is it just me...

[Reverend P. Babcock Chase]

Howdy Reloaders,

I constantly marvel (not Prof. Marvel) at the folks who post looking for load data. Don't they have loading manuals? If they don't they should before they consider reloading. Further, I wonder about the idea of using data from some stranger (some stranger than others) on line.

Now, someone who says: "Lyman says xx grains of xxxx powder with this xx gr. bullet. Has anyone used this?" Makes sense to see if this has worked for anyone else. But, just taking a load of the wire sounds a little iffy.

Is it just me.
Rev. Chase

[ndnchf]

It is important to remember that not everyone here loads for common cartridges that have readily available data.  I load for many long obsolete cartridges - ever look for current data for .32 Ballard Extra Long, .44 S&W American, .44-77 Sharps, .58 Roberts, .32 rimfire?   

[Reverend P. Babcock Chase]

Howdy ndnchf,

Of course you are right. Those who shoot obsolete cartridges should always rely on the experienced shooters here; however, although I didn't specify, I meant those cartridges and loads that are readily available in many handbooks. Sorry I wasn't clear.

Rev. Chase

[Jeremiah Jones]

I can show you several sets of loading data that have differing recommendations.   I don't blame a FNG for asking for real world recommendations,

[DJ]

Sure, there can be dumb questions, but I've been reloading for about 40 years, and I still get timid when trying to figure out loads for cartridges that have no published data.  Revolvers usually aren't too bad--just make sure the bullet leaves the barrel and then work up from there.  But autos can be a different story.  Good example:  8mm Roth Steyr, a pre-WWI Austro-Hungarian cartridge for an early automatic.  I find no published data and very little on the Internet.  If your load is too light, the gun mangles a case that took a lot of labor to fabricate (or shekels to buy).  Too heavy, and, well, let's just call it "excessive wear."  Someone else's success story could be very helpful.

Another case in point--I have a manual from a reliable, major powder manufacturer that lists 19.7 grains of a slow pistol powder as a starting load.  Read across the line and you see that 10.8 grains is the maximum load for the same bullet.  If someone managed to get the 19.7 grains into the case, I suspect touching the round off would rearrange their anatomy.  Even though it is printed in the book, I hope a new reloader would ask first.

I don't fault timid reloaders asking questions--it's how we retain our fingers.

--DJ

[Reverend P. Babcock Chase]

Well fellas, I guess it is just me.

Rev. Chase

[LongWalker]

I don't think it is just you.  Sometimes you have to separate the folks asking for specific data (eg 32/44) from those asking for general data ("anyone have load data for X powder?").   Folks seeking to load obscure cartridges tend to at least tell you the cartridge ("I just got a S&W 32/44 target, anyone have a starting point for load data?")

Then you have the folks who drive you crazy.  On another forum, we had a guy asking questions, and people tried to help him (to the tune of over 120 replies).  People were digging through references trying to help the guy out with a definite ID of the powders, and finding load data.  Someone finally got him to give complete details: it turned out he was trying to get load data for modern cartridges using obsolete powders (that he didn't actually have, and no one has seen since 1928) just in case he found some.     He was offended that people were upset that he'd wasted their time!  I don't know how it all came out.  I got hit with the Ban Hammer for my response to his revalation. 

Any more, if folks don't provide cartridge, at least some idea of the purpose of the load, and possibly bullet weight and gun to be shot in, I just ignore them.   I don't have time and energy to waste asking them over and over to provide basic info so I can try to help.  As I told one guy recently, trying to get info from him is like pulling teeth and I'm not a dentist. 

[King Medallion]

Some are just too lazy to do their own legwork/research, try to get someone else to do it for them. What?? Open a manual and read?? Phht. Anyone ever load with 2400? Really? Makes one get picky on what thread to click on. But then again, sometimes it is amusing to see some of the responses to such silliness.

[ndnchf]

Some are just too lazy to do their own legwork/research, try to get someone else to do it for them. What?? Open a manual and read?? Phht. Anyone ever load with 2400? Really? Makes one get picky on what thread to click on. But then again, sometimes it is amusing to see some of the responses to such silliness.

Exactly!

[wildman1]

Some are just too lazy to do their own legwork/research, try to get someone else to do it for them. What?? Open a manual and read?? Phht. Anyone ever load with 2400? Really? Makes one get picky on what thread to click on. But then again, sometimes it is amusing to see some of the responses to such silliness.

If you are referring to my post about Hercules 2400 I was trying to find out if Hercules 2400 was the same as Alliant 2400. I did know that Hercules was bought by Alliant but that does NOT mean that the two powders are the same. If I could have found an old loading manual by Hercules I would not have posted. I contacted Alliant but received no reply back so I tried to find out if anyone here had knowledge about Hercules 2400. Excuse me for being cautious and trying to find out information from a source that might know what I was looking for.
Thanks to Ranch 13 for helping me out.
wM1

[Snake Oil]

Well, now don't I feel the dunce... I just asked someone for load data, because it is a new round to me and they seemed to have it all worked out... I have looked in manuals, visited hogdons site, I have read threads, and everyone is using something completely different than what the manuals show... little confusing to some of us newbies, especially with powders shifting to make sure there are new and better options... additionally, being on the busier side (not lazy) a clear answer is worth its weight in lead!  Perhaps I am just gullible enough to believe we are here to help one another get better at our craft and hobby!  Sorry for wasting your time!

[Dave T]

I got that Wildman was asking if there was an earlier version of 2400 and told him of my experience with the stuff made by Hercules. Can't figure out if I'm a "dunce", an "idiot", or a "fool". Guarantee dang certain, I ain't gonna do that again!

Dave

[Professor Marvel]

Ah My Good Netizens ....

I Myself maintain that there are no stupid questions.
Only stupid philosposhpers philsopophers phylosoficocles  philosophers.
and misspellers.

But there are some folks who don't want to do the basic work first, such as buying and reading a manual.
Shoot, that is like a fellow who thinks he is handy guy jumping into a forum and asking "teach me how to
build a shed" .... there are entier books just on that topic, many are free online or in the library.
An in that case, Mister Google is his friend.

However, If a fella has at least tried to look up data, and then gets flumoxed for a variety of reasons,
be they older powder vs newer manuals; or older manuals vs newer data; or my favorite:
new powder they never tried vs the different charts on the same powder from different manuals

as long as a fella puts in some effort to start with and provides pertinant info  ...
such as
" I have a Pietta Remington 1858 Cartridge conversion and I want to shoot a 225 gr lead .452 bullet
in a .45 Colt/Schofield/Cowboy case."

then proceeds with

"I tried the manufacturors website, but it only offered 2 loads "
or
"2020 Lyman manual says x grains but 2019 Lee says Y grains"
or
"I want to shoot a 225 gr bullet but only find data for 255"
or some such

at least he is
a) putting in the effort in the right direction to start with
2) asking an intelligent question, and providing useful pertinant info
III) actually using a manual first

often one necounters problems like Wildman , dealing with same-named-powder-from-new-maker,
or like Snake Oil, looking for a consensus of "what seems to work for folks"  vs "doing the ladder loading process"
or like others trying to find loads for obscure cartridges.

Thus, and therefore, in such cases I am more than willing to engage in long, drawn out, overly verbose
internet dialogues and arguements discussions .

However there are the wackadoodles like Longwalker ran across....

Look at it this way - it gives us something to talk about, instead of dead air on the forum.

[wildman1]

Apparently, according to some folks you are not supposed to ask questions on a reloading section of a forum about reloading.

wM1

[Reverend P. Babcock Chase]

Howdy Reloaders (again),

Once again, the Professor has fully amplified the position that I tried (rather unsuccessfully) to espouse.

Rev. Chase

[Trailrider]

If you are referring to my post about Hercules 2400 I was trying to find out if Hercules 2400 was the same as Alliant 2400. I did know that Hercules was bought by Alliant but that does NOT mean that the two powders are the same. If I could have found an old loading manual by Hercules I would not have posted. I contacted Alliant but received no reply back so I tried to find out if anyone here had knowledge about Hercules 2400. Excuse me for being cautious and trying to find out information from a source that might know what I was looking for.
Thanks to Ranch 13 for helping me out.
wM1

Hercules was bought by Alliant to become Alliant Tech Systems or Alliant ATK. They were bought by Orbital to become Orbital Tech Systems, which was bought by Northrop-Grumman.  Can't tell the players without a corporate scorecard.  It is too bad the Alliant (nee Hercules) hasn't answered.  Perhaps if you go to Northrop-Grumman they will guide you to the right division.  In any event, Alliant 2400 is probably similar to the old Hercules 2400, but years ago, Hercules people told me to expect a possible 10% lot-to-lot variation in their powders, meaning you should start low and work up a little at a time to what you had been using charge-wise. Don't know if that is still true, but it always pays to be careful.  If I find out anything, I'll post it.
Stay well and safe, Pard!

[Professor Marvel]

Ah My Dear Reverend

I merely strive to dull any opposition into a stupor by insanely repeating the same thing but using different and overly verbose
( as well as Stilted) prose .....

My Good Trailrider....

first I was rather astounded, as your related progression of path seemed to follow my job meandering!
I worked for honeywell, sperry univac, honeywell again, which became Alliant Tech Systems,
then TRW which became northrupp grummond..... strange coincidental things!

But then even more astounded by Hercules telling you a possible 10% variation in lots!  OMG ....
makes one want to obtain some sort of powder tester...

think this one might work?   



yhs
prf marvel