|
|
Post by Cholla on Feb 1, 2024 23:14:56 GMT -5
Forgot to mention, get a chronograph! They're wonderful tools!
|
|
|
|
Post by marlin35 on Feb 1, 2024 23:42:27 GMT -5
Forgot to mention, get a chronograph! They're wonderful tools! I plan to, someday. As a feller pretty well just getting started in life I have to prioritize, but one of these days maybe ill get on y’all’s level! |
|
|
|
Post by ridenshoot on Feb 2, 2024 7:39:32 GMT -5
Forgot to mention, get a chronograph! They're wonderful tools! I plan to, someday. As a feller pretty well just getting started in life I have to prioritize, but one of these days maybe ill get on y’all’s level! They are cheap relative to an accident, without one you are shooting in the dark with YOUR gun. For the price of a few boxes of ammo or a mold you can buy a useful chrono. |
|
|
|
Post by contender on Feb 2, 2024 9:31:37 GMT -5
I understand the initial confusion.
Different loading manuals often have different data. This is why I always suggest to all handloaders to buy several up to date manuals and STUDY them. Often,, a single component change can make a difference. Plus, as noted,, the publishers may use a different test firearm, or conditions than the general public. This is why we all suggest a loader to start low & build up.
But a chronograph is an excellent tool most can afford that is truly inexpensive when compared to the potential issues that could arise.
Long ago,, I too was a very "income limited, and frugal buyer" of stuff. But I realized that a chrono was a necessary tool. I did without other things to afford one of the best at the time,, an Ohler 35P model. I've never regretted it. And while you can not get a true pressure testing device as easily,, a chrono can provide a good level of information to assist in knowing what your loads are doing when compared to the manuals.
One of the biggest things the decades of using one has taught me. As I build a load,, and test over my chrono, I discovered, in general,, that quite often,, my most accurate loads were NOT maximum loads. Well within the manual data that was published. I found that if I need more power,, just use a bigger gun. A downloaded bigger caliber is much easier to shoot, and doesn't cause me to beat up my smaller caliber guns as much. Plus, the felt recoil in a heavier gun is less, making shooting more pleasant.
So,, I'd suggest you get a few more manuals, read all the details,, and get a good average beginning load to start testing. Then you can approach the accuracy level safely with good info.
Start saving to get a chrono.
|
|
rkrcpa
.30 Stingray
Posts: 263
|
Post by rkrcpa on Feb 2, 2024 14:01:22 GMT -5
I think those are very different bullets that require their own set of loading data.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigbore5 on Feb 2, 2024 16:21:50 GMT -5
I think those are very different bullets that require their own set of loading data. That's why cartridge lengths are so important when developing a load. |
|
shorty500
.327 Meteor
too many dirty harry movies created me!
Posts: 934
|
Post by shorty500 on Feb 2, 2024 16:58:26 GMT -5
There’s just so many variables I’ve never regarded published data as very reliable much beyond actual pressure numbers.
Velocity statements in any manual are very suspect to scrutiny- once upon a time I got a wild hair chronographing multiple
different .44 mag & .45 Colt loads thru a variety of barrel set ups on the same given day.
By the time you compare a 10 closed breach Contender barrel, universal receiver and long barreled revolvers etc it rapidly
proves velocity numbers listed for anything but your particular gun are pretty much meaningless.
Example #1 - .44 mag barrels in 7-1/2 to 10-5/8 revolvers some longer barrels posted lower speeds.
Example #2- FA m83 usin* Colt cylinders- little gain from 7-1/2 vs 4-3/4 tubes
|
|
|
|
Post by marlin35 on Feb 2, 2024 18:19:53 GMT -5
I understand the initial confusion. Different loading manuals often have different data. This is why I always suggest to all handloaders to buy several up to date manuals and STUDY them. Often,, a single component change can make a difference. Plus, as noted,, the publishers may use a different test firearm, or conditions than the general public. This is why we all suggest a loader to start low & build up. But a chronograph is an excellent tool most can afford that is truly inexpensive when compared to the potential issues that could arise. Long ago,, I too was a very "income limited, and frugal buyer" of stuff. But I realized that a chrono was a necessary tool. I did without other things to afford one of the best at the time,, an Ohler 35P model. I've never regretted it. And while you can not get a true pressure testing device as easily,, a chrono can provide a good level of information to assist in knowing what your loads are doing when compared to the manuals. One of the biggest things the decades of using one has taught me. As I build a load,, and test over my chrono, I discovered, in general,, that quite often,, my most accurate loads were NOT maximum loads. Well within the manual data that was published. I found that if I need more power,, just use a bigger gun. A downloaded bigger caliber is much easier to shoot, and doesn't cause me to beat up my smaller caliber guns as much. Plus, the felt recoil in a heavier gun is less, making shooting more pleasant. So,, I'd suggest you get a few more manuals, read all the details,, and get a good average beginning load to start testing. Then you can approach the accuracy level safely with good info. Start saving to get a chrono. Thank you for your wisdom and encouragement. I really appreciate you guys and your willingness to answer some stupid questions and then address why those kinds of questions get asked and how to fix it. I will save up for a chronograph. |
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Feb 2, 2024 18:40:23 GMT -5
”.... I’ve never regarded published data as very reliable much beyond actual pressure numbers. Velocity statements in any manual are very suspect....” ***** shorty500.... can’t imagine making that kind of statement in front of Kenneth Oehler, Allan Jones, the Hodgdons, Jim Stekl, Steve Hornady, or the Rugers. David Bradshaw |
|
shorty500
.327 Meteor
too many dirty harry movies created me!
Posts: 934
|
Post by shorty500 on Feb 2, 2024 19:14:50 GMT -5
”.... I’ve never regarded published data as very reliable much beyond actual pressure numbers. Velocity statements in any manual are very suspect....” ***** shorty500.... can’t imagine making that kind of statement in front of Kenneth Oehler, Allan Jones, the Hodgdons, Jim Stekl, Steve Hornady, or the Rugers. David Bradshaw My point mr.B is that there are so many variables between guns- pressure barrels, vented vs. non-vented, Contender, revolver etc to take published manual velocities as a set in stone item. Even in the old days Speer had a very decent article in one manual comparing multiple candidates of the “same” revolver across a selection of barrel lengths and brands |
|
|
|
Post by bigbore5 on Feb 2, 2024 21:14:35 GMT -5
I've got two Old Model 6-1/5" Blackhawk 357's from 1969 in consecutive serial numbers that never shoot the same numbers.
|
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Feb 3, 2024 10:59:30 GMT -5
shorty500.... were bullet and powder makers to print all their data, loading manuals would share the heft of an Oxford Dictionary. A key to published data is to use it as a guide. Gentlemen such as Ron Reiber (Hodgdon and before that Hornady), and Allan Jones (Speer/CCI and before that forensics), would be the first to tell a handloader to pay attention, to not presume. A handloader who says he loads to a certain pressure, or seeks to load to a certain pressure should first acquire the equipment to do so. Velocities are easily measured. Pressure requires expensive gear and the training to use it.
So when I hear laymen talk of pressure, I want all the details. Nowhere do I hear a laymen’s talk of pressure include TTP or variations at peak.
The velocity part is relatively painless.
David Bradshaw
|
|
|
|
Post by bigbrowndog on Feb 3, 2024 14:31:32 GMT -5
On the get a chronograph recommendation, I would add and learn how to take accurate velocity readings. Variations in velocity from our current chronograph selections can be widely different as well. If care is not taken to record velocity under controlled conditions, direct sunlight is a poor provider of accurate readings in my experience.
Trapr
|
|
