Free vs paid reloading data.

Marco Califo said:
Western Powders will sell it. But it is also available free. See the top of this page for the Sticky of Official load data free downloads, online, etc.
Click to expand...
That sticky is badly in need of maintenance. A LOT of the links are dead, resulting in 404 "Page not found" error messages.
 
kmw1954 said:
As a pistol only reloader I find a little bit of a different problem and that is with plated bullets that many have problems with.

Seeing that None of the plated bullet manufacturers actually do any testing of their product there is No data to be had from the bullet manufacturers. Instead they all rely on the generic statement to just use cast or jacketed data of the same weight. Sorry but in my mind that is no more than a CYA.
Click to expand...
As a pistol shooter too, I can attest to the truth of this statement. I use almost exclusively Berry's plated bullets. Using their 230-grain round nose in .45 ACP, with what Winchester/Hodgdon says is a maximum load that should produce velocities in the high 800s, what I actually got was mid- to upper 700s.

The problem is what we have to keep telling the newcomers -- proper reloading data isn't just a powder charge, it's a "recipe" that includes a specific case, a specific primer, a specific bullet, and a specific charge of a specific powder. If you vary any of these ... you have a new recipe and you don't know what you're going to get.

Over on the M1911.org forum one of the reloading mavens started a project a few years back to try to quantify this (a bit). The issue, of course, is that not all bullets weighing 230 (or whatever) grains have the same shape and proportions. If you load only according to overall length, the case volume available for powder will change depending on the length of the bullet. So this guy started a project to collect and to make available as much dimensional information as he could on as many bullets as possible. There's a lot of data there, and it shows how much variation there can be even within bullets of the same weight.

The project also shows that people still don't get it. The project has been on-going for years. Just a couple of days ago somebody posted dimensional data for three "new" (to the project) bullets. But ... he omitted the critical dimension, which is the base dimension for the bullet.

Here's a link to the discussion of the project: https://forum.m1911.org/showthread.php?77249-Collecting-Dimensions-Bullet-Data

And here's a link directly to the bullet data: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...uItM0glf7wjhd8/edit?hl=en&hl=en#gid=519572970
 
I simply like hard copy. Same with books. Rather read a paperback/hardback than look at a 'screen' any day of the week. As far as I can tell they never go out of date (just not the latest powder recommendations). Every one has 'some' useful information. Someone mentioned cell-phones above. I personally wouldn't own one, except my company requires me to use one. The land-line is perfect. If important, leave a message when I get home! Need to send a picture, email it. Don't see the need to be 'connected' all the time, waste of time and money.... Pet peeve is cell phones in driver's hands.... Off soapbox ... BTW, my job is programming/analyst .... go figure.
 
More follow-up on "second tier" plated bullets. As previously commented, the smaller makers don't do any testing -- most likely because they can't afford either the equipment, or to pay for having it done. So they either provide nothing, or they provide garbage. Berry's is an excellent example. They sell good bullets for a good price, but DON'T believe what they tell you.

Case in point: .45 ACP, 200-grain plated, hollow-base, flat point. What Berry's web site tells us is:

The bullet profile is longer but the weight remains the same and you can load these bullets using any published load data for a jacketed bullet as long as it is the same weight bullet.

SAAMI MAX COL = 1.275"
Click to expand...
So they want us to believe that a bullet with a hollow base (which means volume) should use the same load data as a bullet with a solid base. Hmmm.

And for cartridge overall length they provide the SAAMI maximum length for .45 ACP -- which is for a 230-grain round-nose bullet. Let's see how that works out in the real world.

Based on new data on the M1911.org site, the length of this bullet averages .5596". The person then split that into a base dimension (the portion with straight sides, that goes inside the case) and a nose dimension (what's left when you subtract the base from the bullet overall length). Base = .314", nose = .246".

To get a starting point for COAL, you add the case length to the bullet nose length. A .45 ACP case has a SAAMI maximum length of .898". If we add that to the average bullet nose length, we get a COAL of .898 + .246 = 1.144 inches.

That's quite a bit less than the SAAMI maximum COAL of 1.275". If you load these bullets to a COAL of 1.275" you'll be exposing 0.131" of the bullet base -- adding that much to the case volume behind the bullet. That has to have an effect on the muzzle velocity (and, quite possibly, the feeding).
 
Last edited:
A .45 ACP case has a SAAMI maximum length of .848".
Click to expand...

I think you mis-typed. the .45acp max case length is .898"

I understand. and you are correct, that loading shorter bullets to the listed 1.275" does change the internal volume of the loaded round.

Now, there's two questions, (and specific to the .45acp), first why would you load to 1.275" if its not needed for function, and second, if you do, does the change in volume MATTER??

Something I'm seeing very often is people who seem to think they have to load to the listed COAL. They don't seem to understand that the max COAL is a limit, not a requirement. A lot of them also seem to think that SAAMI pressure limits are a "your gun will grenade if you pass this by any amount" limit, which, of course, they aren't.

What is the "right length" for a load?? There are SAAMI max length limits, there are given lengths for some bullets from their makers, and then there's what will work in your gun, and what works best in your gun (and those can be different).

Another point many don't seem aware of is that different rounds, and different guns don't always follow the same exact formulas for what works and what doesn't. Generally similar, but seldom identical, and that all loading data are guidelines not laws of nature that don't vary in the known universe.

You know those instructions on the box of whatever you're cooking, giving temp settings and times (25min @ 425degrees, etc.,) but ALSO say ovens vary so cooking times may vary....
(and then, there's also altitude variances...)

Guns vary, too.
 
Come on 44AMP,
You know that changing case volume on small cases like 45ACP, or 9mm can have a huge effect!

Difference in pressure with same amount of powder in 45ACP going from COAL of 1.040" to the max of 1.275" is nothing to sneeze at.
 
changing case volume on small cases like 45ACP, or 9mm can have a huge effect!
Click to expand...

Can is not Will. Sure, there will be AN effect, but whether or not its "huge" depends on a "huge" number of variables, unique to the specific situation. .45ACP and 9mm might be the "same" small cases compared to rifle rounds but they are quite different from each other.

Website A says one thing, Site B another, and a third might be the same as one of the first two, or something else, different from both. With tons of FREE data, having sources ranging from companies with lab grade testing equipment to any joker with a keyboard and Internet access, it can get confusing, fast.

Free is always good, right?? Except when free turns out to be worth what you paid for it.

I've always felt that printed manuals have a lower risk of "data entry error" than online data. I might be wrong, and I hope I am, but I know how easy it is to type 23 when you meant 32, so I'm always leery about data on screen having a greater error risk than data printed in manuals, where I feel they spend more time and effort ensuring what gets printed is what they meant to have printed and not a typo. But, that's just me.

All data includes some form of warning saying essentially "this is what we got, what you get could be different". I don't think enough people realize how different things can sometimes be.
 
As far as case volume changing pressure on handgun reloads,its a valid point.

I suggest COAL is about fitting in the magazine and feeding,and it is subtly different than case volume.Not all 230 gr or 124 gr bullets are the same length.
Ogive shapes vary.

Its the depth of the bullet base that determines combustion chamber volume.
 
The difference between free online data and paid printed data is you paid for the printing. That's about it.

I had to track down a printed manual from the 1970's to get obsolete load data that wasn't available online.

Jeff

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
Just a couple points of clarification.

HiBC said:
Its the depth of the bullet base that determines combustion chamber volume.
Click to expand...
Mostly. However, for a given bullet base depth, combustion chamber volume is greater if the bullet base is concave or hollow.


weaselfire said:
The difference between free online data and paid printed data is you paid for the printing. That's about it.
Click to expand...
That is true for the free online data that's also been printed. Most of the data available in print form has been pressure tested. But some of the free online data that hasn't been made available in printed form hasn't been pressure tested either.
 
Some loads posted by individuals on the various shooting forums. Loads developed using computer simulation programs
Click to expand...
Really? Specific links you can post here? I would like to see. I doubt you can show more than one odd example.
That is why we have the official load data sticky at the top of this forum. If you use something else, you do so at your own risk (and should not). I collect data resources that are published with the Company's name (Powder, Bullets, manuals). Frankly, I don't consider anything else as load data. Once in a while I might come across someone's load list, and find it entertaining, but would never under and conditions accept it as load data. At most I may locate the makers source data (which I would use).
My actual method is to put all my data sources on loads I consider into an Excel spreadsheet side by side in columns. That way I get out a box of bullets, find the tab and row I need, and compare what powders get mid to high velocity for that bullet. Since the data is all in one place, I can compare Alliant BE-86 to CFE Pistol to Ramshot Silhouette at a glance. Then I consider which I have on hand.
I sometimes see data clearly labeled/disclosed as Quickloads estimates or predictions. So? What's your point? That is not Published Load Data.
I do not think there is a substitute for knowing what you are looking at and where it came from.
 
Last edited:
I don’t trust anybody! :). That’s why I cross-reference several sources when planning a load test series. I typically try to get data as near to my components as possible from bullet and powder manufacturer, Lyman’s, QuickLoad for rough estimating, recommendations from other forum users, Ken Water’s “ Pet Loads”. Also share data between a couple of friends. I take various data and then consider what seems on the low end and work up a ladder from there. Sometimes a recommended load ends up being one of the best in the series.

I store my test results in Excel spreadsheets which are auto copied to my phone and backed up on DropBox. So some data is free and some is paid. Never looking for a max load just an accurate load at mid-range charge. But sometimes such as with W296 the best load is going to be near max.
 
Reynolds357,

Note that Hornady and Sierra will provide you with their data free for a specific bullet. Just email them and ask for it.


Std7mag,

One thing I've observed with a number of short pistol loads is the primer often starts unseating the bullet before the powder gets burning or the case expands and drops pressure by venting a little of the gas around the bullet and up the barrel (gas bypass), so the actual volume behind the bullet is not quite as predicted from the cartridge dimensions. Unfortunately, that means the only way to be sure what the pressure from a load will be is to measure it. QuickLOAD sure gives you some scary numbers from short seating, though.
 
Those are individuals saying they did something. That is not, IMO, published load data, and, also, IMO, not something anyone with any sense would load to without verification. Obsolete cartridges, and for that matter, surplus military powders, are cases where obscure information could help someone (who knows what they are doing anyway). Disclaimers would be expected.
If you do not understand the difference dont reload.
 
Last edited:
Gee, my point was simply some loads shared online (free) haven't been pressure tested. And I provided a couple of quick examples per request. In contrast, most load data that is printed and sold (and sometimes available free or online) has been pressure tested.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top