The best thing about the Lyman manual is that they use bullets from all manufacturers, rather than just one. And you are right - have several manuals for reference. For cast bullets, the Lyman cast bullet handbook is absolutely indispensable.
ReloadOC is the only reloading shop that matters. If you're not shopping at ReloadOC, then you're just not serious about reloading. Love your shop, Brian!
Excellent advice and information. One point if I may add, with the Lyman manuals (esp. with those new to reloading) , they tend to stay on the conservative side of pressure with their load recommendations. I’ve also used multiple manuals to compare bullets of common weight, design and caliber to see variations in velocity from powder charge to powder charge of the same type. Lots of valuable data available from multiple manuals, and I dare say “No reloading manual is out of date!”
H.V. Stent wrote an article called "A Handlaoding Mystery" which was about different manuals having varying load data for the 30-30. He shows how the load data varies by 7 grains between Speer Handloading Manual #7 (with 40 grains) and #9 (shows 33 grains). And while Speer gave the reply that there are bound to be changes between publications, they gave no explanation as to why. And while Sierra, Hornady, Lyman, and Omark all gave answers basically saying stick with the latest data, but Hodgdon's answer was "Some data sources keep loads purposely on the low side. We do this. Some data sources want to keep 30-30 loads super safe, below 35,000, and some crowd 45,000 or more...". But again Speer in their own manuals varied 7 grains between two of their own publications. [see: Handloader's Digest, eleventh Edition, page 97-99] None the less as powder and primers do change over the years it is always best to use the most current load data available. And even then it still varies from one manufacturer to another, whereby leaving the question still up in the air as to which one should one trust. I have noticed in the latest editions that Hornady publishes a much lower charge weights than the others which actually come close to one another. For example take the 45 Colt, Hornady's charge weights for their 250 grain XTP with Accurate #5 is 7.7 to 10.4 grains, while Lyman has10.0 to 11.0 grains, while both Western Powders and Accurate manuals show 9.9 to 11.0 grains. So Hornady has a minimum of 2.3 grains below the others, and a maximum of .6 grain below the other's maximum. Now if we are not to go below the minimum nor above the maximum charge weights we would be stuck between the two publications at 10.0 and 10.4 grains. As these manuals warn that going below the minimum could cause erratic pressures so should we dare start with Hornady's low ball charge weight? Or should we be scared to dare start at the 9.9 to 10.0 grains stated by the others, which is close to Hornady's maximum charge? Funny how they are all using the exact same bullet and powder with modern pressure testing technology and the data as of this day is all over the place. Yet if Hornady was worried about getting sued they would not drop the starting charge weight so low as to create erratic pressures, nor would the others raise the maximum to such heights above Hornady's maximum. If they are all claiming 14,000 PSI what is up with this? Well different primers and lots thereof, as well as different cases, and lots of powder could explain things to some degree. And then there is the difference in the exact diameter as well as the grooves within the test barrels too. So Hornady used their own cases (which may have a smaller useable case volume than the other cases involved) and Winchester WLP primers, while Accurate used Winchester cases and CCI no. 300 primers, and Western Powders used Remington Cases and Remington 2 1/2 primers, while Lyman chose Winchester cases and Winchester WLP primers. So none of these manuals used the same exact components in their texting which could easily account for the differences in recommended charge weights. Just the pressures between different primers can be 2,000 PSI alone, and the useable case volumes between manufacturers could easily explain the majority of the discrepancy themselves. It is well known that Federal makes the hottest primers so keep those extra 2,000 PSI in mind if you choose to go that route. And, while this question will always seem to linger (even though I just explained why here above) as to why are there such differences between one manufacturer's load data compared to other's, simply remember to always start at the beginning charge weights and work up. But as to which one you will believe is best is up to your discernment alone! Plus when making up their mind which data is best perhaps one would do well to see which manual uses the brass they plain on using and stick with their primer choose to boot. Personally, I went with Western Powders, Accurate, and Lyman's data. I used Starline brass and CCI no. 300 primers. Yet my advise is y'all do you as I don't want to get sued.
I have got at least 70+ reloading manuals to date, and still have at least 10 to go that I know of. And I have been gleaning a lot of knowledge from the front halves of these manuals. But I only use the newest editions from 19 bullet and/or powder companies to gather load data from.
In the Lee manual, on page 37, it states: "Bullets seated deeper than normal will reduce case capacity and increase pressure. This is not too critical for large rifle cases, but extremely important for pistol loads. Good load data specifies bullet seating depth or over all cartridge length. Do not seat the bullet to deep. On page 96, of the Lee manual, under the section of “The Latest Information On Pressure”, it states: "2) the extreme expansion (XTP and Gold Dot) handgun bullets have a large and deep nose cavity that makes them longer than a regular bullet of the same weight. This requires deeper depth resulting in higher pressure. Seating depth is very critical for handgun ammunition because of the small cases and large bores. ... … The usable volume of … … … the 45 ACP is 1.14cc. Seating bullets 1/16” deeper … .. … reduces the volume … 0.16cc for the 45 ACP. That’s ... ... ... a whopping 14% ... . This large volume reduction has an equally large effect on pressure that is made more critical because the maximum pressure for the 45 ACP is 1/3 of [plus 60,000 pound range as mentioned below. Keep in mind the 45 Colt working pressure is a mere 14,000 psi.] … On page 157, of Lee's manual under "Minimal Overall Length", It states: This is critical on most handgun cases. A small reduction in overall length can cause dangerous pressures because of reduced capacity caused by seating the bullet too deep. See details on page 96." On page 133, of the "Complete Reloading Guide", under "Loads For Handgun Cartridges", in bold font right under the heading it states: Loads for handguns ... with less case capacity ... when loading ... ... ... mere tenths of a grain of powder can make the difference between a good load and one that is dangerous. Approach the loading of handgun ammunition with these facts in mind." Plus on pages 88 thru 89, of the Lee manual, under "Signs Of Excessive Pressure" is a list of seven pressure signs and then the manual states the following: "It must be emphasized that these signs will not manifest themselves in ... low pressure rounds. These are signs of pressure in the plus 60,000 pound range. If you are loading for a gun designed to operate at 15,000 pounds pressure, you will most likely never find a loose primer because the gun would have blown up and spread the primer and gun parts over a wide area." And on page 158, in the section of “How To Read The Load Data”, under “XTP” it states : “Use these loads for the Hornady XTP, Speer Gold Dot, or Remington Golden Saber bullets. Now on page 270, of the Lee manual, under the “250 grain XTP” it gives load data with three different seating depths, because the data was taken from three different brand bullets, yet clumped together as if one. So if someone where to take the data developed for the shorter bullet and turn around and used it with the longer bullet they could very well raise pressures far above the 10% reduced starting charge weight. Especially if they use a case with smaller case capacity than that used in the development of the load data, as well as a hotter brand primer than that which was used to develop the data in the first place. Keep in mind that just changing the brand of primer can cause as much as a 2,000 psi rise in pressure alone, which can by itself swallow up the safety margin. Then throw in a case that has a reduced volume than the tested one and on top of all that seating the wrong bullet father in to the case, because it has a deeper hollow point and thicker cooper jacket, than what was used to developed the load data could easily displace the primer into one's own eye - so to speak. Or another way to put it would be as written in the book "Ammunition, Demystified", at the bottom of page 18, which says: "Use only the loading data published by the bullet manufacture! Substitution of loading data for equivalent weight bullets can get you into deep yogurt!" And I know for a fact that other manuals have stated not to switch brands of bullets even if they are of the same type. I would post them here if I had the time to wade through 30 different manuals to find where they spoke of such, but I am tired just having to have dug up the above and below. Head the warnings of reloading or not, but what ever you do try not to teach others to ignore them just because you might so choose. Again, the Richard Lee loading manual does not do pressure tests themselves, they only take test data from others that do and jumble it all together, of which they lose the test barrel length, case brand, primer type and brand, as well as bullet brand. These are all important elements, as one should never take data made for one specific brand and type bullet and turn and use it with a different brand or type bullet. This is due to Brinell hardness and bearing surfaces can be different, as well as the shape can be slightly different with longer or shorter lengths, all of which can cause extremely high pressure issues. One should only use data straight from a reputable data source [see paragraph below] that does their own pressure testing which give the test barrel length, case brand, primer type and brand, and most of all the brand of the type bullet used in developing the data. Each one of these elements that are changed is a compromise of which if all are compromised at the same time could very well add up to a recipe for disaster. First off, I am not implying that Lee plagiarized the data in their manual, just that they jumbled data from different sources together and lost key elements in the doing. And it has always been a given that one should use the starting loads and work their way up. This 10% reduction covers for smaller bore diameters, different lots of powder, different brand/lots of primers, and different brands of cartridge cases. These alone can take up that 10% relatively easy. Especially in pistol cartridges, as a little goes a long way in such small volume chambers. Lyman, Speer, Nosler, Sierra, Barnes, Swift, Berger, Norma, Lapua, VihtaVuori, Accurate, Western Powder, Hodgdon, or even Hornady reloading manuals are far better suited than Richard Lee's for gleaning load data from, as they all not only do their own testing but they all give the test barrel length, case brand, primer type and brand, as well as the bullets brand and type for each load recipe. Again Richard Lee's manual throws out one of the carnal safety rules of "never use load data developed for one brand of bullet for another brand of the same style bullet". Keep in mind that it is always better to throw out Richard Lee's manual than any of the safety rules. But with all that said Richard Lee's reloading manual has a wealth of knowledge in the front half that makes the book well worth having. Just do not ignore the Cautions, Warnings, and Nevers there within.
The best thing about the Lyman manual is that they use bullets from all manufacturers, rather than just one. And you are right - have several manuals for reference. For cast bullets, the Lyman cast bullet handbook is absolutely indispensable.
ReloadOC is the only reloading shop that matters. If you're not shopping at ReloadOC, then you're just not serious about reloading.
Love your shop, Brian!
Excellent advice and information. One point if I may add, with the Lyman manuals (esp. with those new to reloading) , they tend to stay on the conservative side of pressure with their load recommendations. I’ve also used multiple manuals to compare bullets of common weight, design and caliber to see variations in velocity from powder charge to powder charge of the same type. Lots of valuable data available from multiple manuals, and I dare say “No reloading manual is out of date!”
H.V. Stent wrote an article called "A Handlaoding Mystery" which was about different manuals having varying load data for the 30-30. He shows how the load data varies by 7 grains between Speer Handloading Manual #7 (with 40 grains) and #9 (shows 33 grains). And while Speer gave the reply that there are bound to be changes between publications, they gave no explanation as to why. And while Sierra, Hornady, Lyman, and Omark all gave answers basically saying stick with the latest data, but Hodgdon's answer was "Some data sources keep loads purposely on the low side. We do this. Some data sources want to keep 30-30 loads super safe, below 35,000, and some crowd 45,000 or more...". But again Speer in their own manuals varied 7 grains between two of their own publications. [see: Handloader's Digest, eleventh Edition, page 97-99]
None the less as powder and primers do change over the years it is always best to use the most current load data available. And even then it still varies from one manufacturer to another, whereby leaving the question still up in the air as to which one should one trust.
I have noticed in the latest editions that Hornady publishes a much lower charge weights than the others which actually come close to one another. For example take the 45 Colt, Hornady's charge weights for their 250 grain XTP with Accurate #5 is 7.7 to 10.4 grains, while Lyman has10.0 to 11.0 grains, while both Western Powders and Accurate manuals show 9.9 to 11.0 grains. So Hornady has a minimum of 2.3 grains below the others, and a maximum of .6 grain below the other's maximum. Now if we are not to go below the minimum nor above the maximum charge weights we would be stuck between the two publications at 10.0 and 10.4 grains.
As these manuals warn that going below the minimum could cause erratic pressures so should we dare start with Hornady's low ball charge weight? Or should we be scared to dare start at the 9.9 to 10.0 grains stated by the others, which is close to Hornady's maximum charge?
Funny how they are all using the exact same bullet and powder with modern pressure testing technology and the data as of this day is all over the place. Yet if Hornady was worried about getting sued they would not drop the starting charge weight so low as to create erratic pressures, nor would the others raise the maximum to such heights above Hornady's maximum.
If they are all claiming 14,000 PSI what is up with this? Well different primers and lots thereof, as well as different cases, and lots of powder could explain things to some degree. And then there is the difference in the exact diameter as well as the grooves within the test barrels too. So Hornady used their own cases (which may have a smaller useable case volume than the other cases involved) and Winchester WLP primers, while Accurate used Winchester cases and CCI no. 300 primers, and Western Powders used Remington Cases and Remington 2 1/2 primers, while Lyman chose Winchester cases and Winchester WLP primers. So none of these manuals used the same exact components in their texting which could easily account for the differences in recommended charge weights. Just the pressures between different primers can be 2,000 PSI alone, and the useable case volumes between manufacturers could easily explain the majority of the discrepancy themselves. It is well known that Federal makes the hottest primers so keep those extra 2,000 PSI in mind if you choose to go that route.
And, while this question will always seem to linger (even though I just explained why here above) as to why are there such differences between one manufacturer's load data compared to other's, simply remember to always start at the beginning charge weights and work up. But as to which one you will believe is best is up to your discernment alone! Plus when making up their mind which data is best perhaps one would do well to see which manual uses the brass they plain on using and stick with their primer choose to boot.
Personally, I went with Western Powders, Accurate, and Lyman's data. I used Starline brass and CCI no. 300 primers.
Yet my advise is y'all do you as I don't want to get sued.
I have got at least 70+ reloading manuals to date, and still have at least 10 to go that I know of. And I have been gleaning a lot of knowledge from the front halves of these manuals. But I only use the newest editions from 19 bullet and/or powder companies to gather load data from.
Orange County... Deep behind enemy lines. I ran away to Idaho.
In the Lee manual, on page 37, it states:
"Bullets seated deeper than normal will reduce case capacity and increase pressure. This is not too critical for large rifle cases, but extremely important for pistol loads. Good load data specifies bullet seating depth or over all cartridge length. Do not seat the bullet to deep.
On page 96, of the Lee manual, under the section of “The Latest Information On Pressure”, it states:
"2) the extreme expansion (XTP and Gold Dot) handgun bullets have a large and deep nose cavity that makes them longer than a regular bullet of the same weight. This requires deeper depth resulting in higher pressure. Seating depth is very critical for handgun ammunition because of the small cases and large bores. ... … The usable volume of … … … the 45 ACP is 1.14cc. Seating bullets 1/16” deeper … .. … reduces the volume … 0.16cc for the 45 ACP. That’s ... ... ... a whopping 14% ... . This large volume reduction has an equally large effect on pressure that is made more critical because the maximum pressure for the 45 ACP is 1/3 of [plus 60,000 pound range as mentioned below. Keep in mind the 45 Colt working pressure is a mere 14,000 psi.] …
On page 157, of Lee's manual under "Minimal Overall Length", It states:
This is critical on most handgun cases. A small reduction in overall length can cause dangerous pressures because of reduced capacity caused by seating the bullet too deep. See details on page 96."
On page 133, of the "Complete Reloading Guide", under "Loads For Handgun Cartridges", in bold font right under the heading it states:
Loads for handguns ... with less case capacity ... when loading ... ... ... mere tenths of a grain of powder can make the difference between a good load and one that is dangerous. Approach the loading of handgun ammunition with these facts in mind."
Plus on pages 88 thru 89, of the Lee manual, under "Signs Of Excessive Pressure" is a list of seven pressure signs and then the manual states the following:
"It must be emphasized that these signs will not manifest themselves in ... low pressure rounds. These are signs of pressure in the plus 60,000 pound range. If you are loading for a gun designed to operate at 15,000 pounds pressure, you will most likely never find a loose primer because the gun would have blown up and spread the primer and gun parts over a wide area."
And on page 158, in the section of “How To Read The Load Data”, under “XTP” it states :
“Use these loads for the Hornady XTP, Speer Gold Dot, or Remington Golden Saber bullets.
Now on page 270, of the Lee manual, under the “250 grain XTP” it gives load data with three different seating depths, because the data was taken from three different brand bullets, yet clumped together as if one. So if someone where to take the data developed for the shorter bullet and turn around and used it with the longer bullet they could very well raise pressures far above the 10% reduced starting charge weight. Especially if they use a case with smaller case capacity than that used in the development of the load data, as well as a hotter brand primer than that which was used to develop the data in the first place. Keep in mind that just changing the brand of primer can cause as much as a 2,000 psi rise in pressure alone, which can by itself swallow up the safety margin. Then throw in a case that has a reduced volume than the tested one and on top of all that seating the wrong bullet father in to the case, because it has a deeper hollow point and thicker cooper jacket, than what was used to developed the load data could easily displace the primer into one's own eye - so to speak.
Or another way to put it would be as written in the book "Ammunition, Demystified", at the bottom of page 18, which says:
"Use only the loading data published by the bullet manufacture! Substitution of loading data for equivalent weight bullets can get you into deep yogurt!"
And I know for a fact that other manuals have stated not to switch brands of bullets even if they are of the same type. I would post them here if I had the time to wade through 30 different manuals to find where they spoke of such, but I am tired just having to have dug up the above and below.
Head the warnings of reloading or not, but what ever you do try not to teach others to ignore them just because you might so choose.
Again, the Richard Lee loading manual does not do pressure tests themselves, they only take test data from others that do and jumble it all together, of which they lose the test barrel length, case brand, primer type and brand, as well as bullet brand. These are all important elements, as one should never take data made for one specific brand and type bullet and turn and use it with a different brand or type bullet. This is due to Brinell hardness and bearing surfaces can be different, as well as the shape can be slightly different with longer or shorter lengths, all of which can cause extremely high pressure issues. One should only use data straight from a reputable data source [see paragraph below] that does their own pressure testing which give the test barrel length, case brand, primer type and brand, and most of all the brand of the type bullet used in developing the data. Each one of these elements that are changed is a compromise of which if all are compromised at the same time could very well add up to a recipe for disaster.
First off, I am not implying that Lee plagiarized the data in their manual, just that they jumbled data from different sources together and lost key elements in the doing. And it has always been a given that one should use the starting loads and work their way up. This 10% reduction covers for smaller bore diameters, different lots of powder, different brand/lots of primers, and different brands of cartridge cases. These alone can take up that 10% relatively easy. Especially in pistol cartridges, as a little goes a long way in such small volume chambers.
Lyman, Speer, Nosler, Sierra, Barnes, Swift, Berger, Norma, Lapua, VihtaVuori, Accurate, Western Powder, Hodgdon, or even Hornady reloading manuals are far better suited than Richard Lee's for gleaning load data from, as they all not only do their own testing but they all give the test barrel length, case brand, primer type and brand, as well as the bullets brand and type for each load recipe.
Again Richard Lee's manual throws out one of the carnal safety rules of "never use load data developed for one brand of bullet for another brand of the same style bullet". Keep in mind that it is always better to throw out Richard Lee's manual than any of the safety rules. But with all that said Richard Lee's reloading manual has a wealth of knowledge in the front half that makes the book well worth having. Just do not ignore the Cautions, Warnings, and Nevers there within.
I have most of the reloading manuals. But I think the Lee manual is by far the best overall!
Good to know thanks!
As long as I live I would never throw out a reloading book ever
Wealth of knowledge, thank you.
I have a Lyman, Lee, Hornady and caliber pacific manuals. Might get a couple more down the road but you can get information online also.
Thank you for being! My ReLoading GO TOOO! Guy!
Love your store, Thanks again!
Great shop Brian. Thanks for sticking it out and staying in the OC to keeps us going.
Let me know when you get those 90tnts in!😏
Thank you very much. Good info.
Good advice
Nice presentation and good info.
Get the Lee. Far and away the most data. I have all the big ones, but buy the Lee.
Thanks
Noone should have only one reloading manual.
I am up over 70 reloading manuals now.
Notes or links in the description would be great 😉
Oo shit i have too buy library too reload 😆
Thank for info
Lyman, Lee and the Hodgdon annual.
Yes
Please send books on reloading.
Lol me too love reading through those books