Comparing Lee data

[ken98k]

I've notice when comparing load data between Lee and others, say Hornady for instance, Lee frequently lists loads well above Hornady's max.

Who do you believe?

[Dr.Hess]

I would believe the powder manufacturer.  When in doubt, go to their web site and look up the loads they recommend for the cartridge/powder.

[Dr.Hess]

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/rifle

They have one for pistol also.

[AzRednek]

Lee claims all its data was derived from published data including powder and bullet manufactures. I wouldn't worry about the discrepancy unless you're loading near or at max. Nearly all published handgun data was reduced 10% several yeas ago as progressive presses became popular using scooped VS weighed powder charges. If I load at or near max for hunting or self defense. It will be a load I've tested and I will weigh each charge.

Several years ago I worked up max loads using 2400 in 44 mag. Got what I thought was good for my Ruger Blackhawk but had all indications of being way to hot in my S&W Model 29. With that in mind it suggests the max published data is safe in all guns of that caliber. If you want to heat up your hand loads, reduce published max by at least 10% then work your way up. When I worked up a load, it was about 5 loads each increasing by a half grain. Changes in components like brands of primers, brass, bullets of same weight from different manufactures or even batch numbers from slow burning rifle powders can change a max load. 

When I load what I consider recreational ammo I generally load mild. Making sure I have enough oomph to drive an auto pistol. My revolver loads are mild but when I shoot mag loads I want them hot enough to feel like mag loads. My 38, 44 Special and 45 Colt are kept on the soft side. No sense in beating up my hand or gun just punching holes in paper. My 357, 41, 44 and even Ruger only 45 Colt are apx 10% or more below current published max. For simplicity I usually round up the loads to even or .05. 9MM has been a pain in the donkey for me. What might be fine in one pistol is not hot enough in another. So I tend to load 9 near but below max. My 9MM Chinese Tokarov won't function with mild loads that work just fine in my Taurus 92. 

Published rifle data seems to be all over the board. Changing with same weight but different style bullet even from same manufacture. Some data I've seen give only a single load different from older manuals that offered a starting point to max. I've had problems with max rifle loads when not used in bolt actions. 270 loads were fine in my friend's Weatherby bolt but over pressure in a Remmy pump. My worse were 7MM Mag in a Browning BAR. I started 10% below published max from an old DuPont manual. They were backing primers in my BAR but no indications of over pressure in a bolt action. If I rember right I was using IMR 4350 and the published max data in a modern IMR powder manual was reduced considerably. I think it may have been by 2.5 grs, 10% below max in older publication exceeded max in the modern manual. 

Tony I suggest working your way up from below max, experiment and keep records. I would generally trust the most recent publication but keep in mind the publisher might be lawyer proofing their max or even suggested loads. You don't need maximum velocity to punch holes in targets. If you're loading for an AR-15 they will take mild loads and still function just fine. If you see an odd or large discrepancy between manuals there's always the possibility of a misprint. Another consideration especially for rifle data. The shot to shot accuracy is best below published max. Reminiscent of Parker Ackley's data where he showed max but also showed the most accurate powder charge. 

Now that I think about it, I haven't hand loaded any ammo in at least five or six years. I miss it but just can't seem to get the time to get my loading gear back in order. All the time I still have about 20, 300 Winchesters sized and primed in a loading block on my bench. The last 300 Winnie's I loaded with 220gr bullets. Despite no signs of over pressure the 220 bullet's recoil was near torture. 

[Dr.Hess]

That's interesting on the max loads v. gun type, Az.  I would have thought that max was max, not different with different types of actions.  My only semi-auto rifles are AR's in 223 or 300BO.  After finally getting developing a load that ran well in the 300BO's, I just stuck with it for those.  For the 223, I haven't been shooting those much.  I'm about out of my box of ammo I loaded up 35 years ago.  It was a big box.  I try to load that to factory specs.  Biggest problem I had was chambering.  I think I may have had them seated out a bit far.  Range trips were a lot more time consuming then than today, when I just walk out of the shop and start blasting.  Makes working up loads much more time efficient.

[AzRednek]

Doc all my 223 problems disappeared after I began using a small base die. My 223 hand loads worked fine in a Mini-14 but after trading it in on an AR-15. I had numerous FTF's. My early 70's Colt AR-15 sub model SP-1 does not have a forward assist. A good portion of my hand loads would go about 95% home jam things up and manual extraction was difficult. After writing RCBS, at their request sending them once fired brass from the AR and my sizing die. RCBS sent me a small base sizing die no charge. RCBS recommended a very slight or no crimp. To much crimp in the pre Lee Factory Crimp days would swell the shoulder and cause FTF's in AR's. I've probably put a few thousand hand loads since I began using the SB sizing die and honestly can't recall any FTF's.

As far as over all length. I've always relied on the bullet's cannelure as a guide. Smooth jacketed varmint bullets, I seated the bullet until it was the same length as mil-surp 556. 300 Blackout, your guess is as good as mine. I assume if the loaded cartridge fits in the mag it should chamber but if it doesn't. The only remedy coming to my mind is shrinking it up to shorter than 556. Probably easier said than done especially if using the long round nose 220gr bullet. 

I used Winchester 748 nearly exclusively for 223 with the exception of 4lbs of what was named T-Ball. The T-ball was a mil-surp powder from Olin corp used to load military 556. Olin corp at the time was part of the Winchester corporate conglomerate. The seller of the powder said to use 748 data as it was nearly identical.

As far as differences between bolt vs auto action. I've heard or read 30/06 max loads are to hot for M-1 Garands and can cause operating rod problems but noting significant with hot 308's in a M-1A. I recently shot some hand loaded 06 I did about about 25+ years ago in my Remington Woodmaster semi. I don't have any recollection of the powder charge or bullet weight. They shot and functioned just fine with no indications of being to hot.

 

[Dr.Hess]

It's possible my large batch of 223 from the 80's was either swelled from the crimp or very slightly too long.  Worked great in the Contender, though.  I, too, have a SP1 with no forward assist.  I always wanted a forward assist, thinking that would solve the occasional problem I had, usually on the first round from a mag, not on one where the rifle itself loads.  Anyway, I got an upper with a forward assist and found it was useless. It wouldn't close on those tight rounds at all.  I didn't try hitting it with a hammer, but that's probably what it would take. 

On the 300BO with my 230GR cast, powdercoated boolits, I finally found the recipe was a small base sizing die and for the crimp position, no crimp but another sizing die, of course with the decapper removed, and not screwed all the way down, just enough to make sure the neck mostly is the right size.  Function is 100% like that.

[AzRednek]

Doc I was close to using an upper with a forward assist untill I learned the SP1's fetch a good price for two reasons. First of all it has value as a collector's item in original condition. 2nd the early AR's work best with the so called drop in Auto Sear. Before the ban one could get a full auto tax stamp on just a serialized Auto Sear and use it in any AR. I never fooled with an Auto Sear, a friend did and had problems. We more or less stopped being friends after I refused to sell him my SP-1. He had two legal Auto Sears and he had plenty of jams with both. 

Dont know if Lee makes the Factory Crimp Die for 300 BO but I've found them to be as they say the cat's meow. I know the dies can be finicky using cast slugs. The rifle dies unlike the pistol dies won't shrink a cast bullet. Lee claims it's near impossible to over crimp. I would worry about squeezing a lead bullet using a sizing die. I'm unfamiliar with the 300 cartridge. If it has a shoulder might be a good idea to check it with a micrometer to see if the downward pressure is swelling it up. 

Back in the 70's as I was going through the learning curve. I had problems over crimping a 270. Worked fine in my friend's bolt but often failed to easily chamber in my Remington pump action. Guess the leverage in my bud's Sears bolt action pushed the over crimped cartridge in place. Being a rookie I didn't pay attention to the variance in length using various brands of un trimmed brass. I can recall boogering some cartridges as I was seating and crimping in the same step. On my pump some cartridges would slide right in while others had to be forced.