Yesterday I received my Nosler # 9 Reloading Guide, may I share my observations of the guide. I am no gun writer but here are some of my takes and takeaways from the Guide.
John Nosler opens by saying that this Loading Guide "is the most in-depth and well thought out book I have seen Nosler produce"
That got my attention, I was really hoping to see all the new powders that we now have from the past 10 to 15 years in new loads for the cartridges listed.
We have never had better times for components! I was hoping Nosler would build on that.
My takes.
It was nice to see a Burn Rate Chart in the Guide, maybe that is a first.
The Cartridge index list 9 new cartridges, 5 of which are Noslers.
To read what the 'gun writers' have to say about each cartridge listed and given the amount of space they have to write a piece it's enjoyable to read. It's nice to keep up with some old faces from past Guides and then see some new faces in the industry.
I really liked the read about the 6.5 PRC from Jason Hornady, it was great to see a competitor and yet a friend of the Nosler family writing in their bible! What a hoot. Great new cartridge too.
Some of the writers were a right fit in the cartridges they wrote about, like JB and the 9.3x62. But Terry Wieland paired with the 250 Savage cartridge?
The Guide is a showcase of Noslers 8 proprietary cartridges, and I think that is the main reason for the Guide.
To show off their new cartridges.
Some Takeaways
I was highly anticipating that the Guide would show us some new loads with all the new components we now have.
It was sadly lacking in that area and pretty much a re-hash of past guides from decades ago. Nothing new to see.
In the 6.5 Creedmoor 123/125 grain bullets, Nosler list a now re-called powder IMR 4007 SSC as the "Most Accurate powder tested" A lot of good that will do us. lol
RL 26, RL 23, and RL 16 are hardly given mention along with Winchester 6.5 Staball powder and the newer IMR powders.
Just to name a few.
No mention of the 338 RCM.
No new loads for the 338-06 with new powders, one of many that did not. Just the same loads from decades ago.
Bottom line, just another re-hash of decades past loads with old powders. Copy and paste job at best.
The Guide left me wanting and asking why did I even bother buying it.
An old post of mine:
I'm pretty sure Nosler carries old data forward.
For 308 Winchester the type of brass used changes from Winchester to Nosler when moving from the fifth to the sixth edition of their manual. Looking at the 165/168 grain data will show that for the powders listed in both editions every charge level of every powder produced exactly the same velocity. The load densities reported were all higher in the sixth edition. This is in line with my experience with Nosler 308 brass of the era which was thicker, heavier and of smaller capacity than WW. If I had to lay a bet on who produced that brass for Nosler my money would be on Federal.
If Nosler had reshot the fifth edition data using the same components even the very next day it's unlikely that the results would be identical.
I just gave the fourth edition a look and it looks like for the powders which carried over to the fifth the charge weight - velocity pairings carried over verbatim as well.
So over an eleven year span, and with a component change to less capacious brass, the test results were identical. That's about as likely as Joe Biden winning the Abel Prize.
How much 4th edition 308 data has carried forward to the new one?
Well sh*t never won the lottery either but I have 1- 8 so I'll prolly get 9 also. We want up to date data guess you better read the fire. Mb
yes i have that Nosler #9 reloading manual and many more new and old reloading manuals, i still think the new Berger reloading manual is best for me.
I suppose since we can't find powder or primers we might as well sit back and read about reloading In the good old days 😁
SU,
Were any of Ramshots powders listed?
Yesterday I received my Nosler # 9 Reloading Guide, may I share my observations of the guide. I am no gun writer but here are some of my takes and takeaways from the Guide.
John Nosler opens by saying that this Loading Guide "is the most in-depth and well thought out book I have seen Nosler produce"
That got my attention, I was really hoping to see all the new powders that we now have from the past 10 to 15 years in new loads for the cartridges listed.
We have never had better times for components! I was hoping Nosler would build on that.
My takes.
It was nice to see a Burn Rate Chart in the Guide, maybe that is a first.
The Cartridge index list 9 new cartridges, 5 of which are Noslers.
To read what the 'gun writers' have to say about each cartridge listed and given the amount of space they have to write a piece it's enjoyable to read. It's nice to keep up with some old faces from past Guides and then see some new faces in the industry.
I really liked the read about the 6.5 PRC from Jason Hornady, it was great to see a competitor and yet a friend of the Nosler family writing in their bible! What a hoot. Great new cartridge too.
Some of the writers were a right fit in the cartridges they wrote about, like JB and the 9.3x62. But Terry Wieland paired with the 250 Savage cartridge?
The Guide is a showcase of Noslers 8 proprietary cartridges, and I think that is the main reason for the Guide.
To show off their new cartridges.
Some Takeaways
I was highly anticipating that the Guide would show us some new loads with all the new components we now have.
It was sadly lacking in that area and pretty much a re-hash of past guides from decades ago. Nothing new to see.
In the 6.5 Creedmoor 123/125 grain bullets, Nosler list a now re-called powder IMR 4007 SSC as the "Most Accurate powder tested" A lot of good that will do us. lol
RL 26, RL 23, and RL16 are hardly given mention along with Winchester 6.5 Staball powder and the newer IMR powders.
Just to name a few.
No mention of the 338 RCM.
No new loads for the 338-06 with new powders, one of many that did not. Just the same loads from decades ago.
Bottom line, just another re-hash of decades past loads with old powders. Copy and paste job at best.
The Guide left me wanting and asking why did I even bother buying it.
Thanks for saving me the bucks. I was hoping for some new powder data with older cartridges. Guess that aint gonna happen this issue.
I just have no interest in most of the newer rounds.
Still like the Nosler the best as its the best organised/presented (Speer the worst) plus it is the only one of the majors that lists the water capacity of the cases and those capacities are tailored to the bullet weight category. Not just 1 case capacity across all bullet weights. That's quite useful I think.
Even though you can get most of the info free from the internet now I still like to buy the reloading manuals! An enjoyable read in front of the fireplace!
regards
JohnT
SU,
Were any of Ramshots powders listed?
Yes, in some cartridges they were, Big Game, Hunter, Magnum. But these powders have been around for a while.
Thanks for saving me the bucks. I was hoping for some new powder data with older cartridges. Guess that aint gonna happen this issue.
Gun Gack 3 is your friend for that.
I usually buy it just for the write up for each cartridge, most of the data is usually just regurgitated from previous manuals and can be found online.
Sure wish I'd seen this yesterday before I bought one from SPS. But that gave me a chance to throw in some more bullets, though their stocks are dwindling. Had to get another bag of those dirt-cheap 9.3 250 ABs an .338 250 E-Tips, and 3 more of those funny looking stubby ogive .257 115 Partitions. My gut tells me they will be the absolute cat's @$$ if I ever score/build a fast twist .250 savage. In the meantime going to try 'em in the .257 Roberts.
Thanks again for the review, Rooskie Fighter Jet Guy.
Rex
If we take into consideration how many bullets Nosler produces (105 based on the #9 manual), and how many powders tested with a single bullet, and how many shots fired with a particular powder starting at low to high, and all that being evaluated after a series of 5 shots per load with a single bullet (average), to build a complete NEW manual from scratch would be far too costly and time consuming!
And they have less that 1/2 the number of bullets (varmint, small game, game, and big game, plus handgun bullets) than Hornady!
Son I think expectations need be more realistic!
When you get to be my age (some will make it, most won't) you are, or will be, more realistic in expectations. Firstly, I don't need (or want) all the new powders or cartridges on the market, most of which provides no improvement over what I have. Some of the latest powders do give better results overall. But the "new" cartridges are mostly a tune that's been played a few times already.
Bob
www.bigbores.ca
I'll probably bite and buy one just to see if there's data for the 70g accubond in a fast twist 22-250.
I find Nosler data to be like reading an Elmer Keith book, lame, over inflated and full of BS. They only use their brass and their bullets.
RJj
I don't see Hornady using many Nosler bullets in their data. Come to think of it, Sierra doesn't use Berger bullets either. What's the deal?
I don't see Hornady using many Nosler bullets in their data. Come to think of it, Sierra doesn't use Berger bullets either. What's the deal?
Odd, isn't it?
Come to think of it, though, why doesn't Hodgdon's data use Hodgdon bullets?
Hodgdon's makes bullets?!
...crap!.......I'm always late to the party...
Anyone know where I can find some Hodgdon brass in stock? Midway seems to be out, as do Grafs and Midsouth.
Asking for a friend.
I find Nosler data to be like reading an Elmer Keith book, lame, over inflated and full of BS. They only use their brass and their bullets.
RJj
"IN-COMING"
I find Nosler data to be like reading an Elmer Keith book, lame, over inflated and full of BS. They only use their brass and their bullets.
RJj
Nosler is very fair about using powders NOT made by Nosler, primers NOT made by Nosler, and shooting in barrels NOT made by Nosler. I believe Nosler didn't grow the trees for the wood pulp or produce the ink used in the manual, either. Asking more of them is really pushing it.
I buy reloading manuals because I'm a Fudd and my handloading predates the time Al Gore invented the internet--I actually own most of the well known and a few not so well known hardback/spiral bound manuals published for North America since WWII.
Sometimes it is easier to use and compare various manuals when starting with new to me cartridges, or bullets, or powder, rather than use the internet.
Every manual carries old data forward.
No bullet company can test and list all the available powders, no powder company can test and list all the available bullets.
If Nosler left out a large portion of the new IMR and Alliant powders then they screwed up.
With the advent of a fair number of new powders and various new cartridges, I think the Ackley Improved and wildcats are not nearly as popular as they were even a decade or so ago, and consequently will see less of them in future manuals.
I like every current manual from bullet and powder companies, and every one has important and relevant data missing for popular cartidges, it's veritable "WTF?", when they do that.
Powders from Hodgdon have always been noticeably sparse in the Nosler manuals. I've decided Nosler doesn't like Hodgdon--whether I'm right or wrong it sure seems like it.
Thanks for the write up "RussianFighterJetGuy"
mine will get here via Graf's sometime this year.......I hope.........
As an added note I hope Hodgdon's makes good use of Western Powders pressure lab, because I heard it was state of the art. Maybe Hodgdon will keep both of their labs open.
Lyman 48th or 50th. Readily (well, before current panic hoarding frenzy) available components in real world barrel lengths, velocities that consistently match my observations, and I use the pressure column a lot because I like to adjust loads to the action strength I may be using in a given cartridge. No point in running an 8x57 for instance at SAAMI pressure in a strong action. So it's a pretty handy book any way you cut it. If you are a Nosler fan boy, you need the Nosler book, 'cause Lyman doesn't have a load for every Nosler bullet.
I suppose since we can't find powder or primers we might as well sit back and read about reloading In the good old days 😁
Good point!
If we take into consideration how many bullets Nosler produces (105 based on the #9 manual), and how many powders tested with a single bullet, and how many shots fired with a particular powder starting at low to high, and all that being evaluated after a series of 5 shots per load with a single bullet (average), to build a complete NEW manual from scratch would be far too costly and time consuming!
Considering that Nosler publishes a Load Guide about every 5 years. That amounts to a couple of cartridges a week.
So doable with anyone, or company, who has a little ambition.
And to put it in your own words, Bob,
Son I think expectations need be more realistic!
Well Pop, this Son just turned 63 and 'handloading' since '73. There's still fire in the tank and high expectations are for those who live life to the fullest. I can still climb the mountain btw.
Just a side-note that
www.riflesandrecipes.com will be carrying Nosler #9 as soon as the copies that Eileen ordered several days ago arrive. In fact it can be ordered right now, as the website's all set-up, and she'll ship any orders when the books get here.
Right now she's out of Western Powders manuals, and evidently their transition to the Hodgdon team is causing a glitch in getting more. But she's working on it....
I have several old manuals from Speer, Sierra, Hornaday and the first Nosler manual. It's interesting to compare the loads from them to the ones in current manuals. I don't think a new manual is needed every year.
I find Nosler data to be like reading an Elmer Keith book, lame, over inflated and full of BS. They only use their brass and their bullets.
RJj
Nosler is very fair about using powders NOT made by Nosler, primers NOT made by Nosler, and shooting in barrels NOT made by Nosler. I believe Nosler didn't grow the trees for the wood pulp or produce the ink used in the manual, either. Asking more of them is really pushing it.
Thank you huntsnshoots for your admiration of my inadequacies.
To clarify, Nosler is out to sell their brass and bullets, like Sierra, Hornady etc. Hodgdon is out to sell powder that they dont even make.
A true reloading manual should be had for one thing, data, not the promotion of their wares. Now I do have other manuals, but only Lyman and Lee build data using everyone else's products, like brass, bullets, powder and primers.
Also, when using Nosler data gleaned from their website ,also realizing that no two rifles shoot the same load the same, (velocity and accuracy) that my data always falls short of Nosler's claimed data (velocity)
If I must write every post here like I'm trying to explain something to the village idiot, then that's what I'll do.
I have Nosler manual #2,#7,. and I have other manuals.
I find that Nosler’s most accurate load to often be the best or one of the best loads in my rifles for accuracy.
The jacketed bullets I use are mostly Hornady Interlocks or Nosler Partition anymore. Except varmint bullets which I’ll use what’s available and accurate. Also the bullets for the old cartridges such as 35 Remington, 30-30, 30-40, 32 Special, 45-70, 45-90, and other similar cartridges work fine with the old cup and core bullets.
The new powders - loads are important to me when they are improvement over old. Copper fouling and temperature insensitive powders in particular. With more emphasis on temperature insensitive powders for me, which is very important.
I liked Ken Waters articles on pet loads and his write ups, except he often used bullets or powders that I find to be not as good as what’s available today. I like the Lyman manual mainly for cast bullet loads. I own the excellent gun gack books and refer to them often.
In my opinion, for the more modern center fire cartridges such as 17 Hornet through the ultra modern 416 Rigby the Nosler manuals and the on-line Hodgdon manuals are very good.
I have always found it interesting that Nosler data has powder charges in .0 or .5 increments, but velocity is a precise number. Hornady has odd weight powder charges, .7, .2, etc, but velocity is a nice even number, 3000, 2500, 2750, etc. Not that this is true for every load in both manuals, but it sums up about 95% of the data in both books.
Sierra also follows the same format as Hornady. Could make some guesses about why, but dunno.
No Reloader 26 in 7mm Rem Mag with 160 AccuBond.
P
Which is why my collection of loading manuals always includes all the latest. There isn't one single loading manual (or one source of on-line data) that includes every new bullet or powder.
If more companies published all their latest pressure-tested data on the Internet this wouldn't be a problem. But a few companies don't, because they make money selling printed manuals. I have considerable sympathy for them, due to Eileen and I publishing printed "recipe" books ourselves. But there's more to handloading (or game cooking) than just recipes, which is why mere data doesn't answer all questions.
So you think Nosler #9 is a bit sparse with new powders and data, eh?
Just received my Lyman #50 last night and perused a dozen cartridges. Not a single Enduron powder to be found. They don't even have RL-26 listed anywhere I can find, either. As far as I can tell, they haven't tested a new load since the previous #49............
So you think Nosler #9 is a bit sparse with new powders and data, eh?
Just received my Lyman #50 last night and perused a dozen cartridges. Not a single Enduron powder to be found. They don't even have RL-26 listed anywhere I can find, either. As far as I can tell, they haven't tested a new load since the previous #49............
I bought my copy of #50 when it first came out. Was very disappointed that there was so little data for, among others, Lil Gun, especially in the .357 mag, where it really shines. H4895 is also pretty much missing; other stuff as well.
The worst part was that instead of helpful, informative articles in the front, they used pretty much the whole space on a bunch of pieces on past manuals and other self-congratulatory drivel. That stuff would be better placed in a separate book on Lyman history, fleshed out with info on old molds, dies, etc. Might even buy something like that myself.
The worst part was that instead of helpful, informative articles in the front, they used pretty much the whole space on a bunch of pieces on past manuals and other self-congratulatory drivel.
I took note of that also. I'm pretty sure it's the only new part of the entire manual.......
So you think Nosler #9 is a bit sparse with new powders and data, eh?
Just received my Lyman #50 last night and perused a dozen cartridges. Not a single Enduron powder to be found. They don't even have RL-26 listed anywhere I can find, either. As far as I can tell, they haven't tested a new load since the previous #49............
Casey,
Yeah, I got Lyman 50 a couple years ago, and noticed a lack of, say, Enduron powders. This seemed a little odd, since #50 appeared in 2016 and the first Endurons appeared in 2014. I know that because of being assigned an article on IMR4166 for the 2015 Annual Manual, and the deadline is always around September 1st of the year before the date on the Annual Manual.
I just got my copy today. I'm sure I'll have a lot more to whine about in support of Rooskie Fighter Jet Guy's well written OP, but just flipping around for 10 minutes I see some glaring omissions that the advancements over the last few years should have compelled Nosler to run the data with their bullets - powders that have been no-kidding game-changers:
- Didn't take a look at RL-26 with their 140 and 50 grain bullets in the .270 Win.
- Didn't take a look at PP 2000-MR in the .35 Whelen.
- They dropped the .358 Winchester entirely! Despite making one of the best bullets ever for it, the 225 Partition (still listed for the Whelen). Blasphemy. The .358 WAS in #8. Dropped the 9.3x64 and 9.3x74R too since #8, but I'll get over that.
- Dropped a couple powders from America's Cartridge, the 6.5 Cre... I mean, the 30-06, but didn't replace them with anything new, that I can see. Just as it's been since #3 back in 1989, you can still get over 3000FPS with 63 gr RL-22 and a Nosler 165 gr. Yooou Betcha.
- Some things are just plain weird that almost look like they wanted it to LOOK like they reran the shooting runs, for instance. 11.5 gr H110 with the 40 grain bullet in the 22 Hornet went from 2794FPS to 2793FPS. But then in the 6.5x55, 43 grains of IMR4350 under the 140/142 jumped from 2730' to 2780'. And honestly, though I love it the 6.5x55 is certainly one of the rounds I would not have expected them to reshoot.
- Added the 6.5 PRC. Probably added a bunch of others I've not yet noted.
- One other odd thing is for many, many, of the listed loads, there is no change whatsoever from #8 (same components, same water capacity, same charge weight, and identical velocity), only the load density percentage numbers are changed by a percent or three. This looks like maybe a computer rerun. Noted this a lot in the 30-06 data.
- Lot's of fine new powders I've yet to find represented (Superformance, and have not yet run into many Endurons.)
Regardless, I am glad to have the book - worth the $22 I gave to SPS I reckon. I'm sure I'll enjoy reading it. But dropping the .358 Winnie?? As we said in my old job, YGBSM!
Cheers,
Rex
No new loads for the 338-06 with new powders, one of many that did not. Just the same loads from decades ago.
I've ordered the book from Midway and it's taking a while to get here, (Covid and Xmas slow down), so I haven't reviewed. I'm a Reloading manual nerd. Love the write-ups in the Nosler, Sierra, Hornady, etc Manuals. But, I have to ask myself, "why do I re-load"? It's because mainly I shoot oddball calibers, i.e. 240 Wby, 7mm WSM, 338-06, 257 Roberts, (not really oddball, but +p data sucks in most manuals). Plus I live and hunt in California where finding Lead Free data wanting in most powder manuals Not only are these cartridges not updated, but they're being dropped out. I just bought the 2021 Hodgdon magazine, guess what? The calibers I mentioned above have again been omitted, dropped or not updated. And the powder manuals, where is the data on Berry's type bullets data? We shoot these by the hundreds in pistols, or monumental bullets? I ask myself again, "why do I reload"? One good reason is because I shoot oddball calibers and they should be included in the manuals.
[/quote]
Which is why my collection of loading manuals always includes all the latest. There isn't one single loading manual (or one source of on-line data) that includes every new bullet or powder.
If more companies published all their latest pressure-tested data on the Internet this wouldn't be a problem. But a few companies don't, because they make money selling printed manuals. I have considerable sympathy for them, due to Eileen and I publishing printed "recipe" books ourselves. But there's more to handloading (or game cooking) than just recipes, which is why mere data doesn't answer all questions.
To my eye the key word in the quote is "all."
I buy all the manuals I can data and procedures both. I weight Gun Gack and others from the same source more than most. Even when the powders have the same names I don't pay much attention to the data from Phil Sharpe or even from Richard Lee's much more recent big book.
My biggest gripe with the included at no extra charge internet data is the illusion of completeness. Despite having their latest data book in the next room I checked on line to choose powder for a less common cartridge. I bought a powder I wouldn't have if I had chosen from the full assortment in the printed book.
I've been told the various labs do respond to interest expressed by their customers but seldom and only for the largest numbers?
Anybody out there today after the manner of H.P. White to do pressure testing and load development for hire? I'd like the opportunity to join a Patreon group suggesting which questions should be answered next.
Clark,
Before Hodgdon bought Western Powders, the lab in Miles City did a LOT of piezo pressure-testing for various companies, including at least one major bullet company. Don't know if that will continue with the Hodgdon purchase.
Don't know why some powder/bullet/etc.companies don't list ALL their data on-line, but suspect it will continue to increase.
Just ordered my #9 today. Whether or not it's worth it or doesn't really matter now. At least Ill have hard copy of data.
My newest manual is several years old, the newest powder I have bought is at least a decade old, most have been around for many decades. My most currently used powders, are H-1000, RL-15 and Varget. Oldest is 4831. I believe that there have been "few", that does not mean any, of any advancements in cartridges since the 50s. Many love new stuff, I love tried, tested and work ready. Just my 02.
Nosler #8 is currently online minus the cartridge author write-ups. I wonder how long it'll take to get #9 online.
If we take into consideration how many bullets Nosler produces (105 based on the #9 manual), and how many powders tested with a single bullet, and how many shots fired with a particular powder starting at low to high, and all that being evaluated after a series of 5 shots per load with a single bullet (average), to build a complete NEW manual from scratch would be far too costly and time consuming!
And they have less that 1/2 the number of bullets (varmint, small game, game, and big game, plus handgun bullets) than Hornady!
Son I think expectations need be more realistic!
When you get to be my age (some will make it, most won't) you are, or will be, more realistic in expectations. Firstly, I don't need (or want) all the new powders or cartridges on the market, most of which provides no improvement over what I have. Some of the latest powders do give better results overall. But the "new" cartridges are mostly a tune that's been played a few times already.
Bob
www.bigbores.ca Amen!
I like having paper manuals. Have the new Hornady and the new Nosler inbound as I type. Easy to tote to the loading bench. Easy to open several at one time to compare across companies. Some of my older manuals get gifted to newbies getting started in reloading. A few I keep to have reference for older cartridges that may not make it into the newer manuals.
Finally... What happens when all of the current online reloading content is banned from the internet because it "promotes violence" ?
My newest manual is several years old, the newest powder I have bought is at least a decade old, most have been around for many decades. My most currently used powders, are H-1000, RL-15 and Varget. Oldest is 4831. I believe that there have been "few", that does not mean any, of any advancements in cartridges since the 50s. Many love new stuff, I love tried, tested and work ready. Just my 02.
Good post.
Was using alot of H4350 and RL15. I did warm up to Ramshot Big Game & Hunter a few yrs ago and just use their pdf data download.
Most of my manuals are old, newest about 10yrs? And I have alot of older powders that need loading or sprinkling.
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/N9G2z4y/20201224-100142.jpg)
]
If we take into consideration how many bullets Nosler produces (105 based on the #9 manual), and how many powders tested with a single bullet, and how many shots fired with a particular powder starting at low to high, and all that being evaluated after a series of 5 shots per load with a single bullet (average), to build a complete NEW manual from scratch would be far too costly and time consuming!
And they have less that 1/2 the number of bullets (varmint, small game, game, and big game, plus handgun bullets) than Hornady!
Son I think expectations need be more realistic!
When you get to be my age (some will make it, most won't) you are, or will be, more realistic in expectations. Firstly, I don't need (or want) all the new powders or cartridges on the market, most of which provides no improvement over what I have. Some of the latest powders do give better results overall. But the "new" cartridges are mostly a tune that's been played a few times already.
Bob
www.bigbores.ca Some of the new powders are BETTER than the old powders. Wider variety of powders give a handloader more options to find better/accurate, mild to wild loads.
We're not talking about a redo of every powder out there, we're referring to new powders--some that have been on the market for 4-5 years and are VERY viable, and in some cases BETTER powders.
I know one thing, this Panic Pandemic has done more to introduce handloaders to the new Enduron powders than a million dollars in advertising by Hodgdon could have accomplished......
Good post.
Was using alot of H4350 and RL15. I did warm up to Ramshot Big Game & Hunter a few yrs ago and just use their pdf data download.
Most of my manuals are old, newest about 10yrs? And I have alot of older powders that need loading or sprinkling.
lol......I have 61 hardbound and spiral bound manuals.......then there are the paperback and brochure type manuals.....
There can sometimes be little tidbits of info found in manuals that are not online. Besides, when starting with a new powder, or bullet, or cartridge, it's nice to open 3-4 manuals and do some contrast and compare.
Just call me a Fudd.........
I buy most of the new manuals as they are a good read. And sometimes new cartridges are added. For instance the latest Hornady manual has the 6.5x57 and 7x64 cartridges. Nosler has the .257 Ackley. I have a big pile of manuals by my chair and flick through them when the crappy ads are on the tv.
I agree with everything said about the #9 deleting classic cartridges and not including some of the new powders, however I appreciate finding everything I need with their online manual.
That said, yesterday I picked up the Lyman 50th and immediately noticed H4350 conspicuously absent. It lists AA4350 and IMR4350, but no H, a powder I luckily have a lot of. Guess I’ll be extrapolating starting loads from the other 4350s. Anyone have a secret formula for figuring H4350 loads from AA4350 and IMR4350? Looks like all three are within .5 to 1.5 grains of each other for a given bullet/cartridge combo.
Thanks
Lou
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/yAIdw9y.jpg)