1) Etter substantiated his results with an Oehler Model 33 chronograph in 1981 within safe pressure guidelines.
2) build a 30-06 Ackley Imp rifle on a Weatherby or equally strong rifle-then check the results with the same recent powders for yourself.
NOT 1940s-or 1960s with those powders, but modern powders available now. Check the 1981 Handloader Magazine article and duplicate them with your results.
3) Otherwise, HANDLOADER and Wolfe publications gets the credit
for a fine article with proven results. End of controversy.
1) I didn't ask about a chronograph, I asked about pressure. Because you know that a chronograph doesn't record pressure...
2) This is the year 2023, and you're referring an article from 1981. 2023 - 1981 = 42 year old powder. The powders being referenced, are not the same; and in some instances have been changed multiple times already.
3) At no point did I claim it wasn't a wonderful article. What I challenged is badly out of date information about assuming pressures, and a false claim of knowledge.
. If the bolt opens, pockets are tight, case head hasn't expanded, etc. then pressures are safe. If that is 55K, 65K, 70k, no one will ever know, and everyone will be safe. 3.5 grains and an extra 5k pressure will increase velocity, if it is enough for someone to make one, then more power to them.
This is false, and dangerous information.
SAAMI sets the standards. When you exceed those standards, you have exceeded standard safe practices. SAAMI info is all freely available to read, as is the pressure sticky. Anyone interested in reloading should understand, the exponential decrease in lifespan when a pressure vessel is overloaded. Simply noticing that something didn't catastrophically fail, does not allow someone to proclaim "it's safe", or that everyone should do it regularly, or that they magically know something they aren't measuring.
Members since long before I began posting about pressure measurements, have been linking an extremely accurate and inexpensive measurement system. Moreover, as every twisting manual has started for an extremely long time: If you exceed book velocities, the presumption should be you exceed book pressures. If you want to actually confirm this, you buy the tools to measure it.
Bob Hagel, a respected gun writer
with Wolfe Publications... He always states the caveat of starting low and watching for pressure
signs. He backs his results with a chronograph. I.
A "respected" writer... One of those decided to join this forum, and begin bloviating about things he rather clearly didn't understand. He ignored almost a century of ballistic study, ignored some rather elementary facts about measurements, and ignored the wonderful pressure testing being shared here by those who came before me. His nonsense, is why I put my money where my mouth is, and actually began measuring pressure and his false claims; and sharing the results with the forum.
A chronograph measures velocity, not pressure.
When a chronograph informs you that there is excessive velocity, while it is a result of pressure; it doesn't actually tell you what the pressure is.
It certainly could be the case that the peak pressure is excessive. Or it could be that the area under the curve is greater, without an excessive pressure peak. Given the number of powders which are progressive in at least one application, the bumper sticker assumption people should default to; is that the peak pressure is excessive.
I've ridden several roller coasters in my life, and it felt like
I was weightless at several points. That doesn't mean I actually was weightless, nor does it show me to tell people "I know" I was weightless. The only way I can say I know I was weightless, would be by measuring it. Telling a story about how quickly my ice cream cone melted that day, isn't measuring whether or not I was weightless. 😉