Originally Posted by TRexF16
Originally Posted by 458Win
The new Nosler reloading manual #9 shows their highest 250 grain load as 2643 fps using 58 gr W748

Strangely their top load with the 358 Norma was only 2628 fps with IMR 4350

I would guess they put a little more time and effort into working with the Whelen as they show its case had a water capacity of 78 grains vrs the Whelen's 62.2


Phil,
I'm guessing you mean that Nosler probably has historically put more effort into the Whelen than the .358 Norma - I'd agree with that conclusion from what you quoted. But I don't think they worked either much recently.
Comparing the #9 manual to the #8, it looks as if they may have reshot their previous .35 Whelen loads, but did no new load development nor did they try any of the new powders that are now available. Every powder and every load, as well as the top-to-bottom rankings of the loads are identical, but some of the velocities shown for the same loads vary by a few FPS. The word was out on the superiority of PP 2000-MR and CFE223 in this cartridge, and I really wish they had tried those out with their bullets.
I'd say the same for RL-26 with 150gr in the .270Win - there's been a lot of buzz about what a game changer that is (like the powders above in the Whelen), but still nothing in Nosler #9. Would like to have seen more trials across the board with Superformance, StaBALL, and the Enduron series too. Maybe next time.
The above, and the fact that they dropped the .358 Win and the .284 Win completely from the new manual led me to actually be a pretty disappointed customer in the new book. I use it, and I'd rather have it than not, but I don't feel it was well done - most of the effort seems to have been into the Nosler proprietary cartridges, and that's understandable I guess.

Sorry for the rant ;o)
Rex


Thumbs up on your rant!

What many (or perhaps most) handloaders fail to take into account, in researching manuals, is the personnel behind the scenes who do the shooting and testing of loads. They may be relatively new (or old) to their job in interpreting what they see on the monitor, and must satisfy company (bullet or powder manufacturers) policy before it goes into a computer program that sometime later is pulled for printing. Differences in temperament type and experience often decide if a load is acceptable or not based not only on MV and psi, but it's overall stability under potential varying conditions of temperature and other variables such as components and commercial rifles they might be used in. Just like factory ammo -- .30-06 ammo must be "fit" for use in any rifle chambered in .30-06. Handloads in manuals must therefore be "fit" for any rifle they might find themselves in, despite multiple disclaimers and warnings published in all manuals.

So, in the end, it's the one behind the test setup who decides if a particular "load" could safely be used in most commercial rifles, and therefore published for public consumption. And, it's you or I who must decide if a particular load is safe through carefully reading "messages" sent to our eyes from our particular rifle(s)!

And, BTW, I was SAFELY getting 2997 fps from a 200gr Hornady SP in one of my .35 Whelens with a 22" barrel over a decade ago, but you'll not see the recipe here!

Bob
www.bigbores.ca

"What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul" - Jesus