Reduced Rifle Loads

Discussion in 'The Ammo & Reloading Forum' started by drymag, Feb 15, 2017 at 12:46 PM.

  1. drymag

    drymag Well-Known Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2013
    Messages:
    3,797
    Catching up on my Handloader magazine (Feb 2017 No. 306 p40-47). After reading the article, it seemed interesting to try since it will save some powder (cost) for the type of shooting I usually do when velocity isn't a need. It seemed it would also make my barrel last a bit longer. I arbitrarily picked the 308. What I found from their "Select Reduced Loads" was my reloading manuals all had start grains down from their preferred reduced grains. Not sure why they called their listed reduced as reduced. In fact, they were closer to the max side. Using their statement, " down to 60% of max" left me with significantly way less powder (about 15 grains) and that seems to me to be an explosive potential. They were referencing the single based powders like 4895. They did mention their reduced loads were not safe w/ IMR-4895 but ok w/ H-4895. So I am not seeing how they can call the 60% of max as safe when the number from my manuals places the grains significantly down from their posted which are not reduced per my manuals. Am I mis-reading this article for those that have the article?
    Note: They listed their 308 reduced at:
    Barnes TTSX 130 bullet, IMR-4895, 45.0 grains, Fed 210 primer, 2.799 oal, muzz vel 2849.
     

  2. drymag

    drymag Well-Known Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2013
    Messages:
    3,797
    Lyman 130gr at oal 2.690 using imr-4895 w/ 47.0 grains max places the 60% of max at 28.2 grains. That just seems explosive. The article says their number of grains is 45.0 (yet Lymans start is 43.0 grains (lower than the articles reduced load). The longer oal w/ 28.2 makes the explosion in the case that much worse if the 28.2 (which is the 60% of max) was used. I'm just not getting their position of 60% of max as a working number when they ended up a/ 45 grains. It just isn't computing for me.
     
  3. slayer

    slayer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,949
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    I have ran some of hodgons youth loads through my 300 win mag with H-4895. I believe I loaded 23gr (IIRC)under a nosler 125gr BT. They worked as advertised. Extremely low recoil and very accurate at 75yds. I only ran about 20 rounds because by the following year my son was big enough to handle full power loads.
     
  4. sharps4590

    sharps4590 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2013
    Messages:
    3,247
    Location:
    Missouri Ozarks
    It isn't what a fella thinks, it's what is fact. Given how litigious society is today I sincerely doubt Hodgon would put out that information if it had not been thoroughly tested. Hodgon and 4895 aren't the only powders that have tested, recommended reduced loads.

    I use a pile of reduced loads, cast and jacketed bullets, and have for decades. Nary the first problem. By the same token, if a fella isn't comfortable and confident doing something and/or hasn't done the research into the subject at hand, I wouldn't do it.
     
    joe45c and slayer like this.
  5. soundguy

    soundguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2012
    Messages:
    15,651
    Location:
    florida
    And if searching for reduced loads, you can always go with trailboss 70% fill of free space under projectile.
     
    joe45c likes this.
  6. Don Fischer

    Don Fischer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2016
    Messages:
    418
    I shoot greatly reduced loads in my 308 and 30-06. But they are with cast bullet's. I see no reason at all to load any cartridge below it's best potential unless you might be a competitive shooter. If you want a 243, don't load your 308 down to it, get a 243!
     
  7. res45

    res45 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Messages:
    216
    Location:
    NC
    I hardly ever shoot reduced loads using jacketed bullets in fact I hardly ever shoot jacketed bullets at all. I have boxes of J bullets I've had for 10 years or more since I started casting my own bullets for those calibers an haven't found a reason since to use those jacketed bullets,but they will be there when or if I need them. Reduced loads especially if you only have one or two rifle and your on a limited budget firearm wise do have a place for general purpose plinking and shooting or introducing individuals that might be recoil sensitive to larger caliber rifles till they can grown into them.
     
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Ammo & Reloading Forum reduced loads Mar 18, 2016
The Ammo & Reloading Forum Reloading for reduced case volume cases? Jan 17, 2015
The Ammo & Reloading Forum Reduced 45 acp loads Feb 12, 2014
The Ammo & Reloading Forum Smutty cases on reduced loads Dec 20, 2013
The Ammo & Reloading Forum Muzzle breaks = reduced recoil May 27, 2013