Old recipe deemed Unsafe in new manuals. Suggestions?

[freddiej]

There is a few facets that no one so far has addressed.
process, technology, and stupidity.

The recipe of the powder has not changed. the blending methods have. more complete blending has been achieved, smaller particle ingredients, and better performance have made the top end loads lower. we can use less for the same performance.

The litigious nature of the society have also dropped top loads. (has been addressed but I thought I should add this in for good measure)

I will address one other reason. people without thinking used 20 year old old data books with new powders and blew up guns, hurt themselves, and lost their lives. Darwin was right, the most stupid among us will take themselves out of the gene pool. I have to count my father in this mind set. he was using 1950's/1960's data books (lyman) with 1980's/1990's powders and was getting blown primers, and other really bad pressure signs in his 32 win special, 30-30, 30-06, 44 magnum, 357 mag, and a WWI 1911. When I was 14 or 16, I really can not remember the year at this point, I bought new Speer and Hornady manuals. then showed him the error of his thinking that powder charges do not change throughout time. To this day I will not shoot his old loads out of any rifle or revolver. they are topped out 1960's data used with 1980's powders. I just do not trust that they will not hurt the gun and me. I have been slowly taking the powder charges out and putting in fresh powder charges so I can shoot them safely.

 

[HockeyDad]

Back in the 80's I had a recipe with IMR4350 from Lyman's 46th edition that gave me less than 1/2", 5 shots at 100 yards. According to the book, it was at the Max, but no pressure signs. Used this until late 90's when I retired the rifle.
I like to shoot that rifle again and perhaps try the load in a few others I have. (Its a Magnum round with Remington 9 1/2 Large Rifle Primer, not the magnum primer)

Current loading manuals (and for apple to apple conparison, Lyman's 49th edition) have the Max at a full 6 grains lower. IMR (Hodgdon) claims the powder has not changed.
Should I start at the much lower load and work my way up again? I hate to burn supplies in these market conditions, but Safety is ALWAYS Rule #1.

Have you tried emailing Lyman to see if they can offer an explanation?

 

[asd9055]

What primers do the above manuals list for each load ? You wrote that your original load used Remington 91/2 Large Rifle Primers in a magnum round/cartridge. The Remington 91/2 LR primers have the least brisance ( explosive/shattering capability) of rifle primers. Those Remington primers could be the key to that old load being safe.
Lil story:
When I acquired my 7mm Wby Mag, it was used. I took it to the range. As per my rule #5,- use factory rounds in a newly acquired rifle, I used Factory Weatherby rounds. Fired the first round, bolt was hard to open. Stopped right there, saddled up and headed for the local noted gunsmith ( who is also a long range shooter). He inspected the rifle, gave it a clean bill, but took a box of Remington 7mm Wby Mag rounds from his shelf and tried them in my rifle at his little range. Said the difference was in the Remington Primer which resulted in a lower pressure. Worked fine. No bolt stick. I shot them, sighted in the rifle with no more problems.
Still an all proceed with caution.

Nosler #3 had Fed215, current WLRM
Lyman old, had Rem 9 1/2 standard and Fed215
Lyman new, Fed 210 and Fed 215
So Nosler always had a Magnum Primer - does it justify 6 grains of powder less?
Lyman has both standard and Magnum, how ever Remington not as hot.

 

[jdyoung]

Nosler #3 had Fed215, current WLRM
Lyman old, had Rem 9 1/2 standard and Fed215
Lyman new, Fed 210 and Fed 215
So Nosler always had a Magnum Primer - does it justify 6 grains of powder less?
Lyman has both standard and Magnum, how ever Remington not as hot.

So Nosler always had a Magnum Primer - does it justify 6 grains of powder less?
I would say yes.
Below is a primer chart I go by. I have not seen a chart produced in the last few years . There are some claims that the Winchester WLRM Primers are hotter than the FED 215 primers

 

[asd9055]

So Nosler always had a Magnum Primer - does it justify 6 grains of powder less?
I would say yes.
Below is a primer chart I go by. I have not seen a chart produced in the last few years .
View attachment 291006

That makes no sense for Nosler. They go from a Fed215 to WLRM (less hot) AND drop powder?

 

[jdyoung]

That makes no sense for Nosler. They go from a Fed215 to WLRM (less hot) AND drop powder?

Oops, one thing I forgot about that primer chart, there are claims that the WLRM primers are hotter than the Fed215. I'll edit that above.

 

[Zorack]

Back in the 80's I had a recipe with IMR4350 from Lyman's 46th edition that gave me less than 1/2", 5 shots at 100 yards. According to the book, it was at the Max, but no pressure signs. Used this until late 90's when I retired the rifle.
I like to shoot that rifle again and perhaps try the load in a few others I have. (Its a Magnum round with Remington 9 1/2 Large Rifle Primer, not the magnum primer)

Current loading manuals (and for apple to apple conparison, Lyman's 49th edition) have the Max at a full 6 grains lower. IMR (Hodgdon) claims the powder has not changed.
Should I start at the much lower load and work my way up again? I hate to burn supplies in these market conditions, but Safety is ALWAYS Rule #1.

If you're using everything exactly the same component wise I'd think you would be fine. The only thing I'd be concerned about is the primers since remington no longer makes them and the new manufacturer could tweak the ignition source some.

 

[NielsC]

The quality of metal today is not what it was 50 years ago. Rusty stainless anyone? This has probably led to problems with higher chamber pressures. Just a thought but most of my max loads are not in modern loading tables.

 

[Treeslug]

Your reply better describes the change.... The attitude that, "I will be taken care of...." Sound familiar to today's hollow promises from the gub'mint?

The gub'mint gonna take care of you alright, and all it is gonna cost you is everything you have and everything you could have ever had.

 

[cabelasken]

I always start 5% down when using a new jug of powder with a different lot # and work back up. So far I have not had an issue doing it that way and max has been consistently the same. Even top velocity and SD's have been pretty much the same. I have found a three to 5% variation between max charges in various manuals with same bullet weights, but different manufacturers and the solids or all copper tend to have a lower max's than lead core bullets. And now you can rewrite the charts for Hammer bullets as they allow a much increased performance over what we've seen before.

I might add though that I've seen an improvement in the quality of brass from all manufacturers over the past 10 years - perhaps an improvement in tooling?

 

[baldhunter]

When I got my 7mag in 1993,I used the 1967 Lyman Manual as my loading guide.

 

[baldhunter]

Examples from Hornady Vol. II 1973

 

[baldhunter]

I think SAAMI sets the standards for ammo these days.

New & Revised Cartridge & Chamber Drawings - SAAMI

saami.org

 

[Airedale56]

first the French having a major foot hold in powder manufacturing make me nervous

Second I blame the Lawyers but please let us know if you can still use you old data I am very curious

From where do you sink ze name E. I. DuPont de Niemours originates, zen?
Eh?
Oui, c'est Francais.
(Say it out loud, Inspector Clouseau voice, Monsieu.)