Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters chrony chronograph

There will always be discrepancies.

When I was still in the service, and had access to more and better equipment, I learned several lessons that were unrelated to that equipment and all the check lists. The first, and most important, was the human element. People are different. Their thought processes are different. Their educational backgrounds and experience are different. For that reason, I trust no one. I have more faith in documented experiments. In other words, I trust companies that have R&D departments much more than casual observers or comments on a webboard. I am more likely to believe credentialed people. I don't ignore what I read from other sources, but it needs to be checked out, if possible.

I am not talking about anyone here, but when someone says they have been doing something for many years, they still have to show me. Saying that they have reloaded for 50 years proves nothing. Shooting a 270 since 1960 proves nothing. All that means is you may have been doing something wrong for a long time. I have to see competency and documented work. Even then, I will evaluate their efforts and perform my own tests, if possible. It is not an insult to say, "Show me." or "How did you come to this conclusion?" It demonstrates that an individual is acting responsibly. He's curious. We could go on at length about scientific method.

Reloading manuals have warnings because end users are amateurs. Most are not ballisticians, chemical engineers or technicians. Reloaders aren't using their test methods and equipment. They don't know who will use their data. Publishers of these manuals know that virtually no one has the equipment, the expertise in data collection or know how to properly interpret that data. Readers are end users. Hobbyists. What we see in manuals is the dumbed down, layman's version. Companies know that this synopsis is all a reloader needs.

There are many things we don't see. The chemical make up of the propellant/primers. Calibrated test equipment and the type and the make/model of the equipment itself. When it was certified as serviceable. Any other devices that are being used in the evaluation - rifles/universal test barrels have to be serviceable and clean. How is pressure testing done? The weather. Test location(s) The analytical software. The experience of the operators/testers is important as well.

Would your average end user even understand any of this? Most people only want to know how much powder to put into a case. Only a few even care about whose cases were used, the powder or the barrel length.

These companies put a lot of effort into production of their manuals. Sometimes, despite their best efforts, errors occur. The one that sticks in my mind was the Barnes overpressures of many years ago. Improper info was published. Whoops! That's why there are warnings and minimum loads.

The final thing I would like to mention are the disagreements. First, between credentialed people. They happen. Usually, the discussions are amicable. Talk is productive. Sometimes, the individuals involved work things out. More or different testing happens. Other times however, the two have to agree to disagree. I have seen this many times while in uniform. Perhaps you have seen this too.

On webboards like this, disagreements also happen. On webboards however, discussions inevitably turn into mud slinging matches. Discussions here rarely happen between qualified people. It's usually which powder someone says is best, and they know because they have been reloading for over 50 years! And chest beating. And one-upmanship. Or calling someone's opinion or competency into question.

"I have been shooting the 22-250 for over 50 years!" (Yeah? So?)
"I was reloading when you were still [bleep] your diaper!" (What's your point? You're still an idiot!)
"Are you calling me a liar?" (Yes. Yes I am.)

And that's where I'll end.