Load data database thread

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Would the reloaders on MDS be willing to share load data on loads of various calibers that they have worked up? Maybe we could get admin to create a sticky with sub threads for individual calibers? I realize that not all loads are going to function accurately in all guns but they would at least give some a place to start and a reference point. I think it would also possibly create interest for potential new reloaders. I've seen other forums where they have something similar.
     

    Speed3

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 19, 2011
    7,816
    MD
    I think this would be a good thread.

    Like .308 - 175gr SMK, 43.5gr Varget, .020 off the lands kinda thing?
     

    byf43

    SCSC Life/NRA Patron Life
    Could be a good idea, with one exception. (I've seen this, before.)

    There's always "that one" individual that will intentionally give bad data, and doesn't care if you or I have a KABOOM.

    I learned reloading years ago, when there wasn't any such thing as internet forums and clubs, and no local friends that reloaded.
    Speer reloading manual. Hornady manual. Sierra manual. Lyman manual. (And many hours reading them, too!)

    I've given/stated loads that I've used, and also cited (verbatim) data from known good loading manuals/books.
    A former member of my sportsman's club, wanted/needed a MILD load for his Ruger Blackhawk in .357 magnum.
    A favorite load for a bunch of us was Hornady 158 gr JHP and 7.2 grains of Unique in .357 cases.
    VERY MILD load. ACCURATE load in every revolver I've ever seen it used in.

    The guy came to a meeting, with his Blackhawk in pieces.
    Top strap GONE.
    Cylinder in pieces.

    He blamed me for his Blackhawk "coming apart at the seams".
    Everyone hearing the conversation KNEW it wasn't the data given. It was LACK OF ATTENTION on the loader's part.

    He DOUBLE-CHARGED a case and that blew up his revolver!
    (A double-charge of UNIQUE is NOT forgiving!)

    IF this type of "sticky" comes to be, double-checking load data would have to be stated, right from the start. (And state the source of the data, too.)

    For me, the ultimate bottom line is.........
    I don't want to see anyone damage a firearm, or worse, themselves.
     

    Uncle Duke

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 2, 2013
    11,667
    Not Far Enough from the City
    Could be a good idea, with one exception. (I've seen this, before.)

    There's always "that one" individual that will intentionally give bad data, and doesn't care of you or I have a KABOOM.

    I learned reloading years ago, when there wasn't any such thing as internet forums and clubs, and no local friends that reloaded.
    Speer reloading manual. Hornady manual. Sierra manual. Lyman manual. (And many hours reading them, too!)

    I've given/stated loads that I've used, and also cited (verbatim) data from known good loading manuals/books.

    IF this type of "sticky" comes to be, double-checking load data would have to be stated, right from the start. (And state the source of the data, too.)

    For me, the ultimate bottom line is.........
    I don't want to see anyone damage a firearm, or worse, themselves.

    Add Dean Grennell's 2nd edition of ABC's of Reloading to the list above, and byf43 just described me and my introduction to reloading as well. Probably describes many and most of us in the pre-YouTube set, come to think of it. I also remember wanting to figure out how to put a tree between me and my first reloads. (I'm only half kidding.)

    I'll admit my older guy bias here, but I personally don't like data sources that take one's attention away from manuals. Even net based ones. To me, one of the very best attributes of a good reloading manual, and an attribute I greatly value and very much want, is that it stays put on the bench, with the applicable page open to constantly check and double check data. To me, this attribute is huge. No looking up a load on the net, and then wondering, was that 3.5 grains of Bullseye, or 5.3 grains? Was that seated at 1.61, or 1.16?

    No trying to commit to imperfect memory. No typos or errors in translation. And yeah, no exposure to some ******* who might want to get his jollies with a newb building something he ought not to be building, and doesn't know any better. Or even a guy with perfectly good intentions, but misquoted or mistyped or misinformed data. And someone loses a hand or an eye, or puts a bolt through his head in the process.

    Not the only answer here to be sure. Just the one I'm personally most comfortable with.
     

    Blacksmith101

    Grumpy Old Man
    Jun 22, 2012
    22,165
    There are plenty of gun forums that have all manner of unverified load recipe threads all ready out there we don't need another. If you are not willing to shoot someone else's reloads (because they might make a mistake) why would trust someone else's load recipe (mistakes can be made there also). Keep it more general i.e. what powders you like and why, point people to verified data sources, the results you have gotten from published loads, etc.
     

    BeoBill

    Crank in the Third Row
    MDS Supporter
    Oct 3, 2013
    27,064
    南馬里蘭州鮑伊
    Add Dean Grennell's 2nd edition of ABC's of Reloading to the list above, and byf43 just described me and my introduction to reloading as well. Probably describes many and most of us in the pre-YouTube set, come to think of it. I also remember wanting to figure out how to put a tree between me and my first reloads. (I'm only half kidding.)

    I'll admit my older guy bias here, but I personally don't like data sources that take one's attention away from manuals. Even net based ones. To me, one of the very best attributes of a good reloading manual, and an attribute I greatly value and very much want, is that it stays put on the bench, with the applicable page open to constantly check and double check data. To me, this attribute is huge. No looking up a load on the net, and then wondering, was that 3.5 grains of Bullseye, or 5.3 grains? Was that seated at 1.61, or 1.16?

    No trying to commit to imperfect memory. No typos or errors in translation. And yeah, no exposure to some ******* who might want to get his jollies with a newb building something he ought not to be building, and doesn't know any better. Or even a guy with perfectly good intentions, but misquoted or mistyped or misinformed data. And someone loses a hand or an eye, or puts a bolt through his head in the process.

    Not the only answer here to be sure. Just the one I'm personally most comfortable with.

    ^^^^ THIS! And I keep a set of scales handy to check every fifth or so charge, just to keep my equipment honest.

    Also, I agree that should this become a sticky, double reality check the load data, and put the LIABILITY DISCLAIMER FROM HELL very large at the top.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,943
    Messages
    7,259,756
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom