Hogdons Load Data

[scope eye]

This is a perfect example of why I think, Hogdons should not be the "Bible" of reloading, It drives me freakin bonkers and this is a perfect example, a bullet that is 90gr has a max load that is 4gr more powder, than the max of a bullet that is 85gr, so basically 10% more powder for a bullet that is 5gr heavier, that's insane and goes against everything we know about reloading, so when someone says to me Hogdons says this is the max, please spare me.

Bullet Weight85 GR. BAR TSX Starting Loads
Maximum Loads

Manufacturer
Powder
Bullet Diam.
C.O.L.

Grs.
Vel. (ft/s)

Pressure

Grs.

Vel. (ft/s)

Pressure


Hodgdon
H4350
.243"
2.620"

37.3
2,972
49,600 PSI

40.5
3,141
57,300 PSI

Bullet Weight90 GR. SPR SP Starting Loads
Maximum Loads

Manufacturer
Powder
Bullet Diam.
C.O.L.

Grs.
Vel. (ft/s)

Pressure

Grs.

Vel. (ft/s)

Pressure


Hodgdon
H4350
.243"
2.625"

42.0
3,039
44,400 CUP

44.5
3,185
50,600 CUP

[earl39]

Dean I believe you are comparing apples to oranges. You are comparing a jacketed lead bullet to a solid copper bullet the latter having a greater bearing surface. The flip side is I agree Hogdon should not be considered the Holy Grail of reloading. Your also comparing psi to copper units of pressure.

[scope eye]

Hey Earl, I understand they are not the same bullets, but as we all know in reloading 10% increase in powder, is a huge amount, and it doesn't matter if it is measured in cup or psi it there max.

Dean

[Oscarflytyer]

NOT the Holy Grail - but NONE are!

And - Barnes bullets are an entity ALL their Own! They are different, and the more comprehensive manuals will say that. Hodgden doesn't say that, but DOES give specific data for certain Barnes bullets. And therein lies the seeming anomaly you are seeing in the data.

[bootsmcguire]

Wouldn't the Barnes' major increase in bearing surface create more drag, thereby causing the bullet to act like a heavier bullet thus require less powder?

True 10% is a fair bit of difference, but then again isn't the bearing surface difference somewhere in the 25%-30%range of difference?

Another thought to think of Dean is perhaps the secret lies in the OAL. Since we know that the Barnes bullet due to its all copper construction is noticeably longer than a Traditional bullet of similar weight, and the listed OAL in the provided data above is within .025" of each other, is it possible that the Barnes has more bullet inside the case eating up room for powder and taking up combustion area thus raising pressures, hence the lower charges listed?

I dunno, just points to consider.

[FW Conch]

My thoughts exactly "boots" !

[wrench man]

The "TSX" bullets have the relief groves in the bearing surface to reduce friction, but I would still use specific data for them?, I've used them in my .270 and after that experience I'll likely NEVER purchase another Barns bullet ever??