Incorrect Reloading Data in Nosler Manual?

Zastava223rem

Zastava223rem

Member
So in my efforts to get my main 7mm Rem Mag ready to go for deer season, I picked a load out of the manual without any development based on the 150 gr Ballistic Silvertips i am shooting. The nosler book calls for a "max" charge of 63.0 gr of IMR4350 that gives appx 3250 FPS out of a 1:9 twist 24" test barrel.

The part I find intriguing in is my 700 is a 1:9.25 twist 24" barrel and my average velocity was 2992.1 FPS.

Now, my Lyman 50th manual i just got is saying a max of 64 gr will only yield 3050 or so with a 24" test barrel.

I know the Nosler Manual is very safe which is why I have no problems picking a load without working up but is it possible or even probable that there may have been an error? I know there's many variables that could be at play but has anyone seen that before?
 
Yes,

Happens all the time. All of those variables that you know about are causing the difference.

Fast barrels and slow barrels.
Some primers can give a difference of 100fps
Some brass cases have way more, or less capacity and several grains variation for max loads can be normal.
Powder lots.
Primer lots
Chamber throat differences that vary rifle to rifle, and change drastically with round count in the same rifle.
Chronograph differences.


Sometimes i get wayyyyy better velocity than the book says, then hit pressure early.

Sometimes i get wayyyyy lower velocity than the book says.

I almost always load up until i see pressure signs, or groups that are clearly deteriorating at the high end. Then you know where the top is. Of course you confirm that the cases will hold a primer again, and then again.

Also,

If you are using some kind of coated "slippery" bullet, you will need more powder to get the same velocity as a "dry" bullet. The equation works in such a way that you can load more powder, and get more velocity than a dry bullet.

I have almost all of the reloading manuals. The differences between book to book for charge weight/velocity on the same weight bullets is drastic to say the least. But i suppose most use different brand components. I don't take those books as gospel. Just a guide line.

Some companies do seem to have some fast test barrels.... I agree on that also.

 
Not incorrect data. It is common for results to be different than the loading manual. Not all components and rifles shoot the same.
 
arlaunch pretty well covered it.
I don't remember where I read it, but I saw an article where a .300 Win. Mag. could be at 30-06 velocities just due to the "components" used, like the others are saying, those "components" alone can make for quite a big difference in velocities.
 
I have been in Sierra and PMC ballistics Labs.

Published data only applies to their barrel, and their lot # of powder, AND other components.

Published data is only meant to act as a GUIDE, not what would be safe in everyone's rifles.

Start lower, work up to max load, watch for pressure signs.

We that have some grey hair have all experienced HOT LOTS of powder, barrels will differ in throat length, and bore dia. Components are manufactured with a +/- in variances.

I have found many times that the "MOST ACCURATE" load in a nosler manual was very, very close to my barrels, but care must be exercised if their most accurate load is their stated Max load.
Their advertised velocity means nothing to me as this number with my loads and my barrel will always vary.

So, as AR launch stated, a reloading manual is meant to be a GUIDE ONLY....not gospel carved in STONE! Learning to think for yourself starts with reading a lot in the beginning of the reloading manual, then read it again.

Zastava223rem, an accurate load in several of my Rem 700 7 Mags is 63.0g of IMR 4350, Rem case, with a rem 9 1/2 primer. Velocity varies with different barrels. The Mack Daddy load for the 150-154g bullets is with R#25, Winchester Mag primer(!!***), at 3250 out of numerous 26" barrels, bullet within .003 of the lands, SD of 7-9 fps, bug hole accuracy.
 
The data passes through multiple layers of collecting,recording and then publication. It would be uncommon, unlikely however you want to describe the possibility of incorrect data. But it certainly is not perfect.
 
I like the Nosler manual, I also like the Hodgen. If you start low and work up until you get slight extractor marks. Then back off a little, this is my maximum load with this combination of components. This load will usually be close to the maximum velocity listed in the Nosler manual. Their data is usually closer to what I find on the ground. Their most accurate loads usually work well too, if you use the same brass and primer. For the rest, refer to my tag line.
 
Was just thinking, my 1961 Speer manual has heavier Max loads listed than any of my more modern manuals, but it doesn't cover all the newer calibers that are now available.
A guy just mentioned a load for the the .308 that I though was pretty stout, looked it up in that old manual and there it was.
As has been mentioned many times, work up the ladder toward a Max load, and if signs of pressure start showing up back off a hair, I am over the max load listed in some books for the "06", but am at the max listed in in that 1961 Speer manual.
There are a bunch of us that shoot that "06" load in multiple guns, none of us ever had a problem with it spanning a 60 yr. timeframe and it has accounted for a lot of deer.
 
Originally Posted By: SixsixtyMagsWas just thinking, my 1961 Speer manual has heavier Max loads listed than any of my more modern manuals, but it doesn't cover all the newer calibers that are now available.
A guy just mentioned a load for the the .308 that I though was pretty stout, looked it up in that old manual and there it was.
As has been mentioned many times, work up the ladder toward a Max load, and if signs of pressure start showing up back off a hair, I am over the max load listed in some books for the "06", but am at the max listed in in that 1961 Speer manual.
There are a bunch of us that shoot that "06" load in multiple guns, none of us ever had a problem with it spanning a 60 yr. timeframe and it has accounted for a lot of deer.




you nailed it with your load developement suggestion. ITs all about testing.

not all powders - and more importantly all powder LOT #'s - are equal.

so while that data may exist and still be valid in some (or even many) cases... many powders have changed slightly over the years, so its somewhat important to use the most up to date info you have if like most of us you're using relatively current production products....

unless of course you're still loading powder from 1961 anyway, then go right to that ancient manual for info for period correct reloading components
smile.gif
smile.gif
 
Yep, the "slipperiness" &/or bullet diameter can make a significant difference. Example: In my .454 Casull with all other factors equal, 0.452" Hornady slugs are 200 fps faster than 0.4515" Sierras.
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top