This question is for everyone since it gets the most attention as well as gun writers since they can often see the bigger picture/trends being in the gun industry.

I remember reading that "conventional" wisdom was to start new & inexperienced shooter with down load or reduced loads from a "deer" rifles.

This wisdom also transferred to handgun cartridges, ie download 44mag loads, etc..


However, while this philosophy/point of view seems to hold true regarding handgun cartridge, it seems most disagree when it comes to rifle cartridges.

The current wisdom or advice given seem to recommend started with a smaller rifle cartridge. In my particular example, instead of downloading 308win to lower recoil levels the advice seems to gravitate toward either getting 243win or better yet get a 223rem and shoot the crap of it.

The conventional wisdom was that it's better to use full velocity potential of smaller rifle cartridge than use reduced/download of larger cartridge such as the 308win.

I don't understand why that it?

Is it because it's easier to get better bullet performance from the smaller rifle cartridge at it's standard/normal operating parameters vs. trying to find the right combination with downloaded larger rifle cartridge?

Or perhaps it's because that today we have more disposable income that our past generations thus can afford to get another rifle?

Appreciate any enlightenment from you more experience shooters and hand loaders. Thank you!


Leo

I don't get it either. To me, working with reduced loads as well as full strength ones simply increases the versatility of any given rifle, and is economical top boot. Heck, even when I get a small cartridge firing rifle, the first thing I do is work up reduced plinking/target loads for it too. I suspect machismo may be a factor with some folks.

Not a gun writer, but I do "download" quite a bit for a lot of my rifles, mainly for practice reasons. More time behind the trigger is always a good thing.

I also use reduced loads for new shooters. As both my daughters were getting ready for their first deer hunts, we stepped up from a .22 to their bigger rifles (257R & 6.5x55), but with reduced loads. That gave them a chance to familiarize themselves with the trigger, the safety, and the overall feel of the gun. They didn't hunt with the reduced loads (I sighted them in with full power loads), and when the time came, they didn't even feel the extra recoil, they just put the bullet where it's supposed to go!

Using reduced loads can also be cheaper. I use cast bullets and Trail Boss for most of my loads, and a bottle of TB will go a long way when you're only using 15-20gr at a time!

Personally, I simply dont see the point. Each rifle has its job, and if I need a lighter load, smaller bullet, less recoil, etc...I simply change rifles.

In general, aside from cast lead slugs from muzzleloaders, bullet performance these days is oft dependent on velocity, and most of those velocities are not in the mild range, hence the need for max velocities from smaller calibers.

Just a thought.

I reduce a 30-06 with round nose bullets for social events.

Yep.
At my 'maturity' (age) I don't see the need to waste powder & primers.

YMMV

Jerry

Leo,

You answered your own question, at least in part.

Despite the popularity of handloading, the majority of shooters still shoot factory ammo, so can't "download." Plus, avid shooters tend to own a lot more rifles, partly because lower-priced rifles have gotten so much more accurate, and have improved triggers.

The "versatility" of a certain cartridge was heavily emphasized by marketers both before and immediately after World War II. But as Americans became more affluent, more and more of us started owning multiple rifles for different purposes. Plus, considering inflation the price of centerfire rifles has actually dropped since the 1950's. In 1955 the suggested retail price of a Remington 721 or 722 (tat era's "affordable" centerfire was $88.35, according to GUN DIGEST.
This may seem like a steal, but the average household income in the U.S. back then was around $4000. Today it's over $50,000.

Adjusted for inflation, the price of a brand-new Ruger American Rifle in 2016 is about about half the price of a Remington 721/722 in 1955. Why spend time making reduced handloads for, say, a .308, when you can pick up a .223 and buy cheap ammo for it? Or handload .223's for considerably less than handloading .308's?

To further my case for shooting reduced loads in rifles, there is the cumulative effect of extended use of full charge loads in heavy kicking rifles. That being the very real physiological effect on one's nervous system and shoulder and neck. A lifetime of high power shooting along with multitudinous trap/skeet/sporting clays shots has left me with arthritis in my shoulder and neck- the cause diagnosed as such by two different docs. Snicker if you may, but it is a real concern, and can happen to the best of us. I refuse to let machismo override intelligence to exacerbate the situation.

I can't tell you how many of my pals who boastfully shoot nothing but 3" shells in their hunting guns, and .300-and-bigger Magdumb rifles have noticeably awkward flinches that they refuse to acknowledge for fear of being called wusses. All the regulars in my goose hunting group are like that, as well as the macho guys who haunt the local ranges.

Isnt that more of an issue of picking the right gun / load, as opposed to handicapping the one you have?

The frowning I mostly have seen in print regarding reduce loads was the issue of safety. Reduce loads often times involves powders that can be double loaded. If not caught upon visual inspection, it poses a danger. With the advent of fluffy Trail Boss, risk of a 2X load goes away.

Another reduced load risk I have seen in print is the possibility of lodging a bullet in the bore. A dangerous situation if the shooter is not paying attention and fires a follow-up round with the bore now obstructed.

Just another way to have fun with guns.

Recently, I find squirrel hunting with a .358W Savage 99 loaded with .38 cal pistol bullets at 1000 FPS more fun than with a .22LR.

I download 257 Roberts, .223, and 25-20, just to give me something else to try, and another application for the rifle. Townsend Whelen used to do it too, and it is just another way to use the rifle and reloading equipment.

For me it comes down to time. And I have not seen a deer killed with a .223 die any less deader.




Dave

Time can definitely be a factor. I've noticed that many if not most of the shooters who really like to dink around with reduced loads are retired.

There was a time that the hot topic of discussion was reduced rifle loads that, on rare occasions, destroyed rifles.

Dr. Brownell did a series ~1965-ish, and his work clearly showed that as rifle powder loads in his 30-06 were decreased below 30KPSI, the variation in chamber pressure became erratic. Using equipment with a much faster response time than we use today, he could see pressure spikes riding on the typical pressure vs. time curve. Today's equipment would simply filter out those spikes.

One of Brownell's students had a bullet lodged halfway down the barrel, and elected to push it out by putting a primed case with a little powder in it in the chamber, and pulling the trigger. The barrel was destroyed.

Hence, some disfavor for reduced loads in rifles.

As far as I know, the effect is limited to slow burning powders in rifles.

Why pull spark plug wires?

I shoot a lot of downloaded pistol ammo. Using (inexpensive) Berry plated bullets and light loads of fast burning powder, I can shoot gobs or 38 Special, 357 Magnum, 44 Magnum and 45 ACP for a relatively small cost.

I've never understood why some look down on light loads.

Apparently it's not entirely frowned upon, as demonstrated by the "light" loads sold by a number of makers. They won't make them if they don't sell. I suspect a number of people want to buy hunting rifles for their wives and children, but don't want to buy them again when they are able to handle more recoil. Light loads work very well there.

Light loads should work very well to reduce meat damage for those of us that like high-intensity (archaic term, I suppose) rifles, but get mostly close-in shots that can juice up the steaks pretty good unless shot placement is just so. I don't do that myself, but probably should. I do tend to stop adding powder to my loads when accuracy is acceptable in order to take it easy on brass and barrels.

I think it comes down to those who have reached sufficient rifle looney status to fiddle with reduced loads, can more easily convince themselves they need another gun. I did quite a bit with reduced loads when my 35 whelen was my only rifle, but somehow found myself replacing those loads with a .223 rifle.

This explains that why, to a degree, I don't mind reducing loads, but when the efficiency of a load falls off or it becomes erratic, I tend to look for a smaller case that will allow pressure more in the intended working range.

Conversely, I'm not a huge fan of real high pressure, either.

It all boils down to the range of performance that a case will perform with consistency with the available powder/bullet combinations, otherwise it's time to upsize/downsize until the performance is suitable.

Here is Dr. Brownell's graph of pressure vs. powder charge for 3031 powder in a 30-06, behind a 220 grain bullet.

Below 30 grains, the pressure becomes more erratic.

Note that he got one reading of ~48KPSI with 20 grains of powder, a pressure very far from typical.

Although I think nobody fully understands this, the rule of thumb that evolved was that if you're using slow powder in a rifle, the case needs to be at least 2/3 full. I can't say that the rule is reliable, but it is true that there is demon that lives in small charges of slow powder in rifles. Just where he lives is not clear.

I shoot cast bullets for many reasons. I like cast bullet loads.

What happens when you do both? I recently bought a RAR in .223, then made some reduced loads for it! Of course, this was an experiment to cover the .22LR shortages, but I digress......

Informative post.

Do you know if Dr. Brownell determine pressure v.s. powder weight with Red Dot vis-a-vis C.E. Harris' 'The Load'?

I believe you have fun!

Denton, good info, thanks for sharing. Do you mind providing a reference? I'd like to read more about Dr. Brownell's work in this area.

Regarding the OP, I often use reduced loads for subsonic/suppressed shooting, even in large cases, but rarely run reduced loads for any other reason. I use cast bullets for most of my suppressed/subsonic loads as well, which in my experience are more consistent and less prone to stuck bullets in highly reduced loads.

That describes it 'to me'.


Jerry

Personally, I find "reduced" loads often are much better for specific tasks.

Loading a .223 with 32-35 grain Hornet bullets and 8-12 grain loads of Green Dot makes for a superbly useful round to vaporize small varmints. It does so with very reduced noise levels and virtually no recoil. While ultimate maximum range is reduced a little, they are still well more than enough to whack coyotes with. Similar .243 loads are equally an improvement for that work. Using the very light weight, very fragile bullets at 2000-3200 FPS instead of 22 lr/22 Mag makes for a lot of fun and quiet fun at that.

Less in this case is actually more.

[size:17pt][i]Reference for Brownell Data[/i][/size]

Dr. Brownell did this formal paper for Dupont, plus he published a series in one of the gun mags about the same time.

If you search through the article and look at the oscilloscope traces you can see small ultrasonic oscillations riding on the pressure curve in some places. Current equipment would deliberately filter out those oscillations. In his popular press articles, he found some disturbing large, fast spikes riding on the curve with reduced charges of slow powder.

He was using a Tektronix 564 oscilloscope. I worked at Tek not much later. Brownell was coached by some friends of mine, who also trained me in physical measurements so that I could be the regional physical measurements support guy when I was a Field Engineer.

I don't think it presents any particular danger to back off 2-3 grains in large case rifle loads in order to manage recoil. I think the trouble begins when the case has a lot of empty space and slow burning powder.

There are exceptions, John! I've been dinking around with reduced loads since 1968 when I was a sophomore in HS. Back then it was 155gr. plain base cast bullets over 6gr. Red Dot in a .30-40 Krag. Can't say how many thousand shots of that load I shot away in the backyards of my life in that and similar cartridges. I still shoot that and similar loads in all my .30's, none bigger than an .30-06. Cheaper than premium .22 LR's.

Loads like that do indeed buy a lot more trigger time for the buck. The gas it takes to get to the range and back costs me more than an afternoon of shooting.

A wise man told me once that all a bullet has to do is go fast enough to make a hole in the paper. When hunting season rolls around, up the ante, sight-in, go hunting.

I got into reloading back in 2000 with the help of several of the folks on this august forum (back then we were on shooters.com) for the specific reason of downloading 357 Mag, 44 Mag, and 30-06.

I'll speak about the latter one first. I was shooting 30-06 at whitetail deer and wanted a load that could work at treestand distances, and I really did not need more. I ended up shooting about 5% off MAX with H4895 under a 165 grain bullet, and after all this time, I have not found a better deer killer inside 250 yards.

I was also raising two sons to hunt deer, and I found a 12 yr old could handle a 30-06 as long as it wasn't loaded up to the MAX.

With 357 Mag and 44 Mag, my theory was to load 38 SPL and 44 SPL loads in 357 Mag and 44 Mag cases. That would allow me to shoot lighter loads for practice while not eroding the chamber. I started with Unique and migrated over time to TiteGroup and Universal.

These are all middle of the road powders as far as burn rate. I mostly stay away from slow powders for specifically the reason that I don't want to encounter the demon.

It costs me time and more money to shoot reduced loads, and the recoil improvement wasn't world changing, so I stopped.

I played with 125 BTs and H4895 for a 30-06 for a little while. I normally use H4350 or IMR4350, with 150-180 grain bullets. Experimenting with 125 grain bullets and another powder meant more money buying more components that I probably wouldn't hunt with anyways. And the recoil, though noticeably reduced from 180 grain loads, was not that different from 150 grain loads. And it was certainly still more than a low recoiling 6BR or 22 LR max load.

If I want to shoot I prefer a low recoiling rifle. A 22 LR is probably the most fun for me (especially shooting cans or whatever with the kids), and the 6 BR takes care of longer range stuff.

If I want to practice with my hunting rifles I shoot them with full loads.

I've seen 7yr old girls have fun with both .223 rifles and downloaded "deer rifles". They couldn't really tell the difference. A 7lb 7mm-08 youth gun can actually have a bit of kick to it with full-house loads, but not with blue-dot loads and varmint bullets. It gets a person familiar with a rifle and lets them grow into it. Does it have the downrange ballistics of a varmint rifle? No, but it can still be a good tool for practice. I also download my Whelen single shot for primitive weapons season, simply because I don't like the recoil with full-power loads. Kills just fine at .358win carbine speeds.

Old farts have time. 😄 Plus arthritis and a miscellaneous pains😞

One of my nephews started out with a 7mm RM loaded to 7x57 power. Another nephew started out with a 308 at 30-30 levels.

One of my 06's shoots nothing but cast.

Sometimes it's nice to have camp meat. A reduced load works well for that.

Curious how his 20grn load that pressure spiked would be right in line with a 40grn powder charge...seems pretty clear he double charged on one.

Thanks Denton for the good info.

I've been rightly accused of dinking around with reduced loads in the past, basically as a means of producing a low-recoil practice load. I don't dink around with them any more, I've pretty much got it pegged.

Just load the case in question with about a 40-45% case capacity charge of AA5744, and you should be GTG. I've heard some folks like to us Trail Boss for this now, too, but I've been using 5744 with great results for a long time and it works really well. I first learned about this concept from the Speer Reloading Manual #12, which recommended a reduced .308 Win load using AA5744 and the 100 gr Plinker bullet to make a very light recoiling load suitable for young kids, small gals, etc, to learn how to handle and shoot a fullsize .308 caliber rifle. AA actually published a note about how to use this powder for reduced loads as well, some time ago.

I'll typically load 3 rounds each at 40%, 40% +1 gr, +2 gr, +3 gr, and +4 gr. (In other words, if a full charge of powder up to the base of the bullet was 50 gr, I'd prepare test loads of 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 gr.) Take 'em to the range and see which one is most accurate, then use that as your practice load. So far it's worked well for me in .308, .30-06, .338 Mag, and .375 H&H Mag applications.

The other "reduced" load application I learned about from Paco Kelly's "Lever Rifles" book years ago. Simply load a long-for-caliber cast bullet over 2-4 gr of Bullseye. In my case, I tried it with a 6.5x55 Swede 1893 Mauser rifle, loaded with ~160 gr cast bullets. I got about 850 fps with that load out of my military Mauser (long barrel helps) that was quiet enough I could use it to shoot feral cats in the city without scaring the neighbors.

Not that I actually shot any feral cats, mind you. Certainly not any feral tomcats yowling around the house at all hours of the night when the neighbors she-cat was in heat and locked up in the old bat's screened porch for days on end. No, not me. This was strictly a theoretical sort of study kind of load development deal, sorta. Ahem.

I wonder if one could down load 223rem to 22lr levels with either cast bullets or hornet bullets?

If so what powder would you use? Unique? 2400? trail boss?

AA5744 or Trail Boss. Use 40% of case capacity as your hard deck, if you load below that you risk getting bullets stuck in the bore.

A cast bullet can be pounded out of a barrel fairly easily without harming the bore. A jacketed bullet, not so much. Don't ask me how I know this.

Leo,

I tend to use 5744 more than Trail Boss in the .223, and in other cartridges. 5744 just seems to be easier to handle, and even though it costs a little more than some other rifle powders, it costs less than TB. Plus, it also works very well in many full-power loads, both in the .223 and other rounds.

I used to play with reduced loads but really don't have time for it anymore. I just use my full power loads with cheaper bullets and get my practice that way.

I have rifles chambered for 223 and 257 Roberts and now a 6.5 Creedmoor. None of these recoil at all heavily and are easily managed for as much shooting as I need to do.

Years ago I bought a .458 African Model 70 Super Grade with the idea that I could load it to 45-70 levels. I had a hang fire that caused me to reconsider.
I still load down the 308 that my late wife used, and my 30-06 with cast lead bullets.
Yes I am retired.
whelennut

I found a load for a 222 Rem in an old Speer manual I believe of 10 grains of SR 4759 behind a 55 grain fmj. Very accurate out of my 24V. Had a bit of an issue however, I shot it the other day in hot weather and had pressure problems with one round. I stopped shooting came home and weighed every round I had loaded for a double charge and found none. Besides a double charge is there something else that could have happened? I have shot plenty of these in warm weather with absolutely no problems, but to be honest it sounded like I had 20 grains of powder instead of 10, it was loud and the action was very tight after firing.

Sure. Out of a 20" barrel, I get 1800 FPS with a 55 grain FMJ bullet, CCI 450 primer, and 7.5 grains of Accurate #5. That's sort of a husky 22 Mag.

With 5 grains, I get a little over 1300.

Didn't test whether the twist was enough to stabilize the bullets.

You can shoot those loads for around $.08 each if you have poly coated cast or plated bullets. Or if you bought a large quantity of FMJs for less than $.05 each a long time ago.

I didn't meet the demon, but that doesn't mean he doesn't live there. But the only kabooms I've read about happened with reduced loads of rifle powder.

Your mileage will vary from mine. Use at your own risk.

Some powders are position sensitive, and some are not. Universal and TightGroup seem not to be position sensitive. Don't remember my conclusion on #5. I did the load testing before I started testing pistol powders for position sensitivity.

It would seem you found the one out of that batch that was double charged.

SR-4759 is/was the t*ts for midrange loads and cast bullets in about everything under the sun. Sadly it was discontinued last year. Thank god I have enough stashed to get me well into my golden years. 20 grains/180 cast bullet yields honest 1 1/4 MOA in my current 1903A1 National Match rifle (and often better with the NOE 308-169)- 10 shot groups, issue sights. Certainly not up to current "internet standards", but the gun won't shoot any better than that with Lake City Match ammo- at about 1/10 the cost. (And I'm not wearing out barrels also.)

I visually check and double check charged cases in the loading block before seating bullets, and in nigh onto a half-century of dinking with drastically reduced loads I've never experienced a double charge. Care and common sense rules at the loading bench.

I don't know how low I have loaded them, but I know it has been under 2000 FPS. I'd guess about 1600 based on noise. I don't FL resize any more. I just use a Lee collet neck sizer.

Blue Dot is great for this! I never tried to see how low I could go or worried about velocity. When I need really quiet I use .22 CB longs in long barreled rifles. Out of those rifles, the firing pin makes more noise than anything.

I only shoot .22 lr anymore because the rifles are fun or I need super quiet. The .223 is a better substitute and only a little louder.

Your choice of bullet and 8.0 grains of Trail Boss....1950fps

If carried to extremes the practice can be dangerous.

why does anybody bother to buy a 44 mag or a 357 if all they shoot are 44 spec and 38 spec load equiv.

Because there's no reason not to.




Dave

The answer to that is simple in my case: I don't just shoot SPL loads. I shoot at a variety of levels. However, for plinking and general use, I usually stay on the low side.

It makes more sense to shoot a light 357 Mag load than a hot 38 SPL load; there is less that can go wrong. You also have a bit more strength in the firearm should something go wrong.

With the deer rifles, I have to trim brass less, because there is lower pressure. It's also much easier to work up an accurate load; usually the first attempt at 5% off MAX is as good as it gets.

In thirty five years of reloading I believe this was my first. I have never had a major malfunction or even close to now. I check and recheck everything so that is why I was wondering if there could be anything else that would cause such a reaction. Definitely not one to push envelopes, but the idea of a true multi-use rifle intrigued my curiosity, rabbits, squirrels, turkeys, varmint ecetera. I think I'll buy a 22 mag over a 410 or 20 gauge and stick to full power loads. My 24V shoots those exceptionally well for these rifles, well under 1 MOA.

4759 is pretty forgiving. Short of a double charge I'm at a loss as to what to say. 100% of my experience with 4759 has been with cast bullets. I never used any behind a jacketed one. You weren't using a filler of any kind, were you?

Have you priced .22RF Mags lately? Have you even seen any on the shelf? I haven't in a long time. Might be different where you are. If I were in the market for a rimfire with more snot than a .22LR, I would go the .17 route myself.

Were it me, I would snag a mold that throws a 50 grain bullet and use it in your rifle with whatever charge of Unique, 2400, 4759, 4227, 5744, etc. that gives you 16-1900fps and have what would amount to a .22RF Super- at less than half the cost of RF Mags, and tuneable to your rifle. A little work? Sure. But it's an avenue of rifle experimentation that is very satisfying, especially if you're like me and get bored with the same old thing easily.

I used a 40gr Nosler BT and 4.5 grains of TB = 1430fps. I was trying to get under 1100fps (subsonic), but a 40gr bullet is too light. It shot into about 2 inches @ 100yds from my RAR Predator.

Yes..there is typically an accuracy node down around that point...bu there is typically another at or a little above listed max. The higher pressure node is usually much more consistent, and of course, faster. For me, I will take speed with accuracy every time, and in certain circumstances, I will sacrifice a certain amount of accuracy for speed. More speed makes slippery bullets behave much better at all ranges, but especially long ones.

In the end, I dont "frown upon" reduced loads...I simply dont see the point.

Let me get this straight: If you had a 700horsepower Dodge Charger would you drive it at its full potential all the time? 150MPH bazai runs to the Safeway? 160 MPH jaunts to the dentists office? Or just open her up out on a lonely stretch of interstate now and then? Same exact analogy holds true for rifles, IMO.

If a 700hp Charger was my only vehicle? Sure....but I prefer to have other vehicles (rifles) to do the job at hand.

If I want to ring steel at 1200yds, I dont grab a 22 Hornet, and I dont reach for a 300 Win Mag to shoot rabbits.

Yes. Cast bullets and Bullseye will get you there easily, or even slower if you want. Any of the really fast pistol/shotgun powders work for this; it almost doesn't even matter which powder you choose, so much as the burn rate.

Seafire a member on this forum has done a lot of shooting with blue dot and 223. I tried it and like what I found. I dont always want to shoot at longer ranges and like these loads.
I believe that he uses them because he is a very high volumne shooter. More bang for the buck.

I have yet to see a load that would shoot well at long range, that wouldnt shoot at shorter ranges as well.

Thank you to all who have replied. You given much food for thought.

I had a couple of thoughts regarding reduce loads when I started this thread.

For my 308Win, I would find a reduced load and stay with using it. I'd use either 125 nosler B-tip or hornady 130gr SP and keeping it around 2800fps. Then try to match correspond Barnes 130gr TTSX to those b-tips. This should keep recoil around 243win levels but with benefit of the 30-cal. was my thought process. Right or Wrong? Or is this too much effort and I should just get 243win?



In regards to 223rem. It's just a very versatile round, IMHO. Called Hodgdon and found some subsonic load data for it that would allow me to duplicate a 22lr. So via hand loading, it can serve as 22lr, standard 223rem duties, and with premium bullets serve as light duty deer round!


I freely admit, that my newness to hand loading has made me over enthusiastic here, but hand loading has just open so many doors that weren't considered possible being restricted to factory ammo.

Thank you for indulging a newbie hand loader, who's gone a little wild on all the new possibilities that have been opened to me.



Leo

Scroll down to Varmint forum and check out The Rimfire Alternative thread...

There was a good article in the Hodgdon annual a few years back featuring reduced loads with various X bullets in a number of cartridges. The author believed they were more effective than lighter rounds like the .243. He used mostly H4895, which is safe down to about 60% of full charge loads. Hodgdon publishes a data sheet for reduced loads on its website.

Leo,

2800 fps with a 125-130 grain bullet isn't going to quite get your .308 down to .243 recoil levels. I know this partly because a few years ago Eileen started getting headaches at recoil levels much higher than a .243 with a 100-grain bullet. When we tried to download her .308 (which she used to use with full-power 150-grain load) with 130-grain TSX's, even 2700 fps wasn't mild enough. Eventually we put a muzzle brake on the .308, and now she can shoot it with 130 TSX's at 2800 without getting headaches.

However, it might be close enough for your purposes. If not, in a .308 110's at 2800 are closer to .243 recoil.

Everybody needs a 223 that shoots 75 Amax. It flys the same as a 30-06 with 165 AB's and I know which I'd rather shoot 50 rounds of in an afternoon. Save the heavy stuff for hunting, play with the 223 while improving your wind skills at the same time.

Just a little different perspective.

I've started each of my kids on "the one" rifle that they will use for all their hunting until they buy their own (if ever). For that purpose, reduced loads have been a godsend.

Really reduced loads are just plain FUN to practice with as well.

I've had good luck with H4895 for reduced loads. I was always of the opinion that you needed full cases to get decent accuracy and consistent ignition, but H4895 proved me wrong!

Hodgdon H4895 Reduced Loads

This is the correct answer. Why take a bike when you can drive? Why cook when you can buy take out?

Um, cause you feel like it?

I wouldn't look to others for an explanation of why to reduce loads. Do it because it's fun. You're curious. You want to match the bullet to the optimum velocity. Economy. You just feel like it.

Follow the loads in a manual to reduce velocity, or other reliable source.

SEE was observed years ago, and known to be dangerous, so use published data using medium or fast burning powders for your reduced loads.

If you're lucky, the powder or bullet companies can sometimes be coaxed into giving free advice.

For my 308Win, I would find a reduced load and stay with using it. I'd use either 125 nosler B-tip or hornady 130gr SP and keeping it around 2800fps. Then try to match correspond Barnes 130gr TTSX to those b-tips. This should keep recoil around 243win levels but with benefit of the 30-cal. was my thought process. Right or Wrong? Or is this too much effort and I should just get 243win
[/quote]

I like your thinking. As has been stated, a 125 at 2800 will recoil more than a .243 but I doubt the difference would be significant. If it is and you don't want the recoil, load it down a little lower. My son shot his first deer, a small doe, with a 120 Sierra from a 7-08 at a muzzle velocity of 2300 fps. She went about 20 yards and started wobbling before tipping over dead so I'm confident your 125 or 130 from a .308 at 2800 or so work very well. Good luck with whatever you decide upon.

There is still a place for reduced loads and 60% loads. A 458 Win. at 45/70 or even Colt velocities is one.

One reason they are not as popular as they once were is in addition to all the previous reasons fewer people hunt for the pot like in times past. You just don't pot a grouse when you have Elk near unless you are really in a wilderness area.

Used to load down 120 gr. 270 bullets to about 2500 fps. for a Turkey load which worked well. But I quit using them when I accidentally let one go on a deer, it worked fine but I didn't want to push my luck. Colonel Whelen accidentally fired an almost squib load at a Grizzly, not good.

What all of you fellows are doing does not meet MY needs and doesn't fit MY situation and I don't understand why anyone would do anything that isn't a perfect fit for ME. So you all need to run your lives according to whatever is best for ME.

There. Case closed.

Jim,
Have you ever considered running for public office?

The lightest rifle I own is a 375 H&H Magnum.
I have never fired it with factory ammo and maybe never will.

Loaded to 2200 fps with a flat nose 200 gr Sierra or a 220 gr Hornady it makes a very deadly deer rifle and I enjoy using it a lot.

I thought about public office but I'm a lousy liar, I'd never make it...

During this recent shortage H4350 was hard to come by, and 42 to 46 grains of IMR4895 goes further than 60+ grains of H4350. so I use a lot of IMR4895 in reduced loads across multiple rifles - 30-06, .308, .270, 270 WSM etc. Plus I don't want to firewall my older mil surps, one of them being 101 years old, so a middlin' does of IMR4895 works really well to keep them shooting.

The way I see it, this is a hobby. Do whatever floats your boat, and if the other fellow doesn't like it, that's his problem. I do note that out of everyone I've ever met who thinks they have some right to say what I or anyone else should do, exactly 100% of them take great umbrage to the thought that they should do things the way I tell them to. Humanity is interesting that way.

As long as you're not putting ice in sipping whiskey or cooking steaks past medium rare we'll be OK.

Yes, sir!

Actually, I think we see eye to eye on that.

Shooting really isn't as complicated as people try to make it.

The real answer to the question is "Because people like to frown a lot."

If you want less recoil in a rifle, remember to use stick powders and not ball. Those large muzzle flashes you get with ball powders generate a lot of extra recoil even with lighter loads. If you have to use ball powder, use a flash suppressor or muzzle break.

This ^^^^^^

Personally, have all of the components on hand to load some .30-30 cartridges for a slightly built 10 year old nephew who wants to use his great-grandfather's lever rifle to take his first deer this fall. First order of business will be to spin up an accurate, reduced recoil, practice load to get him acclimated to the rifle. Then an accurate, middle of the road, hunting round. He is already deadly on the small end of pop cans out past 30 yards with a .22.

He is a suburban "concrete kid" growing up in a non-shooting / non-hunting family. Want to ensure that his transition to centerfire rifle does not scare him off of shooting or hunting.

When my late wife started shooting her .308 deer rifle we shot up several hundred of the Sierra Round nose 110 gr. M1 carbine bullets.
These are very mild to shoot and are quite a deterrent to rabbits in the garden.
Eventually we moved up to the 125 gr spitzer.

This discussion is confusing. I picked up a 650 grain .50 cal mould awhile back, and a .30 cal cough. What's a fella 'sposed to do, hey?

Boom! Or pop. Whatever works.

Brother, did you ever nail it there! The utter contempt some people here show for those who don't view things the same as they do is beyond belief. I can imagine that living or working with one of those jokers would be pure Hell.

I don't know a heck of a lot, but I'm the world's leading expert on what I like.😜

Bingo!

The most disturbing attribute of some people is their steadfast refusal to consider other options. A sure indicator of regressive evolution if I ever saw one.

It's harder to get unwrapped from the crap that get wrapped in it. Guns are funny things.

Once I find something that works for me, I generally stop there and enjoy what I've got. What's that an indicator of?

Go,easy on me , Doc.😉

Common sense? Fellas generally won't kick their own dog, and will fight to defend whatever "choice" they made. Bullets, rifles, scopes, whatever. I will say hand-loading was nothing but waste of time and money.

For me....

No, that can't be it. Gotta be a better explanation!

[quote]The way I see it, this is a hobby. Do whatever floats your boat, and if the other fellow doesn't like it, that's his problem. /quote] Jim In Idaho

Best comment in the whole thread to me.

I have found over the years that I enjoy hunting and shooting certain rifles because of the rifle, not necessarily the cartridge it is chambered for. If I can reduce the load and make the rifle more suitable for the game I'm after or circumstances I'm hunting under, I don't hesitate to do it. A 30/06 loaded like a 30/30 might suit a particular location I'm hunting and make my hunting trip more enjoyable because I'm using the rifle I want to carry.

While I have a reputation for goofing around with reduced loads, I have received quite a lot of flack for it over the years.... but then again, have gotten a lot of requests for my work on it.. often from people who weren't even members on the two forums I was a member of, but joined it just to PM me asking questions about my results.

I enjoy playing at the reload bench is what got me started on it actually... I am a 'what if' kind of guy also. Some think I tend to overthink stuff, but I gather that is they applying the what's good for them, should be good enough for me and everyone else...

Like George Carlin said, "why do we think everyone driving slower than we are, is an idiot and everyone driving faster than we are, is a maniac".. guess too many people think their way is the International Gold Standard.

Working a lot with kids, I've found that reduced loads have been very handy.... its hard to imagine a bigger smile on a kid, that watching his face, after they pull the trigger on a load, that they loaded themselves at my load bench.. with supervision of course.

I've also noticed every year at our range, plenty of people sighting in their rifles, the few nights before deer season opens. Its heavily filled with folks who bought a new bigger caliber rifle, or a new scope. They try sighting in at 100 yds, and wonder why it takes so much ammo to zero a scope. I do like the way they leave all that brass behind tho.

Average blacktail around here is 100 to 110 pounds. and shot at 75 yds or less. Often wondered why someone needs a 500 yd load, to kill a 100 pound black tail at 75 yds or so... especially if you are a handloader.

I hunt what I call 30/30 ranges, and load accordingly, while still using lighter calibers and bullets. A lot of bubba experimenting has shown me that a lot of "non premium" bullets work more than just fine, while recoiling much less than even a 30/30.

Those loads work even fine on larger deer. I've posted pics of one of the larger blacktails I have taken... it weighed 210 lbs on the hoof, a well fed suburban buck...

That one was shot with a 7 x 57, using a 115 grain HP Speer.. bullet placed right thru the heart. Recoil was minimal... 28 grains of SR 4759 IIRC.

And then there is component costs, wear and tear on your equipment....

Some seem to think the faster you burn up a barrel, and the more you spend on components somehow equate to the macho factor... I'm tougher because I burn up my barrel quicker, and spend more on components than you do, which makes you a sissyboy.....If you think that way, knock yourself out.

Got a 243 Rem ADL sitting right here.....got a new box of 750 count Speer 70 grain TNT bullets delivered while out of town.... I don't exactly know what people think the barrel count is to burn out a 243 barrel... but this barrel has over 5,000 rounds thru it.. still as accurate as the day I brought it home from Walmart.

Loaded up 20 rounds last night, to take a trip to the range today... 30 grains of IMR 4198, ( yielding 230 rounds out of that pound of powder)... more than enough zing to easily practice skills out to 200 to 250 yards.

Brass was a gift from Blue ( Rio7 from down at the Quemado Event, how brought a batch of us, brass from his home range, shot by clients ).....Those 20 pieces of brass will easily get 40 to 50 reloads out of them using this load, and by neck sizing, using a body die to bump the shoulder back when needed and annealing every 4th reload.

So that stretches out the shooting budget on components, and also barrel life on the rifle.... as in the past, that will get me labeled as "Cheap" by quite a few.. but then I don't live by others "Macho Factor", and to whatever degree it might be running at for today.

Macho or not, I don't know anyone who doesn't enjoy shooting these loads...., and they will easily take a deer any day of the week.... aids in shot placement.. and even the macho crowd will admit, shot placement trumps everything else....

Heck I am sure many, will criticize a load in a 243 of a 55 grain Ballistic tip, running at 2400 to 2500 fps at the Muzzle for deer hunting.....but you'd be surprised how that bullet will perform at those speeds, and especially with shot placement.. which is fairly easy when what is fueling it is 25 grains of 4198....Blacktails have fallen to kids 10 years old around here with that bullet and a load of 20 grains of 4198.....

Hardly a load for the macho crowd.... yet a 10 yr old usually doesn't care.. and as Travis said above, Dead is Dead... and these aren't a tracking job end result....

Final thoughts.....

if one wants to take about any spitzer bullet, look in any reload manual's trajectory charts....

If one zeros the scope at 3.5 inches high at 100 yds, and that bullet has an MV of 2250 fps at the muzzle ( 30/30 speeds).... you'll note that it is pretty much dead on at 200 yds ( give or take)....and is 3.5 inches low at about 230 to 240 yds.

now lets analyze an antelope... regardless of size, its skeletal structure when measured from backbone/spine to its breast bone/ sternum is going to be 14 inches....about 17 inches or so if it is a whitetail or mule deer...

So lets cut that in half.... giving us a window of opportunity of 7 inches....

put your cross hairs on fur at close by or out to 230-240 yds, you won't have to compensate at all for distance...

since 90 % of all game is taken at 100 yds or under... and 95% taken at 200 yds or less... 2250 fps at the muzzle with ANY spitzer bullet is going to hit home as long as the shooter can hold steady... ( can't help ya with the hold steady part ).... the bullet placement will be there....

then check what your MV will be at that distance... still more than enough for the average plain old bullet to open up and do its job.... .even moreso, with those so called 'fragile' varmint bullets... slow them down, surprisingly they will act like regular bullets as opposed to varmint bullets...


years ago, a local handicapped 8 yr old, was going to hunt with his grandpa, right off the family porch... gramps had an older than dirt 30/30....deer wondered thru the yard all the time....well a 110 grain Hornady RN/SP, fueled by 10 grains of Unique, dropped that deer for that young man, at just under 100 yds...He was thrilled, grandpa was thrilled, grandma was thrilled, as was mom and dad....

The macho factor involved was ZERO, but the smiles on that youngster's face, I was told, would have lit up the night.

If a reduced load would work for a handicapped 8 yr old in a wheel chair, even if off of grandpa's porch, I wouldn't be surprised if it would work for the most macho of guys with their 7 Rem Mag, lift kit on the pick up, 35 to 38 inch Mudders.. and camo everything.. ya know, all the important stuff one needs to hunt deer macho style.

Oh and that load also allowed grandpa, who was fairly handicapped due to old age, wack a deer for himself later in the week.....

They may not be for everyone, but reduced loads certainly have a place and certainly do work just fine for the job intended in MOST situations applied.... when it comes to deer or smaller....

even thoughtful loads that are reduced ( right bullet etc) have been known to take Elk down also...like a 650 lb 11 year old cow elk, taken at Gardner Montana by a son of a buddy, when he was 12....30/06, 165 grain ballistic tip, 30 grains of 4198, at 175 yds.. 2250 fps MV...

worked for that young man just fine.. easy shot placement...

he still shoots that load when deer hunting, according to his dad....out of the same 30/06 I got for him back then...

except he is now a 2 tour Iraq war vet, 225 lbs and a Montana State Trooper... Lack of "macho" never bothers him evidently either...

now let the flaming begin...

Seafire:

Great posts. Coming from a rookie reloader, I have a question: how do you know both how low a load can be reduced and which powder to use?

Thanks again. My daughter wants to shoot "daddy's rifle" but I don't want her to do it with daddy's loads.

RM

Lyman's cast bullet manual gives a lot of reduced load info you won't find anywhere else.

I dont see it as macho, its efficient. If I want to sling a 55gr bullet at reduced speeds, there are calibers that do that.

Yes, barrels burn..they are a consumable, just like powder, brass, and primers. My current snot slinging 243 Ackley will be lucky to see 1500rds before the barrel is toast...and I knew that going into it. Its all part of the game.

Very good advice!

Fairly easy Mike.

AS Gonnahh mentioned, Cast Bullet manuals are a great source...

Another is the old IMR "Brown Sheet" if you can find one...

That is a pamphlet where they took the major calibers used by the public, and then picked several bullet weights and then tested it with each of the powders they made.. from SR 4759 up to 4831 or 7828.

4198 ( either one), RL 7, and 5744 are great powders to use for that type of service....

so are 2400 which is hard to find, and 4759 which sadly was eliminated and no longer produced

4227 is also a good choice, similar to 2400, but I've had better consistency with the ones I mentioned first...

IMR 4895 is a great powder for that also... Hodgdon lists H 4895 for reduced loads, however the info they give out was not developed by them but by ADI whom they buy the powders from...

I have two issues with H 4895 for that duty..
1. It has a loud retort which can intimidate some younger and feminine shooters.
2 it is inconsistent, one load can be a tack driver and then change it up or down a 1/10 of a grain and its all over the place.
One can use IMR 4895, using H 4895s reduced load data, and it is pretty consistent across the board along with not showing up with that loud boom that might intimidate younger shooter, of which I work with a lot.

And as far as Lilly's Dad comments, about his 243 AI.. I'm not taking issue of faulting them here, he and I just make different choices.

He considers 1500 rounds thru a barrel is acceptable. That's cool for him. My ADL Rem in 243 here, has 3 times that number of rounds down the barrel, and then some and its accuracy is still going strong.. when it goes south, I'll set the barrel back, rechamber and it'll still last a long time.

Yet shooting it at usually 250 yds or under, bullets have never failed to reach the target I'm aiming at. Last deer it took was at 50 yds or so.... with an 87 grain SP Hornady... didn't need a lot of high velocity for that.. again I hunt at 30/30 ranges, so I load for that distance.

I've got 223s, 22.250s, 260s right up thru 444 Marlins to use.. but a 2400 fps 243 works just fine at those distances...

Neither one of us are right or wrong.. we both load to what we think fits our needs.. which shows the versatility of the cartridge.. any one of them, and also shows both are still lethal within the parameters we are using them in...

Barrel life, I look at the same way I do tires....

I could get high performance ones for my car, that last 20K, but really grip the road in fast high speed turns etc...

I don't drive my vehicles that way.. so I buy something that fits my driving style, and will safely last me 60,000 plus miles...

its all about choices and needs, and desires...

no one is really wrong or more right than the other.

Seafire,

Thank you for that wealth of information. As a new hand loader myself, I was unaware that H4895 gave a load report when using reduce loads. Reduced loads was the reason I look to purchase H4895.

I have a lot of Uniqe on hand but limited 2400 and titegroup. Did find a small bottle of Trailboss.

I have the Lyman's cast bullet book, but don't think they list jacketed bullets?

You won't get in trouble substituting jacketed for cast in Lyman's light loads. Just don't substitute jacketed for cast in super light loads, such as 150 grain bullet over 6 grains Bullseye, .30-40 Krag. You'll likely stick a bullet in the bore. Ask me how I know...

For those who don't know - remember to work down with light loads like this, not up like you would with normal high pressure loads.

That's fairly common knowledge among those loading for subsonic/suppressed applications, but may not be immediately obvious to everyone else.

gnoahh, I got a little confused. Lyman uses cast bullets. Does that mean I can substitute identical weight jacketed bullet with same load data?


Yondering, so if I used Hodgdon's 60% rule for H4895, don't begin at their lightest 60% charge, correct?

I'll leave it like this: I have, and had no issues, in a number of instances over the years. As with all advice garnered on the internet "you pays your money and takes your chances." In the end, a man has to step into the water to see just how deep it is.

Leo,

Cast bullet loads are waaay below SAAMI specs for pressure. Therefore substituting a jacketed bullet should present no problems.

if using H4895, and you start at their 60% rule, since it has been tried and tested by ADI who gave them the information, there should be zero issues. Same can apply to using IMR 4895 instead. All of these KaBooms one can hear about, happened with much slower powders being reduced, such as 4350, 4831 etc. Even P.O. Ackley tried to duplicate the situation in the lab, and couldn't, so he couldn't conclude why it happened.

Powders like 4198, can be reduced lower than the 60% rule with zero issues....I refer to Ingwe's Bunny Loads, as they are called on the campfire here, 12.5 grains of 4198 with a 50 grain bullet in a 223 case.

Using one's head, instead of letting old wives tales rule your thinking when at the load bench, goes a long way.

Most naythsayers will admit, they haven't worked with downloading cartridges much, if at all.... and then justify their lack of hands on experience, with the excuse "they know better". Apply that logic to the subject of driving a car, and you'll see how ridiculous that is.

Cast bullet manuals have loads that have been tested, so one is pretty safe with those. The most important issue in safety is one's loading techniques at the load bench. Its no different than when loading handgun cartridges, yet somehow rifle handloaders often think it is a case of being a mad scientist.

I started a thread in the "Reloading" section, but since it is already being discussed here:

Has anyone clocked any reduced H4895 loads in 270 Win? For a 130-gr bullet I'm aiming for 2200 fps, and my dead reckoning suggests about 29.5 grs H4895. (Hodgdon's 60% rule yields 27 grs as the max safe reduced load.)

If you use 60% of the powder, will it give 60% of the velocity?

Yes, with single-based powders like H4895. Within normal limits, velocities are proportional to charge.

Double-based powders don't work the same way. Velocity tends to decrease more than proportionally to charge, how much depending on the amount of nitroglycerin in the specific powder.

That was really only a brain fart,but when I got got home I tried the 270 and 243's that are H4895 reduced to 60% of max. They were 61% for the 243's and 62% for the 270's. I loaded 5 270's at 80%. Sure enough, right on 80% of projected velocity. I thought that pretty cool!

Yeah, it's real handy, especially when using either of the 4895's!

And, if I understand these comments correctly, the IMR version doesn't have the loud report of the H version. Is that correct?

I have no idea. They're all loud to me.

I enjoy shooting cast bullets in the .45-70 with reduced loads (Unique & Trail Boss) and peep sights. Always fun to see how far I can hit the "dinger". Time to file down that front sight some more. :^)

Huh? Whattid you say? I can't hear you.

Thanks, that's very useful data! I'm obliged to ya'.

The reduced loads seem quiet to me compare to regular loads. How could they be louder?? I will post some deer and pig pics killed with reduced loads tomorrow. The animals couldn't tell they had a little less powder.

There fixed it for you. Can you hear him now?

Hey wifey, " Can you say that again?"

Hanco, did you ever find those pics?

Well, I score one container of Trail Boss. That should work well in 223rem since blue dot can't be found here.

I will see if I can go back and buy few more containers. It's 9oz instead of 1 lb containers like rest of powder but it's still fairly big container for only 9oz.

So between some Trail Boss and H4895 I should be set!

Thank you all for you help and input, much appreciated!