The web's most comprehensive user-interactive handloading database! Find the loading data created by handloaders, for handloaders, post your pet loads, or access and develop your own online loading database with our LoadNotes personal handloading database software. This feature, unique in its concept and intuitive in it's data presentation is fast to access, superbly organized and comprehensive in scope.Our online forums for questions and answers on many shooting and outdoor related topics. A dynamic, active, and well-informed resource for your enjoyment and interaction. Our most used resource on this website! Come share the experience with us!
» Advanced

Go Back   Shooters Forum > Handloading > Handloading Procedures/Practices
Register FAQ Members List Donate Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-30-2006, 01:13 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,343
8x57 load data?


Registered Users do not see the above ad.


Why is Lee load data so much different in 8x57? I have used 47.5 grains of IMR4320 w/ a 175 grain Sierra FBSP bullets for many years, this is the 1st caliber I started reloading. Lee data has the 170 at 31 grains and 680fps slower. What gives?
Using IMR4064 Lee lists the load 15 grains under all (Except IMR) other load data I have for 170 sp bullets.

I'm ready to toss this Lee manual!! Any Idea why Lee is so far off from the rest?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-30-2006, 02:32 PM
The Troll Whisperer (Moderator)
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 19,703
Ya Gits what ya pays fer!!!!
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
NRA Certified Police Firearms Instructor
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NAHC Life Member

"Firearms only have two enemies - rust and politicans" author unknown
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-30-2006, 02:54 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: rural Iowa
Posts: 4,077
I see what you mean J.P. I see your Sierra load in a in a 1985 manual.
As near as I can tell, Lee does not pressure test data. He just "compiles" data from the powder manufactures and lists it from "fastest" to "slowest" within a given bullet weight.

Also, the bullet used is not mentioned. Only the weight, and lead or jacketed.

All are very likely to be "safe" loads. High performance loads are another matter.

Cheezywan
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-30-2006, 03:01 PM
Jack Monteith's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 7,788
While I agree that the Lee manual leaves much to be desired, in the case it's not really Lee's fault. He isn't doing any of his own load data, but is using the powder companies' data. This means that any comparison between the powders of different manufacturers is a case of apples and oranges as it's unlikely that they are using the same case, primer, bullet and barrel.

Lee has used IMR's data for 4320. IMR loaded to a safe point for the weakest 8x57 rifle, likely the 1888 Commission rifle, so they stopped at 37,000 CUP. This is far less pressure than what a Mauser 1898 can take and Lyman and Speer observe a 50,000 CUP limit. Lyman, Hornady, Sierra and Speer clearly state that their data is not for the older rifles.

Bye
Jack
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-30-2006, 06:08 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Monteith
While I agree that the Lee manual leaves much to be desired, in the case it's not really Lee's fault. He isn't doing any of his own load data, but is using the powder companies' data. This means that any comparison between the powders of different manufacturers is a case of apples and oranges as it's unlikely that they are using the same case, primer, bullet and barrel.

Lee has used IMR's data for 4320. IMR loaded to a safe point for the weakest 8x57 rifle, likely the 1888 Commission rifle, so they stopped at 37,000 CUP. This is far less pressure than what a Mauser 1898 can take and Lyman and Speer observe a 50,000 CUP limit. Lyman, Hornady, Sierra and Speer clearly state that their data is not for the older rifles.

Bye
Jack
Jack, I hear what you are saying, but any fool that uses a .323 bullet in a .318 bore is an idiot! We are talking Jacketed bullets! I have load info for JS (IS) and J(I) barrels. I bought the Lee Manual to have more info, not the best of choices for an old bolt shooter! I have used this round in Model 95's, 98's,and 1916's. I am very disappointed. JP

Edit: If you look at real velocity the 8x57 beats the 30.06 every time, but is relegated to an obsolete round by most. You need true data to load effectively!

Last edited by jpattersonnh; 10-30-2006 at 06:20 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-30-2006, 07:02 PM
Jack Monteith's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 7,788
True, but IMR's data doesn't specify a J or S bore, and you can be sure there's some maximum overload type out there who doesn't know the difference and doesn't care, until he pulls the trigger. So some more lawyer data.

http://www.imrpowder.com/data/rifle/8x57mauser.php

I bought the first edition of Lee's manual. It's by far the worst reloading manual I've seen since I started reloading in 1968. I am not buying any more Lee manuals.

Bye
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-30-2006, 07:10 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: South Texas
Posts: 657
Don't blame Richard Lee (or John!), blame SAAMI. They are the ones who established the working pressure of the 8x57 at 37,000 CUP. Lyman also used to stick to SAAMI specs with 8x57 load data, but now include higher pressure data. Accurate's first book actually broke the cartridge down into 2 different cartridges! They refered to SAAMI spec loads as 8x57, and had a seperate page of European type loads at 50,000 PSI or so. They refer to them as 8x57JS. Certainly not correct nomenclature, but usable to differentiate the two pressure levels. There is plenty of data available in the 50,000 PSI range, it is no problem to find.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-01-2006, 05:06 AM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 461
When I first bought my 8x57 I also bought 2 boxes of factory ammo. One was Remington and one was Norma both shot accurately but there was quit a notable difference in recoil. After a little investigation I found that the Rem. were loaded to SAMMI and the Norma were European loads for the JS bore. I wish I had access to a chronograph back then to see what the actual difference was. I think if more shooters would listen to common sense instead of the gun writers the 8x57 would be a much more popular cartridge. My 25 dollar rifle is one of the best shooters I own.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
8x57 Data & Turkish Mauser Load Workups! Marshall Stanton Rifles and Rifle Cartridges 7 05-04-2012 03:42 AM
.223ai Squint Wildcat Cartridges 29 05-31-2009 01:02 PM
25-35 loads Dr. A Handloading Procedures/Practices 138 11-05-2007 01:22 PM
35 Rem load data changed PistolDave Handloading Procedures/Practices 18 03-02-2005 10:07 AM
Lyman 48th. Edition Load Manual William Iorg Books 1 06-05-2003 11:11 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:55 AM.

< Contact Us - Shooters Forum - Archive >

 
 

All Content & Design Copyright © 1999-2002 Beartooth Bullets, All Rights Reserved
View Privacy Policy | Contact Webmaster | Legal Information
Website Design & Development By Exbabylon Internet Solutions
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2