Ticked off at CCI-Speer (Deep Curl) - 11/18/13
So, I just finished working up a load for my Kimber 280 Ackley with IMR-7828ssc, CCI BR2, and the 160 grain Deep Curl. Speer has very little published load data for this bullet--only a handful of calibers. In the interest of full disclosure, I'd read that they've had some trouble with unexpected pressure spikes.
I started low with my load workup, watched carefully for pressure signs, and made it up to 60 grains without any obvious pressure signs. My best results were at 59.5 grains, 2933 fps average, standard deviation of 5 fps (5 shot groups). I saw no flattened primers, no sticky bolt lifts, nothing. Accuracy was outstanding. These groups were better than any I have seen in this rifle.
Today, I called Speer to see when they'd be publishing load data for the 280 Rem or 280 AI. I mentioned that I'd had good luck with the 160 Deep Curl in the Ackley, and the guy about dropped the phone. He said...and I quote..."Don't do that. You're likely to wind up with pieces and parts of your rifle!" Incredulous, I told him that I was seeing no pressure signs and had worked up carefully, and he wouldn't hear it. He all but declared the bullet dangerous.
I asked him why in the hell Speer had released the bullet to reloaders before it had been tested in a better selection of calibers, and, of course, he had no answer. I probably won't use it, but what the hell?
I'm not exactly a novice. If I'm seeing no signs of high pressure, and I'm well within acceptable velocity ranges, what could be going on with the pressure curve that would make the bullet dangerous otherwise? I understand that this bullet is constructed differently, but he wasn't saying that 59.5 grains was a dangerous load; rather, he was insisting that I do no load development whatsoever until there was published data for that caliber.
I started low with my load workup, watched carefully for pressure signs, and made it up to 60 grains without any obvious pressure signs. My best results were at 59.5 grains, 2933 fps average, standard deviation of 5 fps (5 shot groups). I saw no flattened primers, no sticky bolt lifts, nothing. Accuracy was outstanding. These groups were better than any I have seen in this rifle.
Today, I called Speer to see when they'd be publishing load data for the 280 Rem or 280 AI. I mentioned that I'd had good luck with the 160 Deep Curl in the Ackley, and the guy about dropped the phone. He said...and I quote..."Don't do that. You're likely to wind up with pieces and parts of your rifle!" Incredulous, I told him that I was seeing no pressure signs and had worked up carefully, and he wouldn't hear it. He all but declared the bullet dangerous.
I asked him why in the hell Speer had released the bullet to reloaders before it had been tested in a better selection of calibers, and, of course, he had no answer. I probably won't use it, but what the hell?
I'm not exactly a novice. If I'm seeing no signs of high pressure, and I'm well within acceptable velocity ranges, what could be going on with the pressure curve that would make the bullet dangerous otherwise? I understand that this bullet is constructed differently, but he wasn't saying that 59.5 grains was a dangerous load; rather, he was insisting that I do no load development whatsoever until there was published data for that caliber.