Giving out Load Advice caution!

[misterc01]

As a semi-newbie, I have found that there are some times when I just can't find the load data I need from a manual. So, I start searching forums, but I NEVER just settle on the first load I find. I find as many as I can, and see how it/the group of loads compare to the closest similar load I can find in a manual. I NEVER consider a load that is substantially higher than others I find as one I would start with. COMMON SENSE says to start low and work up looking for pressure signs and watching what the chronograph is telling me. I understand that anything I read on line is caveated as NOT attributable to the owners/managers of the forum, and just an OPINON of a forum member. Kind of like the warning on a DVD that the opinions offered are not those of the studio. I appreciate seeing what loads other use and no reason to not post them.

 

[manitou]

I admit that I research pet loads on the .280 Rem since it was always a published as an anemic load due to Rem making it for the semi-auto platform. It was originally loaded for 55K psi (IIRC) when its closest cohorts run 65K. Thus many folks safely run it at .270, 3006 pressures, myself included. That catridge is an exception.

 

[CTK]

I now have solid reloading experience with the 280ai and 6.5x47. Load for a couple others but know these fairly well. When I see 280ai loads posted, they usually make safe sense. Most people with this cartridge use Nosler brass. Nosler brass seems to let you know when you have gone too close to the edge. Published book max loads for the 280ai sometimes have shown pressure signs in the 3 280ai rifles that I have owned. The 6.5x47 is the exact opposite. Tons of article published and chat room data out there that exceeds Hogdon by a mile. I have been guilty of quasi accepting this alternative data and working loads up near or to it. I have only seen a handful of pressure indicators with my 6.5x47. My current x47 Varget load exhibits zero signs of pressure and velocities uniformly came up with added powder. I am possibly guilty of overloading the 6.5X47 based on internet research. Justified this early with the lack of book data available.

 

[ELR_Shooter]

First, the following is not intended as an attack on anyone either stated or implied. My only intention is to respectfully suggest to all posters to think about the ramifications of what they are posting.

In a recent post, there was load data that was shared to the OP that was considerably hotter than accepted/published loads. I think I put a permanent crease in the seat of my office chair. I took the time this morning and looked thru a number of both new and old manuals for a load that hot, couldn't find it listed anywhere. I shoot an improved version of that round and don't even load it that hot.

Here are my thoughts; we should all be very careful sharing loads that are not published by the manufactures for a number of reasons.

You never know the condition of the rifle that the load might find its way into.

You don't know the experience of the individual that might try it.

Individual components i.e. cases, primers and bullets all have an effect on pressure. Simple change of a bullet or primer on a hot load could be devastating.

Back in the day (I'm dating myself now), we played with a lot of crazy loads trying to find that sweet spot. I won't even hint on this open forum what we were doing because someone might decide to try it themselves without the foundation and knowledge to do it correctly. Many shooters wanted me to share what we were doing. Always told them I could not because of the liability was something that I was not willing to risk. I even got accused of being a jerk for not sharing, wasn't being a jerk, just being safe.

Thankfully, with the current wide variety of components available to us today, there is no need to do that anymore. Well, I still do it for my BR rigs

In the 70's and early 80's, I had the privilege of managing a small chain of hunting and fishing stores (3 stores) in California. It was store policy that no employee was allowed to quote load data. If a customer wanted load information, the employee was required to grab a published load manual, look it up and show the customer. This removed any and all liability to the company, and it was just plan safe. Any deviation from that were grounds for immediate dismissal.

There was a well know shop in So Cal that was put out of business after an employee gave a customer bad loading advice. The resulting law suit after the gun blew up (Super Blackhawk) and the shooter badly injured forced the store to close the doors, sad.

So again, this is NOT an attack. Only respectfully suggesting caution when giving advice or sharing load data.

First and foremost, we don't want to see anyone get hurt. Second, in today's crazy sue happy world, none of us need to expose ourselves to the possible liability. Bad advice could even drag LRH into a lawsuit. Chances of LRH losing a lawsuit because someone gave out bad advice would be pretty slim. Put the possibility of getting drug into one that would cost a lot of money to defend is there.

Everyone be well and safe.

PS. It is sad that in today's world we need to think "can I get sued for this?"

Sir your intent is accurate.. To many people do not want to look in the mirror and say what did I do wrong.. Judges foolishly do not throw those cases out of court!!! Wisdom would say engage the brain 1st and research all the pros and cons before even beginning.

 

[Randy Tidwell]

When I asked this morning the only thing I was looking for for was suggestions on different powder and bullet combinations that work well together not exact loads. Didn't want to start a **** storm

Perk, there is a difference between someone sharing a known published load and someone telling someone it is safe to load 2-3 grains over max load.

I have no problem with sharing loads that you can look up and confirm. You must be diligent about starting out at a safe point, then work up.

But too many times I have seen people post loads that should never be attempted with out working up to them and even then I question why they would take the chance.

(no criticism intended or implied with the following)

We all need to remember, there are a lot visitors to these sights that are novice beginners that have not had the chance to learn.

 

[MrChick]

Thanks for a great post. I'm not one to trust random information I find on the Internet. I would always check a load against published info as I value my body parts.

 

[Paper boy]

Cohunt, no offense taken. Only taken as a respectful conversation.

If excersizing "Caution" saves just one person from injury, no matter how slight, you "Caution" was well placed. Bill

 

[montana west]

Manitoul 1 I totally agree with you on the 280 remington- been shooting em for 45 years and my 40 year old loading manual does it justice.. example shoot a 160 at 3000 fps.. today they show 2800. I think remington wanted it to be a 760 and 742 round only probally because they had some problems with the 270 win in their rifles.. and when the 7mm mag came out they wanted to sell more of them thus the lower pressure in the 280. because of the case desigh the same presssure in the 280 should push a 160 gr bullet the same as a 270 with a 150 gr.. The cases are both 64 mm long, but the sholder on the 280 is moved forward thus more powder capacity.

 

[Dean2]

So with 5 pages and almost 70 posts basically agreeing with the OP it would seem the majority are on the same page. There are however still lots of people putting up dangerous loads, even on here, so obviously they decided to just move along and keep doing what they always have. Hopefully this thread gives a bunch of newer reloaders the heads up to be very careful with loads off of forums.

 

[ntsqd]

I'm willing to post my 240gr LSWC .44 plinking load exactly. All others not so much.

BTW Randy, the shop that I worked in up in Ventura had exactly the same policy about recipe's. Both owners were Orange County CA natives and either worked in the biz or were well informed about what was going on locally. I'm sure that they were well aware of the Grants debacle. I'm going to guess that you either knew them or knew of them. I'll bet one of them probably called on you from Cal Gun in Lindsay. Not sure it's appropriate to share their names publicly, but I will in a PM.

 

[5gauss]

First, the following is not intended as an attack on anyone either stated or implied. My only intention is to respectfully suggest to all posters to think about the ramifications of what they are posting.

In a recent post, there was load data that was shared to the OP that was considerably hotter than accepted/published loads. I think I put a permanent crease in the seat of my office chair. I took the time this morning and looked thru a number of both new and old manuals for a load that hot, couldn't find it listed anywhere. I shoot an improved version of that round and don't even load it that hot.

Here are my thoughts; we should all be very careful sharing loads that are not published by the manufactures for a number of reasons.

You never know the condition of the rifle that the load might find its way into.

You don't know the experience of the individual that might try it.

Individual components i.e. cases, primers and bullets all have an effect on pressure. Simple change of a bullet or primer on a hot load could be devastating.

Back in the day (I'm dating myself now), we played with a lot of crazy loads trying to find that sweet spot. I won't even hint on this open forum what we were doing because someone might decide to try it themselves without the foundation and knowledge to do it correctly. Many shooters wanted me to share what we were doing. Always told them I could not because of the liability was something that I was not willing to risk. I even got accused of being a jerk for not sharing, wasn't being a jerk, just being safe.

Thankfully, with the current wide variety of components available to us today, there is no need to do that anymore. Well, I still do it for my BR rigs

In the 70's and early 80's, I had the privilege of managing a small chain of hunting and fishing stores (3 stores) in California. It was store policy that no employee was allowed to quote load data. If a customer wanted load information, the employee was required to grab a published load manual, look it up and show the customer. This removed any and all liability to the company, and it was just plan safe. Any deviation from that were grounds for immediate dismissal.

There was a well know shop in So Cal that was put out of business after an employee gave a customer bad loading advice. The resulting law suit after the gun blew up (Super Blackhawk) and the shooter badly injured forced the store to close the doors, sad.

So again, this is NOT an attack. Only respectfully suggesting caution when giving advice or sharing load data.

First and foremost, we don't want to see anyone get hurt. Second, in today's crazy sue happy world, none of us need to expose ourselves to the possible liability. Bad advice could even drag LRH into a lawsuit. Chances of LRH losing a lawsuit because someone gave out bad advice would be pretty slim. Put the possibility of getting drug into one that would cost a lot of money to defend is there.

Everyone be well and safe.

PS. It is sad that in today's world we need to think "can I get sued for this?"

ALWAYS ALWAYS double or triple check load data to different manuals and or online....common sense

 

[Lompoc]

Good thread here but if you think that you won't be held responsible for or get sued because you posted a hot load and someone uses it and gets hurt i think it is very possible I just heard a little about legislation or something like that where gun manufacturers can be held liable for some jack wagon who buys a gun and kills a bunch of people so if that goes through you can bet it will trickle down the line

 

[RAGGED EDGE]

Good idea to NEVER share a specific load. Share case, primer, projectile, LOA. Share a specific powder, never a specific load.

 

[Hueyman]

First, the following is not intended as an attack on anyone either stated or implied. My only intention is to respectfully suggest to all posters to think about the ramifications of what they are posting.

In a recent post, there was load data that was shared to the OP that was considerably hotter than accepted/published loads. I think I put a permanent crease in the seat of my office chair. I took the time this morning and looked thru a number of both new and old manuals for a load that hot, couldn't find it listed anywhere. I shoot an improved version of that round and don't even load it that hot.

Here are my thoughts; we should all be very careful sharing loads that are not published by the manufactures for a number of reasons.

You never know the condition of the rifle that the load might find its way into.

You don't know the experience of the individual that might try it.

Individual components i.e. cases, primers and bullets all have an effect on pressure. Simple change of a bullet or primer on a hot load could be devastating.

Back in the day (I'm dating myself now), we played with a lot of crazy loads trying to find that sweet spot. I won't even hint on this open forum what we were doing because someone might decide to try it themselves without the foundation and knowledge to do it correctly. Many shooters wanted me to share what we were doing. Always told them I could not because of the liability was something that I was not willing to risk. I even got accused of being a jerk for not sharing, wasn't being a jerk, just being safe.

Thankfully, with the current wide variety of components available to us today, there is no need to do that anymore. Well, I still do it for my BR rigs

In the 70's and early 80's, I had the privilege of managing a small chain of hunting and fishing stores (3 stores) in California. It was store policy that no employee was allowed to quote load data. If a customer wanted load information, the employee was required to grab a published load manual, look it up and show the customer. This removed any and all liability to the company, and it was just plan safe. Any deviation from that were grounds for immediate dismissal.

There was a well know shop in So Cal that was put out of business after an employee gave a customer bad loading advice. The resulting law suit after the gun blew up (Super Blackhawk) and the shooter badly injured forced the store to close the doors, sad.

So again, this is NOT an attack. Only respectfully suggesting caution when giving advice or sharing load data.

First and foremost, we don't want to see anyone get hurt. Second, in today's crazy sue happy world, none of us need to expose ourselves to the possible liability. Bad advice could even drag LRH into a lawsuit. Chances of LRH losing a lawsuit because someone gave out bad advice would be pretty slim. Put the possibility of getting drug into one that would cost a lot of money to defend is there.

Everyone be well and safe.

PS. It is sad that in today's world we need to think "can I get sued for this?"

I agree, I believe that you have given out sound advice, I started reloading in 73 while in Germany, I have a firm policy of not reloading for any one, I would invite them to come over and help them reload for them selves, if the load was one given to them and over book max I stopped and would not let them continue if explaining the problems that could happen with insane hot loads did not work, we were done, now I know a lot of people will have negative thoughts on this but I have seen what can happen with hot loads. I love to load and yes I have ran some loads that were at the max, how ever I have found that using good components and working up a load that is accurate beats the stuffing out of how fast can I make it go, just my two cents worth and I still have all of my fingers and eyes.