Armory Sponsor
Posted: 12/17/2013 7:01:15 AM EDT
|
I know that powder companies generally publish their loads online with various bullets but then bullet companies publish paper books with various powders.
It seems to me that to be safe one has to cross reference as much data as possible but then when you have a conflicting recipe who do you believe? I would tend to go with the powder recipe. What say you? |
| It's a valid point. I cross reference 3 manuals and the available online data from the powder and bullet manufactures (if available). The place of concern for me tends to be on the low end. I want a valid place to start that will properly cycle the action. There does tend to be some variance in the manuals on where that point is. If the bullet manufacturer lists the exact powder and bullet combination I'm using, I'll use that data. If it's not listed, I use the powder manufacturer's data with the closest bullet, use the start load data, and work up .3 grain ladder loads from there. |
|
I don't think it's a matter of having to cross reference three data sources to be safe, the published loads from any of those sources should be safe if followed otherwise they wouldn't have been published. To get the best possible performance then cross referencing and using specific data from either the bullet or powder manufacturer may yield the best results. Their data is representative of their loads and testing not all the possible variables out there.
I would feel comfortable and safe if I was only forced to use one reference document, I of course prefer to have all the manuals and or web access that I do to work on best possible combination for loads. |
Armory Sponsor