Shooters Forum banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I’ve been using the new Sierra manual for a while and am really liking it. It seems their data is pretty spot on velocity/charge weight and many cartridges have a bunch of powders listed including new powders that many other manuals are missing. I’ve been using it for 7mm-08, 300wm, 45-70 and it has the widest array of powders and bullet weights for those I’ve seen out of any other sources. Some other cartridges seem to have not been updated much since the last manual but others it seems to be a great resource

I was wanting to get the printed version but I ended up getting the app on my phone and now I think I like that better. It sounds like they are continuing to test new loads and update the app as they go but I haven’t noticed any updates since I got it.

I haven’t heard much talk about it so just thought I would pass on my experience.
 

·
Elk Whisperer (Super Moderator)
Joined
·
10,581 Posts
Sierra is my second choice after Lyman. Always really close to what I actually get.

RJ
 

·
The Shadow (Super Mod)
Joined
·
7,321 Posts
Do you know if #6 is finally a complete reshoot?
Because they had been living off of calculated or supplied data for a fair amount of time, prior.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
It is stated like it’s a reshoot using psi equipment. It doesn’t look like that’s necessarily the case for every single cartridge though. Some appear to reprints of old data on a few of them (358 WIN).

It also sounds like the idea is to continually update the data over time as new powders and bullets come out, I’m interested to see how well they keep up on it.
 

·
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Joined
·
36,130 Posts
I toured the Sierra plant a few years ago, including the load test area / shooting tunnel. They shoot in rebarreled production receivers, and then send out loads for testing later. That's exactly what I was told.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
514 Posts
I’ve been using the app since the latest version came out and like its interactive user interface. Unlike others, I don’t find the data any more “accurate” than other sources - how can it be the same as mine with the countless variables involved, including different powder, primer and bullet lots, bore and chamber dimensions, number of grooves, bore finish and barrel length. Does anyone think that Hornady, Speer, Alliant, Hodgdon etc. fake their data? IME Speer comes closer to my velocities, but then a sample of one is pretty useless.

Too, like others Sierra does not shoot every bullet they post data for (example: .308 Win data uses four widely different 150-grain bullets yet all with identical charges and velocities), can bullets of the same weight with different bearing surfaces and loa really have identical velocities?

in no way am I being critical of Sierra, I have used their manuals since #1 came out. I hated the “binder” style of their printed manuals due to the inevitable page damage with lots of use, but the app is great without that problem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
If you look at the 6th ed. data much of it is based on universal receiver as opposed to actual rifle in the 5th ed. At least that is true of 308 and 223 bolt data. The AR data (556) is still the colt HBAR.
 

·
The Shadow (Super Mod)
Joined
·
7,321 Posts
example: .308 Win data uses four widely different 150-grain bullets yet all with identical charges and velocities), can bullets of the same weight with different bearing surfaces and loa really have identical velocities?
Yes.
I can't claim there are no exceptions, but I've done a bunch of pressure testing different bearing surface bullets. Including a thread where I tested the classic SMK, against it's TMNT variant.
For the most part in what I've tested, bearing surface appears to be mostly background noise or an excuse for something else at play.


Cheers
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doom
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top