do you load to max?

[hofts]

just curious how many of you load to the max listed in the manuals, and if so why, if no, why not.
thanks guys.

i have always gotten really good accuracy at max values but the chart on bullet performance makes me wonder if i shouldn't back down a bit and if accuracy is at least as good, maybe i will get a little more penetration on deer sized game.

???

[L. Cooper]

All my loads are loaded to the maximum I believe to be safe in my guns with my loading components and techniques, and that will produce acceptable accuracy for the purpose.

Why buy a race horse and never let him run?

All of my rifles are used for hunting, so I want as much killing power as each cartridge/rifle combination is capable of producing.

[bulletpusher]

hofts,

I've loaded my rifle cartridges to the max listed loads a couple of times, and I've loaded my Ruger Blackhawk .45 Colt to the max. just cause I could. The loads in both applications fuctioned as advertised.

But accuracy was way better at a little below max. in the rifle and at about midrange in the .45 Colt.

I then thought about something that I had read from Dick Casull and John Linebaugh. If you had a Porche that would go 180 mph would you drive it at that speed all the time.

The rifle is a .25-06 pushing 100 grn Ballistic Tips at about 3200 fps., thats not max. but it is close. I change to a bit faster power in the rifle and can load about 10 grns less to get those magic velocities. The .45 Colt is pushing 260 grn Kieth bullets at about 1050 to 1100 fps. I changed to a bit faster powder and am using about 5 or 6 grns less powder to get the velocity range I want and accuracy it getting better as I play with the load a little.

One thing about loading below max. is the loads don't suffer all that much and I'm burning less powder. Makes for more ecconomical loading on my part and a pound of powder last a little longer and I get more rounds per pound.

Just something to think about.

Bulletpusher "BBRSSC #1"

[aceoky]

No I don't (and I like the "Porche" ananlogy very much!)

A hundred or even 200 fps doesn't mean much in actual hunting situations, they kill as well, shoot nearly as flat, and allow for tempature variables(meaning a "max" load won't be over max when the temp is "up" nearly as easily)

For example, kill a deer with a .300 savage, then kill a deer with a .308 at the same distance, tell me which is "more dead"???

Though there is a measurable differnce in the fps, they both kill, and I haven't found anyone that would say the .300 Savage isn't a good killer!

Brass lasts longer, less stress on the rifle, and many other reasons tell *me*, that "under max" is "more better" most times at least, and yes it's cheaper as well!

[Adam Helmer]

hofts,

Well, first you need to define what your mean by "MAX." I began reloading in 1958 and bought updated reloading manuals every few years and noticed the "Max" loads seemed to decline in later manuals. In fact some of my former mid-range loads are at or over "Max" where they used to be midrange years ago with the same components.

When I reload, I let the gun "tell" me when I am at the accuracy load and record same for future reloading. Most of my accuracy loads are below the published maximums. I prefer accuracy because all the power a cartridge can generate is useless if I cannot hit the target. We are only talking a few hundred fps and the deer never know the difference. Cases last longer and the groups are tight, so that is why I rarely load to the MAX.

Adam

[8X56MS]

I load first for accuracy, then velocity. Safety is always a top concern.
Some of my loads are flat out, and yet still produce the best accuracy in my rifle. Others are slower, but turn in the best groups. Its usually a compromise though.

[billy ahring]

That every rifle I load for performs at its consistent best when load just below max. The one exception to the rule is a 338-06 that is just as consistent when loaded to max levels but, it also wears a match grade shilen barrel that is not finicky about what load you feed it. It shoots every load consistent. That in my opinion is the true mark of a good barrel. By the way I don't load my 338-06 to max levels even though it groups wonderfully, I'm a full grain below max capacity. If I wanted more performance from my 338 bullet I'd have opted for the 338 Win mag


Just my .02

Billy

[denton]

It depends.

In my 8x57 and 6.5x55, I load well over book maximum, because both are instrumented, and both are easily capable of handling 30-06/270 pressures. So I run them at 58 KPSI and below.

In my 41 Magnum, I load well below maximum, because I want a pleasant target load.

In my 243, which is also instrumented, I'm finding that in my particular rifle, book max is well below SAAMI spec. So I don't know how to count that one.

In my 30-06, I load right at book max, because it will probably get used for elk, where ample energy is more important than reducing groups by 1/4".

[Dutchboy]

I tend to load to book max velocity, but I don't obsess about it. For hunting loads, especially elk, I like to run at full horse power. On the other hand, when I worked up my moose load with my Whelen, I had not bought a chrono yet. Good thing the moose didn't know that 250 gr. Hot Core was only going 2250 fps when it punched a hole all the way through. He'd have pointed and laughed, had he known!

For practice, I load a lot of training loads from the Hodgdon youth loads or the Speer manual. I used to shoot quite a few with Blue Dot, but I have started to defer to Murphy again, and now only load reduced loads that can't be double charged (50% fill).

For shotguns, I like to load at about 10,000 PSI for reliable and clean burns in my auto's. FWIW, Dutch.

[hofts]

according to some tests i've seen you probably got better penetration at 2250 than you would of at 25 or 2600 and above.

[Dom]

I load for an accuracy level that I'm satisfied with, regardless of what the books say. I start at the bottom and work up, sometimes stopping low, middle, and sometimes what they call max. It all depends on when I get satisfied, but rarely do I have a book max load, Waidmannsheil, Dom.

[Rocky Raab]

When I'm working up loads for a magazine article, I often have to push the envelope a bit just so I can honestly report what "max" was in that gun. But it makes my shoulder blades squirm when I touch 'em off.

I'm a lot less scared when I back off the powder throttle.

I've also learned something about my much-loved Remington 788 rifles: those with .223-size boltfaces can stand just about any pressure levels, but those with .308-size breeches do NOT like maximum loads. In fact, I find that max loads are two to three grains lower than book in those guns. And three grains in a case that only holds 45 is a good percentage of reduction.

Examples: I once fired a 223 load that was so over max that it blew out the primer, swaged a BELT into the case web and froze the case into the bolt head so hard it had to be hammered out. But the gun was completely fine, and the bolt opened with ease. (No, it wasn't deliberate and I have no idea to this day what happened. Normal hunting load with H335, it was the first round out of a fresh batch of 100 - and when I pulled the other 99, every single one had normal charges.)

With the larger head size, I seldom get much above "start" loads with my 308-chambered 788, and I get a lot of case stretch when I warm up my 25-308 loads by much. No book loads available for that one, so I tread lightly as a matter of course.

[Slim-Zippy]

I usually load under book max to get better accuracy. I use premium bullets for hunting that have a soft front and a solid shank, the best of both worlds. Then I know that I will usually have a exit wound. After a bullet leaves an exit wound it has done all it can do and it doesn't need extreme velocity to do it. Just one mans opinion, to each their own opinion.

[PJgunner]

Well, it all depends. For most modern rounds, at least for hunting purposes, I will load up to the gun's max load, which may, or may not be more, or less than book loads.
However, certainc artridges from days gone by are not loaded by the factories to their full potential, nor do the loading manuals give data reaching the rounds full potential, so what to do? The .257 Robt. and 7x57MM were found in weak 1893 and 1895 Mausers rated to 45,000 P.S.I. Back then, they used the copper crusher method for determining pressure, so they should consider those P.S.I. readings as C.U.P. numbers as they do now. The 30-06 is another cartridge not loaded to it's full potention due to the weak low numbered Springfields. Even some of the relatively hot rounds have been downloaded due to their being used in pump and semi-automatic rifles. Check out the velocities of the .270 Win. just 15-20 years ago compared to what the round does today. Even the already downloaded 30-06 had had their loads reduced a bit more.
Now consider this, if you will. You buy two rifles from any current manufacturor, Ruger, Remington, Savage, or Winchester as examples. Rifle #1 is in .300 Win. mag. loaded to 65,000 PSI max and rifle #2 in 30-06 loaded to 50,000 PSI max. Does this mean that rifle #2 is made from inferior material? I don't think so. So, if rifle integrity is the same, by that materials of equal strngth, then why can't loads approaching the 60,000 PSI level not be used by a careful handloader? I'll answer that by saying, there is no reason why this cannot be done.
I'm sure you've read that the 7x57MM is inferior to Remington's 7mm-08. That's true, only if you stick to comparing factory ammo only. In a modern rifle, such as my Winchester Model 70 Featherweight, it's no problem reaching better than 2750 FPS safely with great accuracy. with a 140 gr. bullet. That's where I settled on for velocity, although I did work up to 2880 FPS which is faster by 30 FPS than one of Hornady's Light magnum loads. I did back off because I felt I might be reaching a pressure plateau that could be a problem, although case head measurements and chronograph data said otherwise.
It gets quite hot here in Arizona during the summer, usually somewhere between 100 and 115 degrees in the shade. This is the time frame when I work up my max loads for whatever rifle I think I'll be using during the hunting seasons. Any signs of excess pressure will show up much more quickly during this time of year.
It is my feeling that any load that I can safely use at 100 degres and higher should be perfectly safe come the cooler weather of hunting season.
BTW, check out the velocity specs for the .300 Win. mag. Sometime in the past few years it's been dropped by 100 FPS.
Another good round not loaded to it's full potential, the .280 Remington. Remington want it to be used in pump and semi-autos. In a good modern bolt action, the .280 can crowd on the 7MM Rem. Mag.'s heels witha 24" barel.
Now, with all that said, and remember, I qualified that by saying they were laods worked up for hunting, probably 80 percent or more of my shooting is done with cast bullets loaded to mid-range levels. Two of my favorites are about 190 gr. with 25.0 gr. of either 4895 in any brass for the .308 and 27.0 gr., same bullets in the 30-06, both loads doing about 1800 FPS. Accuracy is just fine with the .308 load averaging 1.5 MOA at 200 yards ans 2.5 MOA at three hundred yards. The 30-06 load will consisntanly knock down pig silhouettes at 300 meters as long as I do my part. I do use a one grain tuft of dacron pushed sown onto the powder charge to hold it in place. Bullet is usually Lyman's #311644 sized to .310".
So, to answer the question, yes, I load to max and beyond in appropriate cases (no pun intended) for hunting big game and mid range loads for sheer pleasure. Sorry I was so long-winded. NOT!
Paul B.

[Rocky Raab]

Paul has a valid point. The loading manuals are developed strictly to SAAMI standards precisely because there are people out there loading for what might be a century-old rifle. That's why the SAAMI limits go down on a regular basis: the oldest guns chambered for those rounds aren't getting any stronger or less worn.

But if you've just bought a brand new 30-06, it's almost certain that the gun can handle higher pressures than SAAMI now allows. The problem comes with determining what pressures you're loading to. If you have a system that reads those pressures (like denton does) then you may be on firmer ground than the rest of us. But if not, you're just guessing.

Personally, I'd take that extra gun strength as insurance, not as an excuse to see how far I can go before the strength limit is exceeded.