Hornady 11th - worst data I've seen

[Palladan44]

I just peeked at a reloading Manual at a used book store, and I was flabbergasted by some of the data found. It was in the Hornady 11th manual for 357 Magnum for the 158gr XTP bullet. Using Winchester 296.
Starting charge of 12.4 gr for 1000 fps.
(That can't be serious, can it??)

Max of 15.8gr. For 1,250 fps.
Please tell me that this is not the new modern consensus for this load.

I've used a starting charge at this listed max, and it was still way too light, with a ton of unburned powder and not yet in the sweet spot.

Is it possible this data is for the strange (and annoying) shortened 357 brass manufactured by Hornady that I either scrap or keep separate?

 

[1-cavediver]

I believe Hornady and others are dumbing down load data from fear of litigation. I have numerous loading manuals from the 70’s (when I started loading), 80’s, 90’s up to current. I still use loads that I developed when I started in the 70’s that exceed todays maximum loads and they are safe and accurate. Todays maximum loads for longtime established powders are a joke!

 

[Charlie98]

It's pretty common knowledge that Hornady data is a little light, in much the same way Western data is pretty hot... it depends on what the tester's goal was when the worked up the data. A lot of older data has been reworked using modern testing and equipment... so there will be differences between older and newer data, along with variations in powders and components. It's not a mystery.

FWIW, that's why most people will suggest multiple data sources when working up a new load, with the caveat that the devil is in the details on how they arrived at that data...

 

[Riomouse911]

Some data books list their most accurate loads the testers had, which often aren’t the fastest loads.

But in this case I’ll agree that companies like Hornady are erring on the side of overcaution with published data.

Stay safe.

 

[Palladan44]

But 12.4 grains? I'd have to wonder if half the powder Flys out the muzzle due to lack of detonation and lack of pressure...
I'm just surprised is all.
Winchester powder even lists loads at 120% case capacity (20% compressed) of WIN 296 and those aren't overpressured.
I'm thinking 12 grains is almost asking for a Squib.

 

[BBarn]

Hornady's max charge seems in line with Hodgdon's max when you factor in Hornady's method of tabulating loads. But Hornady's starting charge seems too low for that particular powder.

 

[markr6754]

It may not help with your concern, but the Hornady 11th app shows a max charge of 16.0gr for 1250 fps. The starting load remains 12.4gr and 1000 fps.

 

[.45Coltguy]

It may not help with your concern, but the Hornady 11th app shows a max charge of 16.0gr for 1250 fps. The starting load remains 12.4gr and 1000 fps.

Same as the Hornady manual #8. Go to the Hodgdon/Winchester site. You'll like that data better.

 

[bigpower491]

But 12.4 grains? I'd have to wonder if half the powder Flys out the muzzle due to lack of detonation and lack of pressure...
I'm just surprised is all.
Winchester powder even lists loads at 120% case capacity (20% compressed) of WIN 296 and those aren't overpressured.
I'm thinking 12 grains is almost asking for a Squib.

Honestly alot of the data in the Hornady books are old. It ain't changed much for 357 since my 8th or 9th edition, whatever the heck book I got. If you notice, they list 2 different minimum and maximum loads for what we are told is the same powder, H110 and Winchester 296.. I had read once, maybe here or another forum, that they've been the same since 2009. Yes someone could have older stocks of both on the shelf.
Knowing what i know, I sure as heck never load either less than 5% of maximum. That seems to be the general consensus

 

[Jim Watson]

There are real clangers here.

Once upon a time, when Winchester sold their own powders, their booklet said to load exactly as shown, no reduction.
At the time, Hodgdon was saying to reduce H110 by no more than 3%.

Now Hodgdon thinks 158 XTP + 16.7 W296 is Maximum, 15.0 to start, so the usual 10% reduction is OK.
Hornady at 15.8/12.4 is starting with a 22% reduction!

Is the powder different?
Have the boffins concluded that contrary to previous standards, it is ok to underload, even very underload a slow Ball powder?

Heck, a friend got funny results, including hard extraction, when he made up a substantially reduced .357 load with IMR4227.
Another local .44 Magnum aficionado could think of no better way to load for CAS than to put in a lot less 2400. What a mess.

 

[doubleh]

I had a chance to pull out most of my reloading manuals this afternoon and I checked them for 357 magnum data for 296 as 12.4 seemed low. Here is what I found:

Winchester from 1976, 158 gr. JHP-16.6 grains and no starting load.

Lyman, Lee, and Hornady 1973 have no 296 load data.

Hornady 2007, 158 gr, JHP-16.7 grains max-15.5 to start

Speer 1976, 158 gr. JHP-17.3 grains max-15.3 to start. I think this one is a bit overboard and would not use it.

I don't shoot magnum loads much anymore and always used the Winchester data but did start at 10% less than max. The max load in a 4 1/2" Blackhawk recoil is rather stout as I remember. The same load in an 8" Dan Wesson wasn't as fierce. I don't have a manual that has 296 data newer than '07 so that is the best I can do. 296 is supposed to be loaded at or very close to max. I wonder if 12.4 is getting into ka-boom from detonation range.

 

[jmorris]

I just peeked at a reloading Manual at a used book store, and I was flabbergasted by some of the data found. It was in the Hornady 11th manual for 357 Magnum for the 158gr XTP bullet. Using Winchester 296.
Starting charge of 12.4 gr for 1000 fps.
(That can't be serious, can it??)

Do they still have different data for H110/W296 (same powder)?

From their 4th Ed.

 

[Palladan44]

Do they still have different data for H110/W296 (same powder)?

From their 4th Ed.
View attachment 1139079

Yes, but I'm thinking when the 11th was made, H-110 and W-296 were already the same powder. Because the data published looks extremely similar, so much that the difference between them could be nothing more than lot to lot variance.
Either way the exact answer is and probably will remain unknown.

 

[Varminterror]

Hornady 9th edition is 11yrs old, and it included 12.4-12.7grn as minimum for H110/W296, with the maximum at 15.8-16.0.

Another user states the same range is found in Hornady 8th, which was published in 2010. The photo of the 4th Edition - FROM 1991 - shows the same max for H110 as we see in modern manuals, recognizing that W296 is now made in St. Marks rather than by Olin/Win, and is the same powder as H110.

So it sounds like you’ve just been caught napping, as your “observed change” happened over 3 decades ago. So welcome to 1991…

Is it possible this data is for the strange (and annoying) shortened 357 brass manufactured by Hornady that I either scrap or keep separate?

Nope. Nothing to do with their shorter Leverevolution brass.

 

[thump_rrr]

I just peeked at a reloading Manual at a used book store, and I was flabbergasted by some of the data found. It was in the Hornady 11th manual for 357 Magnum for the 158gr XTP bullet. Using Winchester 296.
Starting charge of 12.4 gr for 1000 fps.
(That can't be serious, can it??)

Max of 15.8gr. For 1,250 fps.
Please tell me that this is not the new modern consensus for this load.

I've used a starting charge at this listed max, and it was still way too light, with a ton of unburned powder and not yet in the sweet spot.

Is it possible this data is for the strange (and annoying) shortened 357 brass manufactured by Hornady that I either scrap or keep separate?

9th Edition has the same starting load of 12.4gr and a maximum of 16.0gr for a velocity of 1250fps.