Starting loads versus Max loads?

[Canuck Bob]

After reading some of the AI threads and some pressure indication threads elsewhere I decided to do some very suspect analysis. Manuals that list pressure, Lee and Hodgdon, suggest that the restriction in fps is not that much compared to the reduction in pressure.

In Hodgdon's Online manual for 32 Special, 170 gr Hdy, 20" barrel, they list CFE 223 as the best powder (sure surprised me) with a starting load that was 2200 fps. That easily rivalled many popular leveraction favorites. It was 150 fps less than a full power load. The CUP difference was nearly 5000 CUP. That would please my 94 and brass. 2100 fps is easy enough with our older favorite with a similar drop in CUP.

For us levergunners a 100-150 fps loss seems not to be an issue. Of course I understand the allure of loading and testing for peak power. It is fun and an important part of the hobby. Also 700 yard hunters would see a distinct disadvantage.

As an aside the CFE223 was second only to LVR on the 30-30 site for Hodgdon. This surprised me and since the safe now has a 223 worth some further investigation. It still catches me when I realize how little powder it takes to jump 10,000psi.

[Pete44ru]

.

While there may be many 700yd shooters, there's only a handful of 700yd hunters.................



.

[Canuck Bob]

.
While there may be many 700yd shooters, there's only a handful of 700yd hunters.................
.

Pete I'm getting a little tired of these sniper wannabes! I added that for a little sarcasm. I meet them at the range. I much prefer the tales we tell each other around here. When a guy says I dropped the buck after hunting him for an hour at 40 paces I think hunter. When a guy drops an elk at a ranged 792 yards from a portable bench I think something not printable for polite conversation. Oops I'm high jacking my own thread!!!

[AJMD429]

.
While there may be many 700yd shooters, there's only a handful of 700yd hunters.................
.

Pete I'm getting a little tired of these sniper wannabes! I added that for a little sarcasm. I meet them at the range. I much prefer the tales we tell each other around here. When a guy says I dropped the buck after hunting him for an hour at 40 paces I think hunter. When a guy drops an elk at a ranged 792 yards from a portable bench I think something not printable for polite conversation. Oops I'm high jacking my own thread!!!

It is no big deal to shoot a target at a long range, but when you are shooting a living creature at that range, first of all you need to hit it, but also important, you need a humane kill. Given the time of flight at that range, it is far too likely for the animal to move enough that a lethal and humane shot becomes a wounding or crippling shot. I do not think hunting at that range is something I am comfortable with. It is fine for defense against human predators, or perhaps in a food survival situation, and certainly for target practice for sport, not "hunting".

[guntar]

I have to agree that the number of competent 700 yard "hunters" can probably be counted on your fingers on a worldwide basis. That may take a little definition: I define a hunter as one who doesn't take a shot unless he/she is at least 95% + sure of making a killing shot, and that his bullet will do its job once it gets there.

Even at that, I am not sure what kind of a "hunter" has to take shot at an unwounded animal at such ridiculous distances. No hunting situation I've seen in over 50 years in the field (on three continents) has caused me to think a shot longer than 300 to 400 yards was needed, and those were exceptional circumstances.

One last comment, and I will stop my rant. The people who talk about and take such shots are normally those least able to make such a shot. For instance, last fall I had a guide in an antelope hunting camp tell me that with his rifle (a 264 Win. mag), no holdover was necessary since it shot flat out to 800 yards, you also did not have to lead an antelope if it was closer than that either. This was due to his 140 grain bullet going more than 4000 fps.

I just couldn't come up with a clever reply!

[Griff]

///when I realize how little powder it takes to jump 10,000psi.

Yep; and with some cartridges, it can be difficult to start load @ 15% below max.

[BigSky56]

theres a difference between hunting and shooting meat animals Ive found the long range animal shooters are just horn hunters. Now when it comes to predators pestering you 2 or 4 legged any distance and gutshot is ok. danny

[vancelw]

///when I realize how little powder it takes to jump 10,000psi.

Yep; and with some cartridges, it can be difficult to start load @ 15% below max.

Welp, Cannuck Bob....Griff is trying to help you get back on track, but you derailed it good!

I'm tempted to weigh in on the 700 yard sniper, but what I think has been said already by those posting before me.

Your .32 Special information from Hodgdon got my attention, though. When I get around to reloading for mine I will certainly look at their online manual (as I often do). I have a couple of boxes of Speer 170 gr .321 bullets.

I was noticing (in my quest for 300 gr .45 Colt load info) how close the start/max loads were with some powders and the dramatic pressure increase over a grain of powder or so.

[piller]

Speer Manual #13 lists a Ruger/Contender Only load with AA#9 Powder for the .45 Colt cartridge where the starting and Max load are only 0.5 grain different. That is right, only One-Half grain difference in starting and max load in a .45 Colt load. That is a lot of case capacity for such a little difference. There is only 82 FPS listed as the difference between starting and max loads. I would like to know the pressures, but they are not listed.

[marlinman93]

Accuracy is far more important than maximum velocity. Anyone who loads simply based on the fastest load he can send downrange, without stopping at the most accurate load he can send downrange; is kidding himself. Doesn't matter what hotrod load you can develop, the farther you shoot, the more important accuracy is. A one inch miss at 100 yds. is OK, but push that out to 500-1000 yds., and that's unacceptable.
None of my loads are done to see how much velocity I can wring out. Even my .22-250 varmint rifle is well below max load data. But it prints .5"-.75" groups at 200 yds. with a 55 gr. bullet loping along at 3450 fps. I could push it a lot faster, but then I'd miss a lot more, and waste a lot more ammo.

[vancelw]

I didn't see anyone here say they were looking for maximum velocity

[piller]

I didn't see anyone here say they were looking for maximum velocity

I have, however, seen a bunch of postings about pressures and maximum accuracy during my time around this forum.

[AJMD429]

Accuracy is far more important than maximum velocity. Anyone who loads simply based on the fastest load he can send downrange, without stopping at the most accurate load he can send downrange; is kidding himself. Doesn't matter what hotrod load you can develop, the farther you shoot, the more important accuracy is. A one inch miss at 100 yds. is OK, but push that out to 500-1000 yds., and that's unacceptable.
None of my loads are done to see how much velocity I can wring out. Even my .22-250 varmint rifle is well below max load data. But it prints .5"-.75" groups at 200 yds. with a 55 gr. bullet loping along at 3450 fps. I could push it a lot faster, but then I'd miss a lot more, and waste a lot more ammo.

Agreed. If the only issue is getting the most velocity for a given projectile, all you have to do is get a strong-action gun chambered in a cartridge with the highest case capacity for the caliber. The Remington Ultra-Mag series, or the Chey-Tac series, come to mind - those rounds will nearly always give you the highest velocity for any projectile you come up with. However, even with those cartridges, the most accurate/useful load will probably NOT be the maximum-velocity one.

Speer Manual #13 lists a Ruger/Contender Only load with AA#9 Powder for the .45 Colt cartridge where the starting and Max load are only 0.5 grain different. That is right, only One-Half grain difference in starting and max load in a .45 Colt load. That is a lot of case capacity for such a little difference. There is only 82 FPS listed as the difference between starting and max loads. I would like to know the pressures, but they are not listed.

THIS is getting back to the original post....I've noticed that with some cartridges, you can get two respected loading manuals, and the same load/bullet/powder combination will show that the 'starting load' from one manual is at or even above the 'maximum load' from another manual.

Also, over time, loads change - look how much the loads for (now 'Alliant') 2400 have changed over the past couple decades...

[vancelw]

I didn't see anyone here say they were looking for maximum velocity

I have, however, seen a bunch of postings about pressures and maximum accuracy during my time around this forum.

But not on this thread...
More velocity equals more energy with the same weight bullet, so if you're working up a hunting load, it leads you to the load you want to start working up.

[Canuck Bob]

I am not implying any trends around here. It just struck me that one sends pressure higher for limited benefit. That is preaching to the choir with this group.

[KWK]

It still catches me when I realize how little powder it takes to jump 10,000 psi.

That's why I tend to chronograph to the fps listed for the starting loads. I often treat them as max loads.

The sudden rise in pressures with charge weight is more common with the ball powders. I think I read (Barsness?) that single base stick powders don't suffer this malady. Generally the magic ball powders can give more fps, though.

I'm not sure what's the root cause of this. I have to think it's the heavy reliance on burn deterrent which must be employed to get the double base balls to behave; sticks have geometry in their favor. It's a matter of the higher pressures burning through the deterrent affected part of the kernel sooner, and then the afterburners kick in, so to speak. Depending on the ratio of case capacity to bore cross section plus the relative bullet inertia (ie. the SD), this sudden jump in gas production hits at the wrong time for some cartridges but is ideal for others. The tricks which can be done with ball powders are seen rather dramatically in the Lil' Gun data for the Hornet and K-Hornet. Perhaps the problem is the use of nitroglycerine in the double base powders; it might be more sensitive to pressure or even temperature than nitrocellulose; beats me.

Karl

[M. M. Wright]

A couple of years ago I had a problem with some 308 Win, (7.62 NATO) loads that used Hogdon's BallC2 under a 165 grain Sierra in Lake City NM cases. At a grain above the starting load the cases began to stick and the primers showed high pressure signs. These loads were fine in my BLR but stuck tight in a 99 Savage. I contacted Hogdon and sent them 40 rounds of the loads. After testing, I got a call back that said to lose the Lake City NM brass. Now I'm too frugal (cheap?) to throw it away so it now has a reasonable load of H4895 being used in it.
As a result of the above, I have concluded that the BallC2 is very sensitive in it's useful pressure range so I need to be really careful about working up loads. Maybe this situation applies to all ball powders?

[AJMD429]

It still catches me when I realize how little powder it takes to jump 10,000 psi.

That's why I tend to chronograph to the fps listed for the starting loads. I often treat them as max loads.

The sudden rise in pressures with charge weight is more common with the ball powders. I think I read (Barsness?) that single base stick powders don't suffer this malady. Generally the magic ball powders can give more fps, though.

I'm not sure what's the root cause of this. I have to think it's the heavy reliance on burn deterrent which must be employed to get the double base balls to behave; sticks have geometry in their favor. It's a matter of the higher pressures burning through the deterrent affected part of the kernel sooner, and then the afterburners kick in, so to speak. Depending on the ratio of case capacity to bore cross section plus the relative bullet inertia (ie. the SD), this sudden jump in gas production hits at the wrong time for some cartridges but is ideal for others. The tricks which can be done with ball powders are seen rather dramatically in the Lil' Gun data for the Hornet and K-Hornet. Perhaps the problem is the use of nitroglycerine in the double base powders; it might be more sensitive to pressure or even temperature than nitrocellulose; beats me.

Karl

That makes a lot of sense to me. Thanks.

[Canuck Bob]

Wow a safety reason to buy a chrono!!