New Hodgdon load data website, do you like it!?

[westernrover]

It looks like its formatted for phones now, for all you suckers that carry one of those things.

 

[westernrover]

Filter by powder is marginally useful if you have some powder and are wondering what to do with it. I would like to see an option to sort the powders by Hodgdon's burn rate chart, and also alphabetically as it is now. Rifle and pistol data could be checkboxes instead of separate pages. It's not like the charge masses or bullets are different, just the test barrel length and velocity.

Mostly, I'd like to see additional data. Actual gun data would be helpful. They don't need to test every gun, but 38 Special could have J-frame/LCR results, 4.25" 686/GP100 results as well as the 10" test barrel. 9x19 could have short barrel data as well as 4". Again, the data is not different, but the velocities would be useful.

Maybe more important would be more bullet data. They added a lot of bullets with their acquisition of Western/Ramshot/Accurate/etc. but they just merged the databases without testing the bullets from one set with the powders from the other. Of course what I'm asking for is a lot of work, but that's where the real value is.

 

[Barmcd]

This one:
View attachment 1183164


You have to get a load for one selection first, then hit the add selection button, go through selecting the round, bullet, etc, then click Get Load Data. It adds the new load(s) below the old one(s)
The old ones are kind of hidden:
View attachment 1183166
If you click the > the old load(s) open up.

Just select the cartridge and bullet, don't select any powder and click Get Load Data.
View attachment 1183168
All of the loads for that cartridge and bullet which are in the new system will show. Apparently there are old loads which are now missing. Sigh. If a brand isn't listed, there is no load data for that brand or powder for the selected bullet and cartridge in this new system, so there's no Accurate, Ramshot, or Winchester data for a .223 Remington Pistol load and a 55-grain bullet, in the example above, just Hodgdon or IMR brands.

I must be a idiot because its not working for me. I selected 38 Special, 148 grain, Hogdon, and HP-38 and got one load using a 148 grain wadcutter lead bullet. Then I use the "Add Selection" button and a new menu came up. I chose 38 Special, 158 grain, Hogdon and HP-38. After selecting the "Get Load Data" button, I had four 158 grain loads, but the 148 grain load was gone.

On Edit: I got it to work using two totally different calibers. Maybe its a data glitch when I used two close to each other.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Filter by powder is marginally useful if you have some powder and are wondering what to do with it. I would like to see an option to sort the powders by Hodgdon's burn rate chart, and also alphabetically as it is now. Rifle and pistol data could be checkboxes instead of separate pages. It's not like the charge masses or bullets are different, just the test barrel length and velocity.

Mostly, I'd like to see additional data. Actual gun data would be helpful. They don't need to test every gun, but 38 Special could have J-frame/LCR results, 4.25" 686/GP100 results as well as the 10" test barrel. 9x19 could have short barrel data as well as 4". Again, the data is not different, but the velocities would be useful.

Maybe more important would be more bullet data. They added a lot of bullets with their acquisition of Western/Ramshot/Accurate/etc. but they just merged the databases without testing the bullets from one set with the powders from the other. Of course what I'm asking for is a lot of work, but that's where the real value is.

Actually, now that I’ve had a chance to poke around, a whole bunch of bullet choices have been removed. There is no longer an option to choose a 77gr bullet in .32Long, the 190gr LFN and 200gr WFN bullets are gone for .357Mag handgun - and the 190gr is gone for both rifle and handgun. The CUP data is still there but the load choices are narrower.
Just my opinion but this is not an improvement at all. At first I thought they were just pruning the obsolete bullet data but it’s more than that.

 

[JohnMc]

I must be a idiot because its not working for me. I selected 38 Special, 148 grain, Hogdon, and HP-38 and got one load using a 148 grain wadcutter lead bullet. Then I use the "Add Selection" button and a new menu came up. I chose 38 Special, 158 grain, Hogdon and HP-38. After selecting the "Get Load Data" button, I had four 158 grain loads, but the 148 grain load was gone.

On Edit: I got it to work using two totally different calibers. Maybe its a data glitch when I used two close to each other.

I would be willing to bet it's browser specific and/or something to do with cookies.

 

[JohnMc]

a whole bunch of bullet choices have been removed.

That sucks.
I bet there's data missing between the old Western Powders guides and this as well.

 

[243winxb]

I can't figure out a way to select one cartridge and multiple bullet weights.

Just enter a cartridge. Get data. Its mostly all there. Or sort by bullet or powder.

For me, all the data loads very fast on tablets.. Not like the old slow site.

 

[Cheesemaker]

Seems to work OK.
Things change, that is life. Move on.

 

[LiveLife]

For me, all the data loads very fast on tablets.. Not like the old slow site.

That may have been the primary push behind the revision of the load data center ... faster page loading for handheld devices. So sacrifice a bit of functionality for faster page response. I say not too bad of trade off.

That sucks ... I bet there's data missing between the old Western Powders guides and this as well.

We have access to archived Hodgdon and Accurate load data.

I have downloaded the last version of Western Powders Handloading Guide here for THR members - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?resources/western-powders-handloading-guide-8-0-2020.27/

 

[lowcountry308]

Not a huge fan.

I do like that i can narrow shotgun loads down by selecting a primer.

 

[JohnMc]

We have access to archived Hodgdon and Accurate load data.

I have downloaded the last version of Western Powders Handloading Guide here for THR members -

I have the last few as well on my hard drive, with regular backups.

 

[Toprudder]

One problem I noticed recently ( before the format change) is with the reported barrel length used for the data. When they merged the data from Western, they did not include the barrel length used by Western, they only list the barrel length used by Hodgdon. For instance, Hodgdon used a 10” barrel for 357 mag load data, but if you go back to the original Western data you see that they used a 6” barrel. They mixed all of the Western load data in with the Hodgdon data but only list a 10” barrel for all. None of the velocity data for Western powders has changed from the original Western data. I have to imagine that other calibers are affected as well. I reported this to Hodgdon and got a “Thank you for contacting use” response.

 

[JohnMc]

One problem I noticed recently ( before the format change) is with the reported barrel length used for the data. When they merged the data from Western, they did not include the barrel length used by Western, they only list the barrel length used by Hodgdon. For instance, Hodgdon used a 10” barrel for 357 mag load data, but if you go back to the original Western data you see that they used a 6” barrel. They mixed all of the Western load data in with the Hodgdon data but only list a 10” barrel for all. None of the velocity data for Western powders has changed from the original Western data. I have to imagine that other calibers are affected as well. I reported this to Hodgdon and got a “Thank you for contacting use” response.

Good catch. That data missing is not superb.

 

[Onty]

One problem I noticed recently ( before the format change) is with the reported barrel length used for the data. When they merged the data from Western, they did not include the barrel length used by Western, they only list the barrel length used by Hodgdon. For instance, Hodgdon used a 10” barrel for 357 mag load data, but if you go back to the original Western data you see that they used a 6” barrel. They mixed all of the Western load data in with the Hodgdon data but only list a 10” barrel for all. None of the velocity data for Western powders has changed from the original Western data. I have to imagine that other calibers are affected as well. I reported this to Hodgdon and got a “Thank you for contacting use” response.

I addressed that problem with barrel lengths used for testing here "Reloading for revolvers, load data and testing proposals"
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...lvers-load-data-and-testing-proposals.916951/ .

In addition, I suggested 3 load levels; starting, 1100 fps and maximum. Plus muzzle blast level for shooter for each load. Maybe one day...

 

[jmr40]

It's different. Not better nor worse. I didn't like it the 1st time I went there, but once I figured out how to navigate the site I'm OK with it.

 

[Jim Watson]

It has discouraged me from looking up loads to reply to gunboard questions.

 

[kcofohio]

One problem I noticed recently ( before the format change) is with the reported barrel length used for the data. When they merged the data from Western, they did not include the barrel length used by Western, they only list the barrel length used by Hodgdon. For instance, Hodgdon used a 10” barrel for 357 mag load data, but if you go back to the original Western data you see that they used a 6” barrel. They mixed all of the Western load data in with the Hodgdon data but only list a 10” barrel for all. None of the velocity data for Western powders has changed from the original Western data. I have to imagine that other calibers are affected as well. I reported this to Hodgdon and got a “Thank you for contacting use” response.

It's the same for the 6.5 Grendel. Hodgdon list a 24" barrel for TAC, but Western used a 20" Test barrel. It's good to double check with the Western load data.