companies, etc., such as Barnes, Nosler, IMR, Winchester, and so forth.