The need for speed - your hottest load?

[Brian Pfleuger]

As far as I can see, there were no points made for attempting to do it.

Why do people put superchargers on Corvettes?

Why do people race lawn mowers?

Why did they invent the airplane? The gun?

Why do people skydive?

Why do they ride Harleys?

People are explorers, adventurers and have a innate thirst for knowledge.

Some people color outside the lines and some people complain about the ugly pictures.

There are safe and unsafe ways to go about experimenting.

There are also, and this point should be clear, very fast loads that are real and true published data. Nosler has 55gr .243 data that is very close to 4,000fps, and Hodgdon has some OVER 4,000. Hodgdon has 32gr .204 Ruger that's over 4,100fps and 35gr .22-250 data that is JUST shy of 4,500fps. Is that unsafe? Look back at the numbers I put up in my first post. Do you see any that are dramatically different than the published data? No, you do not.

Fast does not EQUAL dangerous.
Experimentation does not EQUAL danger.

 

[reynolds357]

In my stupider days I was getting 4065 fps from an 85 gr in a .264 Win mag.
I remember reading something about Roy Weatherby necking down the 460 WBY to either .22 or 6mm and getting if I remember correctly about 6000 fps. I think PO ackley necked down the 50 BMG to .22 and got about the same velocity. Memory is cloudy on both so dont flame me if I missed a detail by a hair.

 

[dahermit]

Why do people put superchargers on Corvettes?

Why do people race lawn mowers?

Why did they invent the airplane? The gun?

Why do people skydive?

Why do they ride Harleys?

Death wish?
The question is and was: "What advantage is there in hand loading cartridges to maximum velocities?" Seems like a difficult question to for which to get a plain answer.

 

[603Country]

Dahermit, nowhere have I suggested that anyone endanger themselves with overly hot loads. All I asked was what was the fastest MV any of y'all had. From what I had seen in other threads, Brian had the fastest anyone had mentioned. I don't know of anyone that loads just for max velocity, though there is one guy on the forum that pushes the envelope.

I do want to try that Nosler 35 grainer in my 220, loaded fairly warm.

 

[dahermit]

I think we all have that desire for fast bullets to some degree, and I could present a pretty good argument for it.

I have not yet seen a "good argument", for it.

the need for speed - your hottest load?

Suggests to me that there is some secret advantage.

There are also, and this point should be clear, very fast loads that are real and true published data.

Sounds like a reasonable approach, but then you say:

Why do people put superchargers on Corvettes?

Which implies pushing the envelope is something that is desireable... in hand loading.

To paraphrase one of the loading manuals: Use only factory ammunition of maximum or near maximum loads... Gosh, I wonder why the publisher of the loading manual would waste his time and effort saying that, in an attempt to make hand loading a safe activity, when he could be out racing lawn mowers or skydiving?

 

[m&p45acp10+1]

I only run one load at max published level, and it is for .30 Carbine. Though the load I run has a couple of loads listed hotter than that with the same powder. I stick with the load I use. If I go under that then the loads will not cycle in my rifle.

Other than that none of my loads are on the butt crack of max. All loads that I worked up groups started to open up when I went higher in charges. It is not that they were unsafe per say. Just they did not work as well so I left well enough alone in the sake of accuracy over faster velocity.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

My reference to Corvettes is actually more in response to you mentioning that loading hot wears out the gun. So why do folks buy $60,000 Corvettes and then spend $10,000 putting on a supercharger, which cuts engine life and reduces gas mileage?

Because they can and they want to. What more reason do you need? You don't want to load at (or apparently anywhere near) max loads. Super! Don't! But that doesn't mean that it's dangerous or stupid to do it. It means YOU don't WANT to do it.

In matters of advantage, of course there's an advantage. Faster bullets hit harder, fly flatter and drift less in the wind.

The only legitimate question is, do YOU care about the advantages? Apparently, you don't. That's fantastic but don't spin it into some kind Superiority Complex or that you're smart for doing what you do and everybody else is dangerous and stupid.

 

[Sevens]

Both of you make a fine point in arguing your side of the discussion. Really, truly, both sides offer a lot of sense. In the end, it's not a close race however. There are lunatic and completely reckless idiots in EVERY SINGLE SUBJECT out there. Many can do harm by acting recklessly.

So, so, SO many do not, and some become pioneers in their field. Others become infinitely more experienced and clued-in as they chase down the knowledge.

We are still (barely, it seems, these days) living in a land where we *CAN* pretty much do what we want. It would be nice and warm and fuzzy if reckless idiots did EXIST, but the fact that they do exist shall not keep those who have a genuine taste for experimentation and a thirst for knowledge and experience to chase their dreams, whatever dreams they may be.

And damn anyone of you to try and tell me or them that they cannot or should not do it.

Put up a simple yes or no poll if you want to see how the forum would decide in a vote if you like, but even that will not settle it. Brian is right. It doesn't matter if you don't agree, it doesn't change that fact.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Let freedom ring.

 

[dahermit]

I only run one load at max published level, and it is for .30 Carbine. Though the load I run has a couple of loads listed hotter than that with the same powder. I stick with the load I use. If I go under that then the loads will not cycle in my rifle.

Other than that none of my loads are on the butt crack of max. All loads that I worked up groups started to open up when I went higher in charges. It is not that they were unsafe per say. Just they did not work as well so I left well enough alone in the sake of accuracy over faster velocity.

I am in about the same boat. Every gun I ever had except one produced good accuracy considerable under maximum. The one exception, a Ruger 77 Target Varmint in .308, had the best accuracy (half-inch per five at 100 yards), at a load that would loosen the primer pockets after about 4-5 hand loads. I was not happy with that situation, and pined for a milder load that would produce as fine of accuracy. But it was not to be...it liked what it liked. I would have preferred a larger margin of error despite the fact that "faster bullets hit harder, fly flatter and drift less in the wind" and that extra 100fps would put me into the class of people who, as "people are explorers, adventurers and have a innate thirst for knowledge".
If loading to high levels, albeit perfectly safe, published loads, why did someone find it necessary to put the following at the top of the current thread?

CAUTION: The following thread includes loading data beyond or not covered by currently published maximums for this cartridge. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Neither the writer, The Firing Line, nor the staff of TFL assume any liability for any damage or injury resulting from use of this information.

If I heed that warning and not go for an extra 100 fps, I will not, alas, "...have a genuine taste for experimentation and a thirst for knowledge and experience to chase their dreams..."...until the primers blow out.

 

[MEATSAW]

I have found in both rifles that I currently load for that there are 2 accuracy "nodes" that I see when I do a load work-up. If you stop at the first one you could be settling for less. This, of course, may not be the case in others guns, but it is the case for me. In both cases I have found the 2nd accuracy node to be right at max or in the case of my AR15 to be a wee-bit over max and in both guns the 2nd node is a tad bit tighter than the 1st. I've also noticed much less powder fouling at near max.

All I am saying is that if you don't safely push the load development you might be missing out on some really terrific loads. Of course y'all do what you want with your loads. Plain vanilla is fine, but give me a blizzard anyday.

 

[WESHOOT2]

rifles are fer sissies; I am not alone

I only 'do' handgun ammo, and I am a stupid reckless 'doer'.

But I can make Remington 110g JHPs vaporize (I was gonna write "disintegrate") when they exit the muzzle of my 7.5" 357 Redhawk.



I still have most of my fingers --one got broken off; yes, that one-- and all four eyes.

 

[dahermit]

In matters of advantage, of course there's an advantage. Faster bullets hit harder, fly flatter and drift less in the wind.
The only legitimate question is, do YOU care about the advantages?

Data from Hornady, Handbook of Cartridge Reloading, Fifth Edition, Vol. 2.
Since a .270 WSM was mentioned in the original post on the subject, I will compare data for the .270. Also, having no data for the .270 WSM I will just use a "standard" .270 for comparison, but using, as the original poster did, very light bullets to achieve increased velocity.

.270, 130 grain Horned bullets fired at a velocity of 3200 fps. Energy at 200 yards = 2228, bullet drop at 300 yd., 200 yard zero = 5.7", Wind Drift = 2.1

.270 100 grain Horned bullets fired at a velocity of 3600 fps. Energy at 200 yards = 1901, bullet drop at 300 yd., 200 yard zero = 5.0", Wind Drift = 2.4

In short, it is the heavier bullets, initially with a lower muzzle velocity that will have more terminal energy (hit harder), less wind drift, and the difference in trajectory (fly flatter), is an insignificant .7 of an inch at 300 yards.

Of course, being old and mental facilities growing dim, I may have missed something. Just what are those advantages light bullets-higher velocity again?

 

[superspirit]

I think somebody needs a chill pill. As said this IS still a free country. And I like supercharged corvettes, and motorcycles and fast bullets. And I DONT have a death wish!

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

In short, it is the heavier bullets, initially with a lower muzzle velocity that will have more terminal energy (hit harder), less wind drift, and the difference in trajectory (fly flatter), is an insignificant .7 of an inch at 300 yards.

Of course, being old and mental facilities growing dim, I may have missed something. Just what are those advantages light bullets-higher velocity again?

You did, indeed, miss something. I said "faster bullets", not "lighter bullets".

The SAME bullet, made faster drifts less and drops less. We're talking about pressure, yes? A lighter bullet can go faster than a heavier bullet without being loaded "hotter". It's not, necessarily, about lighter versus heavier, it's about faster versus slower.

That said, I reiterate, for the third time, as I recall, that we're not particularly talking about loading over max here. We're talking about fast. As I posted previously, there is some insanely fast data that's officially published. In excess of 4,500, with conventional loads and even real, official, published data with sabot rounds over 5,200fps.

If you want to talk about light and fast versus heavy and slow, though, run the numbers on a .22-250, 35gr Nosler at 4,450fps (Hodgdon published data, BTW) versus a .22-250 55gr at 3,750fps (also Hodgdon published) VARMINT BULLET. You might just find that the 35gr bullet has something like a 10 inch drop advantage at 500 yards...

 

[Kimber84]

You did, indeed, miss something. I said "faster bullets", not "lighter bullets".

The SAME bullet, made faster drifts less and drops less. We're talking about pressure, yes? A lighter bullet can go faster than a heavier bullet without being loaded "hotter". It's not, necessarily, about lighter versus heavier, it's about faster versus slower.

That said, I reiterate, for the third time, as I recall, that we're not particularly talking about loading over max here. We're talking about fast. As I posted previously, there is some insanely fast data that's officially published. In excess of 4,500, with conventional loads and even real, official, published data with sabot rounds over 5,200fps.

If you want to talk about light and fast versus heavy and slow, though, run the numbers on a .223 cal 35gr Nosler at 4,450fps (Hodgdon published data, BTW) versus a .223 55gr at 3,750fps (also Hodgdon published) VARMINT BULLET. You might just find that the 35gr bullet has something like a 10 inch drop advantage at 500 yards...

Ok, I'll bite... I just looked at hodgons website at the 35g Noslers... The fastest published velocity on a 35g is 3891... That's a ways off from 4,450... And half of those hot loads are compressed so you couldn't stuff any more powder in the case if you wanted to...

Maybe you're getting your data somewhere else???

I'm truly curious... I have no doubt a 35 g bullet at that velocity has little drop but I find it hard to believe that it's getting there in a .223?????

I also don't see any 55g bullet anywhere close to 3750 fps...
Please show me a link, I'm not calling you a liar, but I sure as hell can't find it.

 

[603Country]

No doubt Brian was talking about 22-250 load data, which is still...a .223 caliber, as he said. And, being the guy that started this discussion that turned into an argument, let me restate that all I wanted was to hear what the fastest loads you guys had, not start an argument over safety and exceeding max published data. I JUST wanted your personal fastest loads. I personally do not load for max velocity, but load for max accuracy. Still, that quest took me almost to max in my 220 Swift with 55 grain bullets. If I had even the slightest real need, I'd load up some of those 35 gr Nosler LeadFree's and have a go at 4000 plus. But like I said, some guys already have been doing that (like Brian), and I wanted their feedback on velocities. How hard did they push that bullet?

And then the 'velocity police' had to get involved to chastise some of us for having naughty thoughts of fast bullets. Some years back I'd have been much more interested in fast girls.

 

[Kimber84]

No doubt Brian was talking about 22-250 load data, which is still...a .223 caliber, as he said. And, being the guy that started this discussion that turned into an argument, let me restate that all I wanted was to hear what the fastest loads you guys had, not start an argument over safety and exceeding max published data. I JUST wanted your personal fastest loads. I personally do not load for max velocity, but load for max accuracy. Still, that quest took me almost to max in my 220 Swift with 55 grain bullets. If I had even the slightest real need, I'd load up some of those 35 gr Nosler LeadFree's and have a go at 4000 plus. But like I said, some guys already have been doing that (like Brian), and I wanted their feedback on velocities. How hard did they push that bullet?

And then the 'velocity police' had to get involved to chastise some of us for having naughty thoughts of fast bullets. Some years back I'd have been much more interested in fast girls.

Ok, I can agree with that... Sorry when I see .223 I think ".223"... It would have clicked if it had read .224...

My bad, carry on...

I just re chronoed my .204 today and it was sitting at 4095.... Sent 2 rounds through 1 hole... For slinging a bullet at that velocity I'm impressed with the accuracy

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

Sorry, yeah, that wasn't very clear. I meant caliber, not cartridge.


Editing....

 

[Kimber84]

Sorry, yeah, that wasn't very clear. I meant caliber, not cartridge.

Ha, no problem... I read it like 10 times and thought whoa! Ha

 

[reynolds357]

SuperSpirit, you live in a free country at the moment, but if Obama gets his way the only place you will see a supercharger is in a museum.