• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Sierra Load Data Online

JEFFPPC said:
I am a Sierra bullet guy. But their loading manual, a joke. Too many lawyers. Oh, thats pretty much whats wrong with society today. Too many lawyers infiltrating every aspect of life. Totally non productive worthless eaters.
Click to expand...
gdbleb said:
These data references are getting so conservative you cannot equal MV's printed on factory ammo.
Click to expand...
It so easy to blame lawyers but the truth is that that has little to do with the perceived "conservatism" in modern reloading manuals. What has changed over the years is what the loads and velocities are based on in the manuals. In Sierra's case the first edition stated that the data was from commercial rifles and based on not seeing pressure signs. The data was not based on any pressure testing. If you fast forward to the fifth edition you find a mixture of testing. The 223 Load Data is based on shooting in a Remington 600 rifle (commercial rifle) so the data is probably not pressure tested and velocity is obtained from a chronograph. We don't know which or if the data is based on one or more bullets. Move to the Sixth Edition and the data is based on a Universal Receiver and is probably using a test barrel incremented for actual pressure measurement and most probably to SAAMI test requirements. Looking for pressure signs will typically result in higher pressures than SAAMI pressure limits.

It is not so much that lawyers are making the decisions it that the legal environment is making it more critical that the data published is defendable to some quantitative standard than to some qualitative standard.

As for published muzzle velocities on ammunition that velocity is based on the pressure/velocity test per SAAMI and is from a test barrel that has minimum chamber dimensions and bore area or are a target loading velocity, not lot specific velocity. Most barrels will exceed those dimensions and thus result in lower pressures and velocity.
 
Doom said:
It so easy to blame lawyers but the truth is that that has little to do with the perceived "conservatism" in modern reloading manuals. What has changed over the years is what the loads and velocities are based on in the manuals. In Sierra's case the first edition stated that the data was from commercial rifles and based on not seeing pressure signs. The data was not based on any pressure testing. If you fast forward to the fifth edition you find a mixture of testing. The 223 Load Data is based on shooting in a Remington 600 rifle (commercial rifle) so the data is probably not pressure tested and velocity is obtained from a chronograph. We don't know which or if the data is based on one or more bullets. Move to the Sixth Edition and the data is based on a Universal Receiver and is probably using a test barrel incremented for actual pressure measurement and most probably to SAAMI test requirements. Looking for pressure signs will typically result in higher pressures than SAAMI pressure limits.

It is not so much that lawyers are making the decisions it that the legal environment is making it more critical that the data published is defendable to some quantitative standard than to some qualitative standard.

As for published muzzle velocities on ammunition that velocity is based on the pressure/velocity test per SAAMI and is from a test barrel that has minimum chamber dimensions and bore area or are a target loading velocity, not lot specific velocity. Most barrels will exceed those dimensions and thus result in lower pressures and velocity.
Click to expand...
Make all the excuses you want. We have a legal system manipulated by lawyers, lawsuits dreamed up by lawyers hoping for crazy awards from emotional juries so they, the lawyers can get rich. We have lawyers making careers from lawsuits for reasons that common sense folks would never think of. You confirmed my thoughts in paragraph two. You should run for office, you will fit right in, stop apologizing for our insane as you call it, legal environment. Thus we get a pretty worthless loading manual from Sierra. I did forget the rest of the problem , greed and the desire for a quick buck expecially by those who think they are entitled.
 
Texas Solo said:
Sierra data sucks unless you use Sierra bullets. They have no data for anything else.
I was looking for 9mm data with lead bullets. There's nothing in their manual.
I called them to ask. They said they don't give data for bullets they don't make.
Click to expand...
IMO it's understandable. I wouldn't call a Ford dealership for service advice on a Toyota.
 
Manuals ALWAYS have been a starting point for a powder/bullet combination. Nothing more Nothing less. Your firearm will tell you what it likes and how much is too much.
Bickering over who's Manuals are "up to snuff" is a waste of time.
 
Very conservative loads, not a great resource for actual load development, but somewhat helpful.

For example, I was looking for load data for 221 Fireball with AA1680, and Sierra's max load was the same as the starting load on the Hodgdon / Accurate site, pretty amazing difference. I think lawyers are engaged in this process at Sierra.
 
Last edited:
CJ6 said:
Manuals ALWAYS have been a starting point for a powder/bullet combination. Nothing more Nothing less. Your firearm will tell you what it likes and how much is too much.
Bickering over who's Manuals are "up to snuff" is a waste of time.
Click to expand...
Yep
 
For everyone saying they reduced loads or manuals may be lawyered up, that might be true. On the Hornady podcast they said that older manuals have gotten revised down because they were created before every company had equipment to measure pressure. They dont get pressure by looking for signs on the brass. They directly measure it. If you see signs on the brass you would find you are far over pressure if you had the equipment to measure it.

Is that true? I don't know, but it makes sense. I still think they would back off max saami pressure for the data they publish due to powder lot variation etc. Hornady claims they dont. That is where they hit max saami is what they said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Classified Ads

Forum statistics

Threads
165,976
Messages
2,207,215
Members
79,237
Latest member
claydunbar

Share This Page

Back
Top