Home Forums Reloading Big Game Rifles How much does brand matter?

I use what the manual says to use.

Wow! Lots of blind faith here for reloading manuals here.

Reloading data is like recipes from a cookbook, they worked under the conditions they were tested. A recipe might work differently than it turned out in for the cookbook writer because of many variables that are beyond your control. You oven might heat differently, your yeast might be different, or your flour might have a different amount of gluten than that in the book. Reloading is no different. The biggest variable right off the bat is your own rifle, it's almost guaranteed to have different chamber and barrel specs than their test rig. Next is powder, it's never exactly the same from lot to lot, same with bullets. Brass, even from the same maker, is never exactly the same unless it's from the same lot they tested. Nosler has farmed out brass production in the past, do you think the stuff that comes off their line is exactly the same as what Norma produced for them and stamped with Nosler's headstamp? All these variables stack to mean that you can never exactly reproduce what the reloading manual tested, at best you can say that if you follow their recipe then it's most likely safe because modern rifles have a big safety margin built into them.

If you're to the point where you're splitting hairs over brass brands or primers making a difference then you should probably buy a chronograph so you know what your loads are actually doing instead of guessing.

Yeah but which manual? I have manuals from probably 8 different sources going back 50 or 60 years. Also have some components that go back that far too.
Point is, when reloading you need to educate yourself as much as possible and use your head. Always start low and work up anytime anything is changed and don't try to see how fast she'll go. I'm sure most everyone here has BTDT and learned the lesson that just because a certain manual gives a recipe it is safe or accurate in your rifle. That's half the fun.

Always the newest manual most relevant to the desired results and components. I'm waiting on the Sierra 6 as I type this.

When I started handloading/reloading with books like Townsend Whelen's Why Not Load Your Own I was confused because the era of domed primers had just passed. CCI was about all I could buy. I read about matching primers to cases but didn't know this was with reference to domed primers where the oem was a rounded primer. It wasn't until I bought a Hollywood Universal Turret with primer punches for flat and domed primers that I began to learn the meaning of what I had read.

FREX there are a number of older Speer manuals with data to be avoided. For components including Speer bullets that fall under the same ownership the current Speer manual is a good starting place. Cross referenced just in case with say Hodgdon for powder charge mostly as a sanity check and for a possible typo.

There is a standing joke about the reloader who believes that published data is reduced, the so called lawyer loads, and so believes that going up little bit from current published maximums is the real load. There are a number of published loads from reputable sources of long ago that we now know are over pressure, even way over pressure. I should have saved them as curiosities but I loaded Elmer Keith suggested loads for balloon head cases in balloon head cases. Ken Howell Campfire #8934226

Jeff Cooper's suggested load to give service revolver exterior ballistics in .38 snub nose revolvers is now acknowledged to be way over .38 Special pressure. I didn't know the actual pressure but my own snub nose shot loose promptly.

And just as I seldom see wind flags used for load testing I seldom see the SAAMI twist when folks are chronographing.



Mostly I do follow directions in a cookbook if I want the cookbook results - which often include season to taste - and I also have three oven thermometers for zones in the oven.

This has become an interesting and informative discussion. Glad to see differing viewpoints.

My very inexperienced take away... try to mostly adhere to manual recipes, but realizing that some experimentation will be necessary, be sensible, start low and work up. Got it.

I’ll also go one further in expressing my frustration with reloading manuals. I’ve looked through several now and man, their suggestions are all over the map! So much so that trying to glean useable info at face value is nearly impossible. You pretty much have to blend ideas from multiple recipes to find a combo that seems sensible. For example, and I’m talking about 6.5x55 Swede here, say you like Hornagy’s GMX recipe, but it may be hard to find the prescribed primers in your area, so you gotta sub. I live in CA, so you can’t just order anything you want online. Pretty much have to go with what is available locally, which is always limited. Substitutions are all but unavoidable. People obviously do this regularly with success and safety.

Don’t even get me started on the lack of data for our required non lead bullets! It’s out there, but limited and inconsistent. Frustrating!

Then there’s some data that just makes no sense... for example the Barnes 127 LRX recipe using H4350 max’s at just 37.7 gr! That’s 7-8+ grains less than other recipes for other similar weighted bullets. That makes no sense. See warpig62’s recent post about load testing this LRX bullet in his Swede. He’s using powder charges that obviously worked out fine, 43-45gr., and are accurate, but are supposedly WAY too hot according to the Barnes manual. Yet look at the Hodgdon data for a 129 gr. bullet and he’s just fine, max at 45.5 gr. Even more extreme, their max with Hodgdon’s 4350 powder data for a 140gr bullet is still way more, 44gr., than the Barnes data with the same powder for the 127 LRX. That’s illogical to me. How’s a newbie to make sense of this!

Then there’s the issue of a lot of load data being based on use in old mil surp rifles, yet mine is a modern bolt rifle. More inconsistencies.

So I counter that it’s nearly impossible, and certainly impractical, to following reloading manuals to a tee. You pretty much have to use some creative license, yet common sense must also be applied liberally.

(1) See above and read more from John Barsness and the many other fine and experienced writers as well as Brownell on Pressure Factors and other academic studies. There are primer substitutions that are about as safe as any shooting sport can be and primer substitutions that are highly risky.

You seldom or never, gotta sub. You do gotta find a book load with available components. Wartime expedients of match heads and chopped movie film excepted. Most places in this country a book load that will do the job is possible. It may not tickle the fancy but it will do the job. Say you like Hornady's GMX recipe but you can't find the prescribed primers. Then either make a safe substitution - not arbitrary but safe or put it aside until supplies change and move on to something else. I'm not listing generally safe substitutions here but anyone with average google fu or broad reading will have seen them.

(2) Might even speculate about folks on this board with similar experiences. There was a similar experience with .30-'06 bolt coming back with a SAAMI spec load in a previously abused rifle. Some choices are safe, some are unsafe, is dangerous is gun is always true.

(3) It makes perfect sense. See my mention posted above that once upon a time bullets were - mostly - of similar cup and core construction so that bullets of about of the same weight had a lot in common.

Today similar weight but different construction and shape means bullets can be and often are different enough to make a major difference in the load. data A monolithic or varied alloy lead free bullet will tend to be longer for the same weight and so have a different bearing surface and often be harder. Much like the difference between cast and jacketed pushed to an extreme. Notice this implies different engraving force and often implies different seating with respect to the throat. Similar weight with a variety of other characteristics quite different the similar weight does not thereby imply similar charges. Rather the differences all combined imply different charges.

(4) Perfect example of the above discussion. Barnes LRX are pure copper 129 GR. HDY SP per Hodgdon have a solid one piece lead core. Which leads into

(5) Data for 6.5x55 may be intended for a 19th century military surplus rifle or a recent Ruger or Remington Classic.

The SAAMI Maximum Average Pressure (MAP) for this cartridge is 51,000 psi (351.6 MPa) piezo pressure (46,000 CUP).

I would not hesitate to exceed this SAAMI maximum myself. I might even blur distinctions as between the .270 and .280 in a modern bolt rifle figuring the .280 introduced in a gas auto can handle a little more pressure in a bolt gun. I've also got some interesting almost torn rims from high port pressure but reasonable max pressure book loads in a gas gun.

Similarly there is data for .45 Colt at three different pressure levels commonly from black powder Colt Peacemakers to new downsized Rugers to loads that might best be used in a revolver chambered in .454 Casull up where the highest pressure .45 Colt load is pushing no limits in the gun. Oddly enough about the highest pressure generally accepted as safe loads in a .45-70 are for an old military surplus the Siamese Mauser. Here again there are gradations from trap door Springfield loads to Ruger #3 loads with assorted revolvers and lever actions someplace in the middle.

I wouldn't say inconsistencies but I would say incomplete or abbreviated information. And all information is incomplete. Again is gun is dangerous and a little knowledge is dangerous. When I picked up an original flat top Ruger Blackhawk back when they were new on the market I looked at the frame mounted firing pin, analogized it the Colt 1911 I had training on and assumed with all that implies that the firing pin was floating like the 1911 - unlike the Colt hammer mounted firing pin - so I comfortably but mistakenly loaded 6. Don't do that on an original.

(6)So I contend that it is perfectly possible and relatively easy to follow loading manuals to a tee - all the more with the quantity and quality of lab tested data available today. I started with a Lyman 310 tool loading 9x19 - one dipper load at a time. Today I may amuse myself showing off interesting performance as with heavy bullets for the cartridge in a 9x23 with SP2 based on shared experience more than published lab tested data but that's not a good starting place or I'd have Super Face.

1. I would never just sub any old primer out for any old primer. Of course I’d stick within same class. As in, large rifle, CCI 200, WLR, Fed 210, Rem 9.5... even then understanding that there are pressure differences so one should start low and move up with charge.

To points 3 and 4. I understand the differences in bullet construction can matter, but again, inconsistencies abound. Nosler gives the same reloading data for 120 gr e tip and 120 gr ballistic tip. Very differnent bullet, same powder charge is ok here though? Hodgdon language says not to mix lead free and lead data, as you stated too. but Nosler thinks it’s ok?

I don’t want to argue. I do understand your point. My point is that its not so simple. There is so much strange and seemingly conflicting data, inconsistencies, vintage issues, and component availability problems out there that it’s very tough to come to any confident conclusion and simply follow a recipe perfectly.

Nosler used to have particular warnings about the bullets. I *believe* now for a given bullet weight Nosler posts the charges for the bullet requiring the most conservative charge levels. So they're well into the safety zone for the other bullets. I don't have my set of Nosler manuals on hand to compare.

Nosler specifically states that mid range load are max for their E-tips, or at least did so before they introduced the Banded Etips with reduced bearing surface.

You may be right, but I don’t see any of that here: https://load-data.nosler.com/load-data/65x55-swedish-mauser/

Nuzzler is the biggest bunch of Clueless Fhuqks in the Industry.

Hint.................

In some rifles it doesn't make much difference what brand bullet is used, I get the same level of performance in .204 Ruger rifles using Barnes Varmint Grenades or Nosler BT Lead Free bullets. Same with .223 Remington. However each rifle is a custom using high end match barrels from Shilen or Pac-Nor, especially the polygonal rifled barrels from Pac-Nor.

What I did find is that the primers make a big difference in any given cartridge and load. The photo below shows the same load and rifle with the only difference is one used the Winchester Small Rifle Primer, the other used the Federal Small Rifle Match Primer. Of course the degree of inaccuracy of the larger group wouldn't matter much to a ground squirrel as it turned into biological landscape paint.