Assembling ammunition?

[Rick Courtright]

Hi,

A potentially heated discussion in another thread led me to think of this:

A lot of folks like to THINK they're "ballistic engineers" as they put together their handloads. Some of their ideas are better than others. But an old timer once cautioned me, after seeing some damage my ignorance up to that point had caused, "Son, if you're NOT working in a lab where you can test everything as you go, you're NOT 'developing' ammo, you're just 'assembling' it. And you should do that according to recipes the guys who DO develop it have furnished you. They know far more about this than you do, or probably ever will."

As in cooking, some recipes MAY have a little wiggle room, such as the "Start low, work up" mentality we've used just about forever for most metallic cartridges. Others, such as most shotshell recipes, are SUPPOSED to be followed to the letter.

So I've always kept his words in mind as I "assemble" my own ammo. Can't say I'm any kind of an expert, and my round count is nothing compared to some of yours, but his advice has kept me out of further trouble, AND done the jobs I needed done, roughly a quarter of a million times so far.

How many of you share "the old timer's" view as you practice our hobby? Or are you more of a "kitchen table ballistician" when you load?

Rick C

 

[captainkirk]

Hi,

A potentially heated discussion in another thread led me to think of this:

A lot of folks like to THINK they're "ballistic engineers" as they put together their handloads. Some of their ideas are better than others. But an old timer once cautioned me, after seeing some damage my ignorance up to that point had caused, "Son, if you're NOT working in a lab where you can test everything as you go, you're NOT 'developing' ammo, you're just 'assembling' it. And you should do that according to recipes the guys who DO develop it have furnished you. They know far more about this than you do, or probably ever will."

As in cooking, some recipes MAY have a little wiggle room, such as the "Start low, work up" mentality we've used just about forever for most metallic cartridges. Others, such as most shotshell recipes, are SUPPOSED to be followed to the letter.

So I've always kept his words in mind as I "assemble" my own ammo. Can't say I'm any kind of an expert, and my round count is nothing compared to some of yours, but his advice has kept me out of further trouble, AND done the jobs I needed done, roughly a quarter of a million times so far.

How many of you share "the old timer's" view as you practice our hobby? Or are you more of a "kitchen table ballistician" when you load?

Rick C

I stick to the books and buy new ones as I can.

captainkirk

 

[Bud0505]

I follow the books and quite frankly am still using loads that have worked for me the last 25 years. I've never had the need to see how hot I can crank a load. Never been adventurous enough to push the envelop. I buy a new Lymans every other year or so. The only caliber I've added to my arsenal in the last 20 years is 45 Colt and quickly settled on Red Dot and 255gr RNFP lead. Tried Unique and trail boss but like the RG better.

 

[mr surveyor]

agree with the reloading part about "start low and work up", but I can't agree with the analogy to cooking recipes. I cook quite a few gallons of hot sauce a year .... most folks don't like supersonic +P+ magnum hot sauce, but my tubes handle it quite well


surv

 

[WESHOOT2]

I have assembled most; I have developed some.

 

[Precision32]

I was speaking with a lady who expressed an interest in learning to reload. I told her that I was not being condescending, but if she could read and follow the directions in a cook book and bake biscuits, she could learn to reload.

Progressive burning powders are not a "straight line" proposition, hence the term "progressive." Depending on the powder and loading, the powder reacts in a different way. Push it enough and rather than burn it detonates. H110 is a prime example. Load too low or too high and guns have been known to let go.

I don't have the pressure testing equipment to "develop" a load. I doubt that many of us do. I have to accept the work of others in the field that do have the proper equipment and accept the liability to publish their work. That's why I never give loads out. I will guarantee that if Joe Bubba uses my info incorrectly and blows his gun up, it will be MY fault in the Courts, not his.

 

[6gun]

I'm not a ballistic engineer and figure when I buy a loading manual I'm paying for their services of being engineers, I always stick the the recipes they printed in their cook books (manual) starting low working high never exciting their max. have never gotten in any trouble that way, I'm not developing ammo just loading it, my advise is keep your cook books (manuals) up to date much as possable powders change, and loads change them engineers are always working on new recipes for us to try.

 

[WESHOOT2]

(At times I have thought "What would Elmer Keith do?"), ay?

 

[Mobuck]

I follow the reloading manuals pretty closely. Forty plus years of reloading and a goodly amount of common sense still don't match the technology and equipment found in a ballistics lab.

 

[mikld]

I like to "experiment", but I stay within the guidelines that the real experts/ballisticians print in the reloading manuals. I've been reloading .44 Magnum for over 25 years and that particular cartridge lends itself to quite a bit of leeway for reloading (I've reloaded jacketed, plated and cast [95% of my shooting now] from single ball loads to 265 gr. T-Rex killers). Perhaps "assembler" would fit my methods/philosophy of reloading, but I still make the decision of what components to assemble. I like to think of myself as a "custom" reloader...

 

[CraigC]

Ammo "assemblers" probably should abide by all the rules in the book so they don't get their panties burned.

 

[tek4260]

And assemblers should keep their mouth shut when someone asks a question if they can't discuss the issue without insulting the intelligence of the OP, simply because they disagree with their practices.

Something like "I think what you are doing is dangerous and I advise against it" is so much better than the derogatory posts that do nothing but show the narcissism of the person responding.

I used to be that person asking the questions but I got tired of being ridiculed by the "experts" here and decided to try it for myself after researching. Just opened my 4th 1000ct box of gas checks since then, but according to the experts my loads were not safe and I was a fool because I didn't take what they said as gospel.

 

[Precision32]

tek4260, if asked a question and I give you an answer that results in blowing your firearm up, are you just going to walk away? Or are you going looking for a lawyer to sue me for giving you bad information.

If I told the OP in the post in question that the maximum safe pressure for his SBH was 150,000 psi, how would he measure the pressure in his gun?

Be honest now.

 

[Ethang]

To each his own. I believe there is an awful lot of "Lawyer Room" in published loads from the major manufactures. That said, I do deviate from loads, but I am not running any of my loads at all hot and feel very comfortable doing so. Ragged edge loads are expert territory not to be undertaken lightly.

 

[Rick Courtright]

how would he measure the pressure in his gun?

Be honest now.

Hi,

I don't know if the product's still made, but when I was a kid, a local company, Langley (later Zebco), made a couple of fishing scales. They called them "De-Liars."

In this venue, OUR "De-Liar" is the lab. It's not the guy on the barstool down at the end who tells us "I've been doing this for umpteen years and haven't killed myself yet" or similar. It's not the guy who simply writes in a gun rag, or expresses his opinion on the Internet. I think the point should be clear enough...

Now, for those of us who DON'T have one in our basement, a well-equipped lab isn't automatically something magical "way off somewhere." As already mentioned, guys in white labs coats have done much of the work, and published it for us, so we can take advantage of it. That provides a satisfactory, and safe, methodology for many of us.

OTOH, if we want to learn about something these guys haven't provided us already, H.P. White has been offering ballistic testing services for more than 3/4 of a century. Writers going way back, perhaps to Ol' Elmer himself, have used 'em. Many mfrs and agencies do so to this day, too. So can we. All we've gotta do is get a hold of 'em and ask what it takes:

http://www.hpwhite.com/contact-us/

Rick C

 

[wolfsong]

Cooking from a recipe book does not a chef make. Knowing the foundation and properties of the ingredients and creating something new and innovative is a chef's work. Merely tweaking the ingredients and the cooking time is a cook's work.

There are lots of cooks, very good cooks, out there. There are comparatively few chefs available.

Peace and God bless, Wolfsong.

 

[tek4260]

tek4260, if asked a question and I give you an answer that results in blowing your firearm up, are you just going to walk away? Or are you going looking for a lawyer to sue me for giving you bad information.

If I told the OP in the post in question that the maximum safe pressure for his SBH was 150,000 psi, how would he measure the pressure in his gun?

Be honest now.

No I wouldn't sue. Nor would I load ammo that was on the extreme end of pressure if I didn't understand exactly what was going on and what to expect through your answer and my own research.

 

[DGW1949]

Hi,

A potentially heated discussion in another thread led me to think of this:

A lot of folks like to THINK they're "ballistic engineers" as they put together their handloads. Some of their ideas are better than others. But an old timer once cautioned me, after seeing some damage my ignorance up to that point had caused, "Son, if you're NOT working in a lab where you can test everything as you go, you're NOT 'developing' ammo, you're just 'assembling' it. And you should do that according to recipes the guys who DO develop it have furnished you. They know far more about this than you do, or probably ever will."

As in cooking, some recipes MAY have a little wiggle room, such as the "Start low, work up" mentality we've used just about forever for most metallic cartridges. Others, such as most shotshell recipes, are SUPPOSED to be followed to the letter.

So I've always kept his words in mind as I "assemble" my own ammo. Can't say I'm any kind of an expert, and my round count is nothing compared to some of yours, but his advice has kept me out of further trouble, AND done the jobs I needed done, roughly a quarter of a million times so far.

How many of you share "the old timer's" view as you practice our hobby? Or are you more of a "kitchen table ballistician" when you load?

Rick C

I figure that the guys who wrote the books are smarter about developing recipes than I am, so I just prep the cases and assemble the load as carefully as I can. No fuss, no muss, no damaged equipment.....

Works for me.

DGW

 

[Lost Sheep]

Hi,

A potentially heated discussion in another thread led me to think of this:

A lot of folks like to THINK they're "ballistic engineers" as they put together their handloads. Some of their ideas are better than others. But an old timer once cautioned me, after seeing some damage my ignorance up to that point had caused, "Son, if you're NOT working in a lab where you can test everything as you go, you're NOT 'developing' ammo, you're just 'assembling' it. And you should do that according to recipes the guys who DO develop it have furnished you. They know far more about this than you do, or probably ever will."

As in cooking, some recipes MAY have a little wiggle room, such as the "Start low, work up" mentality we've used just about forever for most metallic cartridges. Others, such as most shotshell recipes, are SUPPOSED to be followed to the letter.

So I've always kept his words in mind as I "assemble" my own ammo. Can't say I'm any kind of an expert, and my round count is nothing compared to some of yours, but his advice has kept me out of further trouble, AND done the jobs I needed done, roughly a quarter of a million times so far.

How many of you share "the old timer's" view as you practice our hobby? Or are you more of a "kitchen table ballistician" when you load?

Rick C

Semantics and control freaks.

OK, give up on the use of the word "developing"if it is contentious. When you are working up a load for a particular cartridge (and especially for a particular firearm), you might be better served by the word "tuning" your load recipe.

Precision in casual language is not enforced very often. However, in science, "terms of art" must be exact. Ballistics is a practical science. In any discussion, all parties must agree on the definitions or misunderstanding one another is likely and disagreements follow.

Tread lightly. Understand that some people in a discussion get really freaked out if you don't use the terms THEY deem correct. Sometimes it is easier to just accept the definitions they understand (and sometimes, they are actually correct) just to get the lines of communication cleared and the discussion back on track.

"Tuning" vs "developing" vs "creating" ?

What do you call it when someone develops a "wildcat" cartridge?

What do you call it when someone adjusts a load recipe to match a particular power level? To minimize group size? To move the point of impact to a particular location?

Nuances that might require clarification, depending on the purpose of the discussion. Nuances that might ruffle the feathers of an insecure "expert", which then adds "heat" to a discussion that, in the mind of a more professional and knowledgeable and diplomatic expert would only generate a clarifying moment.

(You might detect my disdain for people who get hot and bothered unnecessarily.)

 

[WESHOOT2]

I have found that I can learn more about making ammo by reading what other people say about making ammo than by arguing.......

I can learn!