Reduced Recoil Loads

Disclaimer: This Web site's authors, editors and publisher have no control over the assembly of ammunition, arms it is to be fired in or how the resulting ammunition may be used. Therefore, no responsibility, either implied or expressed, is assumed for the use of any of the loading and reloading data on this site.
MSHunter
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:32 am

Reduced Recoil Loads

Postby MSHunter » Sun Jul 03, 2011 12:26 pm

Here is a question for you more experienced reloaders.
On Hodgdon's website they have a sheet of youth/reduced recoil loads. In the paragraph before the load data they state that a medium burning powder be used and that the amount of powder to use be 60% of the maximum load. They recommend this for any load that uses H4198 powder. So my question(s) is/are as follows: Does one select the maximum load within each bullet range and use the 60% rule? For instance a 100 grn bullet has a maximum charge ranging from 59.4 grns of powder to 47.3 grns of powder and H4198 is listed as a powder. So do I base the 60% calculation on the 59.4 grns and use that as a starting point for a reduced recoil load?
"This is the world we are born into -- we should never let that slip away from us. May it never cease to stimulate, inspire and humble us." from Stalking & Still-Hunting: The Ground Hunter's Bible by G. Fred Asbell

User avatar
shaman
 
Posts: 2478
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 12:38 am

Re: Reduced Recoil Loads

Postby shaman » Sun Jul 10, 2011 5:12 am

First off, that 60% rule only applies to H4895. You're using H4198, which is a considerably faster powder. I would not interpret what Hodgdon says at the top of that sheet applying to any powder. In fact, go back and read the last couple of sentences. Switch to H4895 and you're back on track.

I use H4895 exclusively for all my deer loads. Part of it is that I have kids and we did a lot with reduced loads over the years. Second: It is an extremely consistent powder and has lowest shot-to-shot velocity difference of any powder I have used.

The 60% rule is for unpublished cartridges. Example, let's say you had a 270 WSM and you wanted your 8 year old daughter to try it. First off, pick the smaller bullet (90 grains) The published MAX is 56.5 grains of H4895 . 60% of the MAX of H4895 is 33.9. grains-- There's your safe yute load. However that's only for H4895 and only for cartridges that have Hodgdon-supplied data including H4895

The 60% rule is probably a bottom-end limit based on the rare-but-possible problem of detonation. If you take a really-really slow powder and throw a really-really light load occasionally that load is going to detonate instead of burn. There is little known about what causes this effect, but there are a bunch of things you can do to prevent it: Use a faster burning powder, fill the case as much as you can, etc. H4895 does a really great job at reduced loads, but there is no sense tempting fate-- hence the 60% rule.

Let's look at it another way: The 30-06 150grain MIN load is roughly equal to a 30-30 WIN. There's nothing wrong with a 30-30 WIN, but there are a lot of good deer rifles between 30-30 and 30-06. 300 Savage is one. If you knock off only about 8% of the MAX load of a standard 30-06 150 grain H4895 load you end up with something roughly equivalent of a 300 Savage. It will drill a deer nicely out to 200 yards and still give you only a small jolt on the shoulder. The fact of the matter is that you can usually take a load that is 5-10% off the MAX load for H4895 or any medium powder and come up with a light-recoil load that has nearly the same velocity as its full-house progenitor.

All my deer rifles are loaded in that way, and it is one of the main reasons I got into reloading. Most guys reload to get the absolute maximum out of there rifles. Me? I'm looking at how low I can go. My 308 WIN shoots at 300 Savage levels. My 30-06 is about 5 % off max. My 35 Whelen? It is shooting at about 358 WIN levels. Most of the shoulder-busting recoil of most deer rifles occurs in reaching the last few FPS of the MAX.

Can you do that with ANY powder? H4198? It depends. As we all know, once you get off the published data, you're kind of putting your butt (and face) on the line. However, you have the MIN load to work from. Reloaders are always supposed to start at a reasonable minimum (10% of MAX) and work up. Now with some powders, there is a greater variance in velocity at lighter loads. Some powders do not work well unless they nearly fill the cartridge. H4895 just happens to be really good at burning consistently. I am not familiar with H4198. But you could cook up some 10%off Max load and see what you get. Don't go smaller than the published MIN load.

Remember that bullet size has a lot to do with developing light loads. If you have a 270 WIN, for instance, you can knock a lot of recoil off going from a 150 grain bullet down a 100 grain.
Genesis 9:2-4 Ministries of SW Bracken County, KY
Confessions of a Cervid Serial Killer
Image

MSHunter
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Reduced Recoil Loads

Postby MSHunter » Sun Jul 10, 2011 5:37 pm

Hi Shaman,
Thanks for the reply. I meant to type H4895, but I was looking at a load manual and transposed my numbers. I seem to do this more and more the older I get. Anyhow, Thanks for the reply and the timely information. You're spot on as always.

Thanks.
"This is the world we are born into -- we should never let that slip away from us. May it never cease to stimulate, inspire and humble us." from Stalking & Still-Hunting: The Ground Hunter's Bible by G. Fred Asbell

User avatar
shaman
 
Posts: 2478
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 12:38 am

Re: Reduced Recoil Loads

Postby shaman » Mon Jul 11, 2011 4:29 am

Cool. I was a little worried.

By the way: In talking about this topic, we managed to unlock one of the great secrets of reloading. Let's say you want 30-06 performance without the recoil. Buy a 300 WIN MAG and reload to 30-06 specs. VIOLA! (How'd she get in here?) You've got a light recoil 30-06. I'm greatly over simplifying. However, the general principle is correct. Pressure and recoil are closely related. So as you give the powder a larger case in which to expand, you reduce pressure and therefore recoil.
Genesis 9:2-4 Ministries of SW Bracken County, KY
Confessions of a Cervid Serial Killer
Image

Dan Salmon
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 7:52 am

Re: Reduced Recoil Loads

Postby Dan Salmon » Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:56 pm

Pressure has little to do with the recoil produced by the round.

Look at a 12 gauge Slug for example.

A 12 gauge slug can only produce 11,500 psi of pressure and stay within SAAMI specifications. But, the 12 gauge slug will pound the living crap out of you compared to a .30-30 Winchester in the 30,000 to 40,000 psi of pressure level that it is loaded to under SAAMI specifcations.

User avatar
shaman
 
Posts: 2478
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 12:38 am

Re: Reduced Recoil Loads

Postby shaman » Tue Jul 12, 2011 4:39 am

I'm sorry. I didn't mean it that quite that way. You're absolutely right-- at least in some ways. What you're describing is a change in mass of the projectile. That will certainly increase recoil regardless of pressure. What I'm talking about is the change that occurs as you begin to load closer and closer to the maximum safe load. All of a sudden you see a spike in the pressure and this is accompanied by a big jump in the felt recoil. This is also when you start seeing pressure signs like pierced or flattened primers.

Going in the other direction, backing away from the MAX load , the pressures go down dramatically and you also get a marked reduction in recoil. It is not a linear thing. Reducing your load just a little can reduce recoil dramatically.

One other tip: if you're looking at a reloading table and see two loads with similar velocities published for the MAX, one will have a higher pressure than the other. The higher pressure usually indicates higher recoil.
Genesis 9:2-4 Ministries of SW Bracken County, KY
Confessions of a Cervid Serial Killer
Image


Return to Reloading

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests