So, you don't want to check it in your gun?
You say it is unsafe because the bullet isn't seated a full caliber into the case, is longer than the maximum OAL (which doesn't exist in wildcats because there is no standard) but nowhere do you say the round won't chamber in your gun. If you have a case headspace gauge and you measure the distance from the breach to the rifling then you should know whether it will fit in your gun. If it does fit in your chamber (without hitting the lands) then it mat not be unsafe - even in your gun.

Cool down people.

No personal attacks please.

Definition of "NUT" is weird, every one of us here are a bit weird.


ArlenGood, thank you for pointing out the error in the manual to us, in this you have done well.
But attacking fellow nuts here on a discussion, I personally think you are barking at the wrong tree.
Maybe it is people at Hodgon you ought to educate.

somewhere back in dark recesses of my diminishing memory I recall a comment reguarding the 8mm mauser round that went along the lines of.....
If you want to get the most out of this round you need to load it as the Germans did with bullet seated out as far as possible to maximize case capacity............
as Gel has said cool off guys and keep it civil
Paul.......every load has potential to be unsafe in a different rifle thats why warnings are given in load data recommending you start low and work up.
if the load given was used AS IS by a loader like myself who switches projectiles willy nilly as long as weight is the same..it could well cause issues and I take my hat off to this chap for having intestinal fortitude to say"hey guys if using this be careful and be aware this MAY be an issue"

Errors in reloading information are not common but they happen. Arelen's post was a heads up and it reminds us all to double check our loading data no matter the source. Paul, as usual is being methodical and looking for additional information. I thank both for the contribution they make to making reloading safe for all of us. If I was loading 200 grain bullets in a 357 Herrett I would be checking my max OAL now regardless of what any reloading manual says.

MacD wrote:

Errors in reloading information are not common but they happen. Arelen's post was a heads up and it reminds us all to double check our loading data no matter the source. Paul, as usual is being methodical and looking for additional information. I thank both for the contribution they make to making reloading safe for all of us. If I was loading 200 grain bullets in a 357 Herrett I would be checking my max OAL now regardless of what any reloading manual says.

Sage words Mac...both guys are saying good things, and most importantly Arlen and Paul are imparting the benefit of their vast experience onto us,,,well done guys.

Arlen,
I am sorry if I seemed to push too hard - I certainly didn't mean to anger you.

The rest of you Nuts - I'm sorry to have brought drama like this to the board.

Paul ...apologies as well. I'm not angry at you so don't worry about it I'd rather be in a group of strong-willed men than with a herd of sheep.

The Chief Ballistician at Hodgdon is aware of the issue and is researching the measurements but changes come slowly. The folks at Hornady say that 2.400" is the longest any 357 Herrett round should be, especially with their bullets.

Arlen,

Unfortunately you may find that Hodgdons response is nothing more than the sound of crickets. I attempted to clarify something very similar 4 1/2 years ago. And this was about 4 years after first noticing the "issue".

Their 6.5x55 SE data shows a 160g Hornady RN at 3.000" for all Winchester and Hodgdon brand powders. However, for the IMR powders it lists 3.300". SAAMI max COAL is 3.150" for the 6.5x55 SE and 3.300" leaves less than 1 calibers worth of bullet length in the case. Most older military rifles are throated for a 160 grain bullet but I can't imagine even one of them where a length of 3.300" isn't severely jammed into the lands.

While I haven't used the Hornady 160g RN I have used the Sierra 160g SMP (semi-point) which is a slightly tapered RN. So I imagine a full round nosed bullet would contact the lands at a shorter COAL even than the SMP. In my rifle the Sierra SMP hits the lands at 3.000" and I load it 2.990".

I doubt I could even chamber a Hornady 160g RN at 3.300"!

Hodgdon's response to my e-mail...? Absolutely nothing. It was simply ignored.

Hopefully you have better luck with them than I did.

Just a point of clarification.

My rifle is a modern CZ 550 American which is throated shorter than the older military mausers. I imagine a 160g RN could be seated further out than 3.000" without hitting the lands in a longer throated military mauser but I still can't imagine a scenario where 3.300" is an acceptable COAL for that bullet!

Azar ...now that someone has brought it up, I have something to say about Hodgdon (this may be of interest should anyone think about talking to the folks at Hodgdon). First, so that we have something to compare ...the folks at Hornady were absolutely outstanding in there willingness to listen, offer advice, talk for awhile and make suggestions. I spoke with a couple of people and they were energetic, knowledgeable and really interested in everything I was talking about. I got the impression that they really liked their job.
The folks at Hodgdon did not seem the least bit interested. One complained about getting over 700 emails a day from people who don't know anything. Another told me that they "might" look into the issue ...if they get the time. I was also told that they are pretty sure that their data is accurate and that I probably made a mistake. Every person, without exception, that I spoke with at Hodgdon (3 people over 2 weeks) seemed annoyed, sleepy, uninterested and arrogant. And I have yet to get any email response from them.
Hornady ...magnificent!!
The bottom line is, I don't trust Hodgdon data. I will use it as a starting point but much like a horse that hasn't been ridden much...I don't use it right out of the barn.

Unfortunately, that has been their M.O. when I have dealt with them. I have never called them, but sent them three or more e-mails over the years. Of the three I can recall of the top of my head, two were completely ignored and the other the response came across as annoyed and a bit condescending.

I don't bother contacting Hodgdon anymore. Perhaps that's what they wanted all along. To be left alone and not be bothered by their customers...

Azar, ironic you brought uo 6.5x55 Swede. My CG63 has a short throat also. I was going to use as an example the 139 grain match bullets. Every source I could locate gives an OAL of 3.150. I have been shooting PRVI 139 grainers but the maximum OAL I can use with these is 3.125 before I jam into the lands. My son has a original Swede Mauser. His chamber will easily accept 3.150 with the same bullet. The lesson here is know your chamber and check each bullet. When rolling your own nothing should be taken for granted. I found one Hodgdon load for 308 that just wouldn't fit into the brass I was using. It actually overflowed the case. The problem was a compressed load in the brass they used became more than the NATO brass I was reloading. My conclusion was the powder was too bulky and therefore a stretch for 308.

Mac, you will find military cases, (certainly 7.62mm), have a slightly lesser capacity than "civilian" cases because the brass around the web in the case is a little thicker. An easy way to test the capacity is by measuring the water volume of the case concerned. This slightly reduced capacity can cause pressure problems when loaded with a full load of powder used in a "civilian" case.

The external dimensions of the .308 Winchester and the 7.60x51 NATO cartridge are identical in every way, and completely interchangeable, the differences being the web of the military cartridge is thicker near the base, creating a lower internal capacity, thus necessitating a smaller powder charge to achieve identical ballistics, and a slightly larger chamber dimension, due to the nature of military use; dirt, dust, mud, and sand inevitably being ever-present on the battlefield.

.308 vs 7.62mm x 51mm NATO

I repeat and stress:

THE MILITARY CASES HAVE A SMALLER INTERNAL CAPACITY, AND THEREFOR THEY MUST BE LOADED TO A LESSER POWDER CHARGE THAN THE CIVILIAN CASES OR YOU MAY ENCOUNTER A DANGEROUS VERTICLE PRESSURE CURVE THAT CAN TURN YOUR RIFLE INTO SHRAPNEL. ALL ONCE-FIRED MILITARY BRASS SHOULD BE FULL LENGTH SIZED, AND THE PRIMER CRIMP MUST BE DE-BURRED, BEFORE YOU TRY TO RELOAD.

same with .223