When you look at reloading manuals, how strict must you be with regard to brass and primer brand? ...... Same with primers... if one manual calls for a CCI 210, can I safely sub in a Federal 210? Or must I adhere to the manual to a tee? I’m trying to minimize the number of components I need to purchase. Thanks.
I flatly if not completely, disagree with most of the posts on this thread.
Additionally and not much addressed here I'd add that once upon a time cup and core bullets were very similar across brands. Today's bullets, lead free or weirdly shaped are likely enough to be quite different and so not to be considered equivalent to each other any more than powders say.
To minimize the components I need to purchase I buy the components as listed in a reputable manual as published in the most recent edition with applicable data for the cartridge and components. I have all the currently produced loading manuals as easily available from folks like Midway, Brownell's, Wideners, Powder Valley and the whole gang. To that add as many foreign and exotic sources as I've run across when I could afford them. I go back a long ways on data books. I don't use old data when I can help it. For instance Phil Sharpe's Complete Guide has lots of obsolete data. DuPont used to give away data for IMR powders. Today's IMR powders are made by a different company in a different plant so I choose to use newer data. There are exceptions. I use a lot of no longer available Winchester 452 ball powders in handgun plinking loads using data mostly from Speer #ll. Loaddata from Wolfe is easily computer searchable. Hodgdon is on line. I can often find a solid listing with components I have and if I can't well that's what folks call
a clue.
PRIMERS AND PRESSURES
Author: John Barsness / Wolfe Publishing Co.
Date: Feb 13 2005
Many handloaders think a primer is a primer, or differentiate only between “standard” and “magnum” primers. But primer choice can make a big difference in load performance—and a REALLY big difference in safety.
..... This means a load that produces a very safe 58,000 psi with one primer can produce an unsafe 70,000 psi with another—and often there’s no way for the home handloader to tell the difference.
I strongly advocate reading everything John Barsness has written on the subject starting with the several books he sells d/b/a as Rifles and Recipes. Then again I'd suggest reading tales of old Indians and Winchester 97's too. I think there's a story in Best of Field and Steam. There are any number of additional writers with something to add.
Similarly when it comes to brass it is commonly repeated with some reason that military brass is different from commercial brass. Sadly but eternally the question is not about the lot of brass from a different time and place but the current lot of brass on hand. Weight and water capacity and headspace and other dimensions can all be gaged and should be. One extreme example is the change from 7x61 Sharpe and Hart to the Super improved (or maybe not?)
The newer case became the Norma 7x61 Super. Such cases (recent production from Norma) were used for the data in this article. Water capacity is 76 grains. Original 7x61 brass has a water capacity of approximately 71 grains........ Early 7x61 brass is probably still out there and being loaded, old as it may be. The matter is further compounded by a myriad of 7x61 brass that has been reformed from other magnum cases. As a result, there are significant variances in powder capacities. In light of all this, handloaders should treat the 7x61 with the extra caution reserved for wildcat cartridges.
And from the same source elaborating on the extra caution reserved for wildcat cartridges
forget spent primer appearance as an indication of high pressure. This once favored method of judging pressure has been proven to be less than reliable on several counts. The same can be said for measuring case head expansion and pressure ring expansion....Secondly, what about heavy bolt lift as an indication of high pressure? This is usually a sign of excessive pressure, in fact, probably pressure well beyond excessive...
Bolt closing and bolt lift require a little more exertion [in a close fitted rifle], whether there is a cartridge in the chamber or not...
Mike Thomas again from Wolfe found at Loaddata April 2015 and extensively discussed on this very board.
For another example my common shooting partner is fond of the 9.3x62 but mostly uses reformed .30-'06 cases. Without comparing it would be difficult to know what differences might or might not exist with commercial brass. Similarly there are reports of differences between what might be called inch dimension 6.5x55 brass and metric dimension 6.5x55 brass.
Notice I am not saying no substitutions ever. I'd use any primer that fits in any case that would chamber for a 3.5 grain load of Bullseye and an H&G 130 bullet for .45 ACP plinking and graduate toward a no modification magnum load.
I am saying do not substitute lightly and understand that the best way, not necessarily a good way but still the best way, to judge pressure is to compare performance of components as nearly identical as humanly possible between the book load and the hand loads in a given rifle.
