How much time do you spend working up a load

[robMaine]

I am about to start working up a load for my 7mm, and it got me thinking. How much time do I really need to spend, working up incremental loads, testing, so on and so forth.

The way I look at it, before I started reloading, I would buy a box of factory, and 9 times out of 10 it would be decently accurate, 1moa or better. So if I don't desire every modicum of velocity and accuracy, what is stopping me from picking a middle of the road load, with quality components, loading up 10 rounds and if it works, just stopping there...

Does anyone else load this way?

 

[Sam1911]

Sure! Always ask yourself, "Why am I doing this?"

If this will be your hunting rifle and you shoot anywhere up to 300 yds, the difference between a 1-1/2" group and a 1-1/4" group might not be worth a month of tinkering and a few hundred dollars in powder and bullets to work out.

If this is for your benchrest competition rifle, or your practical long-range match gun, maybe it IS worth the time and money.

Identify your goal, work to reach your goal, then spend your time practicing.

(Now, if your hobby is handload tinkering and shooting small groups off the bench, that's a different matter.)

 

[Eb1]

Not to be short, but as long as it takes.

But you are right. There is nothing stopping you. It is all about you and your needs. If a good hunting load is all you want, then the time would be less because finding a MOA to M-1/2OA isn't hard with many different combination of components.
Finding constant sub-MOA is a different story, but you could luck out. Also a MOA load @ 100 yards doesn't always equate to MOA at 300 yards.

Good luck!

 

[NeuseRvrRat]

Does anyone else load this way?

a lot of folks do

it's all about how accurate you want the load and how much time you're willing to invest. no one can answer those questions for you. tweak the load until you're happy with its performance or you're tired of screwing with it. if you tried every possible combination out there, you'd just shoot out barrels and then the whole process would start over.

 

[Kyle M.]

I only load .45acp and .44mag and all I do is plink. I load up 10 rounds and if they function and shoot at least as good as I do then I'm done. Right now I've got one load for each caliber and both are excellant shooters. Beginners luck maybe? I had the same good luck when I loaded .40s&w, .38 super, and .45 colt ymmv.

 

[ranger335v]

For the purposes and goals you plan to use it vs. the time and effort why bother with reloading at all?

 

[mgmorden]

For hunting loads the only question I concern myself with is whether I'm going for a mild recoil round or the most power I can safely squeeze out of the gun. Accuracy isn't a big deal because a) if a gun is built well it is almost always "hunting accurate" and b) even within that qualifier, most shots in this area of the country are within 60-80 yards. If you miss at that distance its not because your handload wasn't tweaked enough.

Which bullet and powder can be used for both of those use cases can largely be determined by looking at printed data. If I want mild recoil I'll look at a lower end charge of a faster powder and if I want power I'll work my way up to top-end data with a slower burning powder.

For hunting, and for most practical shooting disciplines (USPSA, IDPA, 3-gun, etc) thats fine. As noted, if you're shooting benchrest or bullseye or the like then that warrants a little more tweaking.

 

[robMaine]

Interesting responses, it seems to be the difference is between folks reloading for a separate hobby, vs reloading for the savings on some expensive rounds

 

[jmorris]

Depends on how fast you can load and test. I have presses that I take to the spot where I am testing, takes tons of time off the process.

 

[Sam1911]

Interesting responses, it seems to be the difference is between folks reloading for a separate hobby, vs reloading for the savings on some expensive rounds

Yeah, somewhat. I also reload (a LOT) for pistol. In that case I'm going for two things, reliability and enough velocity with a given bullet to make the required power factor for my sport. At all ranges that my competitions take place, I've never found a reasonable load that was so accuracy-poor out of my service-style handguns that I felt I just had to tweak that load. In fact, I don't remember the last time that I even sat down to a bench to shoot groups with a new pistol load. I'll tweak the load until I'm confident that it will clear my minimum velocity under all weather conditions, and then run with it.

In that case I just need a lot of rounds, with a type of bullet I like, going just the right speed, cheap.

 

[jmorris]

I don't remember the last time that I even sat down to a bench to shoot groups with a new pistol load

I am one of the competitive types vs the "just for fun" guys. I have to know what to expect.

 

[Jasper1573]

So if I don't desire every modicum of velocity and accuracy, what is stopping me from picking a middle of the road load, with quality components, loading up 10 rounds and if it works, just stopping there...

That is what I do as well. I load to shoot competitively, and I load to hunt...either way, I start in the middle of the powder charge range and work up .5 grain or less at a time until I have found reasonable parameters for a given load. I spend much less time working up a load to hunt vs a load to shoot targets out to 1000 yards. I have spent the last two years finding a load that performs well at 300 yards out to 1000 yards, and the powder-bullet combination isn't the most accurate I have tried, but it is sub-MOA and carries more velocity out to 1000 yards than a slightly more accurate combination.

Hope this helps.

 

[splattergun]

There is 'acceptable' and then...

It didn't take very long at all to find 'acceptable' loads for both my 30-06 and my 9mm. I came up with these acceptable loads on my 2nd batch of test rounds. at this point in time acceptable to me means, for the -06, a hunting round that is more accurate at 200 yds than the factory loads I was shooting. For my 9mm I wanted a less-expensive plinking load that was tighter grouping than my factory SD loads.

I am currently loading these 'acceptable' recipes but I am not yet satisfied. I want to find a tighter hunting group for the '06, just because I believe the gun is capable of it and I believe that I am capable of developing a more accurate hunting load for it.

For the 9mm, I'm still looking to shave off a bit of the cost and at the same time shave a bit of group size.

And as a relative newcomer to the obsession, I still find it a blast to go shoot my experiments and see what happens!

So the research continues.

 

[BADUNAME37]

Anywhere from four hours to four years and all times in between.

 

[Eb1]

Have you read the ABC's of Reloading? It covers this topic well and in detail. If not, I suggest you do.

 

[beatledog7]

The limiting factor for many of us is getting to the range to test what we've built.

If I have empty brass, I can meticulously build 8 each of 4 different 7Mag loads pretty quickly, say, about an 90 minutes, and that's from just tumbled brass to done assuming they needed trimming after I neck sized them.

But they might sit there for a 3-4 months before they get fired. If that delay counts as work-up time, then it takes me at least...well, you get the idea.

I could shrink it by waiting until I have a range trip planned before I load any rounds, but schedules make my range trips more or less spur-of-the-moment affairs, so I try to always have test rounds built in case I get range time.

 

[Cosmoline]

I think my record was about 8 years, to develop the ultimate bear load for the Mosin. I did, and it's a magnificent load that gives excellent accuracy. But by then I got old and fat and lost interest in bear hunting. So that's reloading, in a nutshell ;-)

These days I try to KISS to avoid too much book work at the range. I'll tinker a bit but I'm quicker to abandon ideas than I used to be. So for example if a particular firearm is just bucking me with a particular kind of load or bullet, I'll stop trying to force the issue.

loading up 10 rounds and if it works, just stopping there...

That's a fine idea, just remember to record your results for future reference. Don't do too many more than 10 rounds for testing. Case in point--the other week I had a bunch of new rounds loaded for my new model vaquero in .45 Colt. Well it turns out the old bright boy (me) had forgotten to cross check OAL in the smaller Ruger. So sure enough they stuck out the end and jammed the cylinder up!

 

[jr_roosa]

I work up for a couple of days, shoot "the load" for a couple of months at matches, and then some gadget or bullet comes catches my eye, or something else changes, and then I re-work the load a little and tinker some more.

For pistols, I only tinker if I'm having problems (leading, feed failures, etc.). Otherwise I load up 4 or 5 batches, run them through the chrony, and then whatever I like the best is the new load and I don't really change it. Maybe if I had a ransom rest, i'd be more anal, but I really can't shoot a pistol well enough off a sandbag to see a major difference in accuracy.

-J.

 

[Tim the student]

Eh, it depends. For my more accurate rifles, I enjoy chasing precision, and it seems like a never ending process. I will find a good load, load some so I have some on hand, then continue to tinker a bit. Its fun for me.

For handguns, I don't worry so much. I find what is acceptable to me (which is mostly function), and then I load more. I'm not as concerned with precision so much. I shoot IDPA and plink mostly, I don't shoot bullseye.

 

[Hondo 60]

How much time do I really need to spend, working up incremental loads, testing, so on and so forth.

Sorry, there's no simple answer.
For my 357 Mag load, I spent 25 rds of various powder charges & am amazed at how different they felt.
I happened to have hit on my go-to powder & charge the first time I tried Alliant 2400.
But that was after trying 4 other powders & multiple charge levels.
I've had a 357 for 3 years & hit on that sweet spot about 3 months ago.

That's just one caliber.
I own guns & rifles of 8 different calibers.
(ya, I know, the brass, powder, primer & bullet companies all love me dearly & have me on speed dial.)
Not so much with the mailman (think bullet deliveries) - LOL

 

[gamestalker]

I load for the 7mm RM and my typical work up using a bullet I haven't yet loaded with is as follows.
I load with one powder almost exclusively for this cartridge, RL22, and I start with a mid range published powder charge for that weight bullet. I load 5 rounds per increments, and then do my work up from 150 yds. over a chrony. In most instances, I'll get 1/2" MOA regardless, so my primary focus is usually velocity and pressure limitations. Normally, I'll wind up some where near the maximum published charge so I can achieve good consistent ballistics that will provide excellent long range performance for hunting conditions. In most cases I'll only have to perform 2 or 3 work ups, or about 15 rounds of test ammunition to acheive my goal.
Example: If I were loading say a Speer 145 gr. BT I would start my work up at around 66 grs. and work up in .5 gr. increments. 3 incremental work ups at .5 grs. would usually take me to aorund 67.5 grs., or .5 grs. from the published maximum. And if I'm setting a goal to acheive maximum velocity, accuracy allowing, I would maybe take it to or slightly above 68.0 grs.. But considering that I seat to the lands and have a throat that allows for such, I often find that the favorable load range is some where around the middle of the data range, this is because pressures run higher when seating to the lands.

It's really very dependant on the bullet weight and profile as to how high I will go within published data.

GS

 

[Eb1]

I am in the middle of loading a hunting load for my .25-06. So far I have 49.0 gr. of IMR 4350 with a 115 gr. CT BT. It will shoot MOA @ 100 yards. I loaded up that load with two different primers (CCI and WLR). The difference was night and day between the two. Sometimes it isn't just the powder and charge. The primers can make or break an accurate load.
Next on the list is a 100 gr. BT with RL19.
I have been working on this for 8 months or so now.

 

[gamestalker]

I absolutely agree that primers are a big element in the reloading process. I have used Win and CCI, and have resolved myself to using only CCI the last 25 or so years. The consistency of the primer burn is elemental, in my opinion. When ignition is inconsistent, the entire internal ballistic process is effected. For .270 win and .243 win I like CCI BR pirmers. I remember many years ago I primed 10 or so cases of each with CCI LR, and CCI BR primers and fired the primers only, the difference was audibly and easily noticable as to how much more consistent the BR's were.

As to powders for high powered rifle concerning .243 and up to 7mm RM, I have my favorites that have become my exclusive go to powders, and all are among the slow burners. The .270 win. has performed very well for me with IMR-4350 and RL19. At one point I was an IMR-4350 only person until trying the RL powder line. I still have a fond place in my reloading heart for IMR-4350, especially when it regards the .243 win and .270 win., but for my 7mm RM I am deffinitely stuck on RL22 and will probably never change that.

GS

 

[GLOOB]

Bingo. If the ammo manufacturers can make one-size-fits-all ammo, a reloader can do it, too.

I think the whole always start with the minimum "start load" and work it up, cuz your gun is unique, is a little overblown. Unless you're using powder from the 50's (or surplus/pulldown) and no-name brass and components.

Heck, if ammo companies can sell +P ammo and not blow up peoples' guns, I think the average bubba can figure out how to make a middle range load using brand name components and manufacturer data, without a workup.

 

[dragon813gt]

Hopefully, as little time as possible. I'm out for hunting accuracy so this helps a lot. I also cast my own so for hunting loads I'm looking for an upper end load with a heavy for caliber bullet that groups consistently. Not necessarily the tightest group. The one that's the same every time. The lower end loads are never it. It always falls somewhere between the middle and the high range.


Brought to you by TapaTalk.