When did the rule about publishing powder data for reloading change and why?

[Quiet Burp]

Just solely out of interest when did the rule about publishing powder amounts for reloading change and why?

 

Doing a lot of searching on the forum last night looking up reloading for different calibres and woe betide if anyone published load data, they were piled on with "you can't post load data on the wire" and heaps of threads with the reason why the Wild Bunch wouldn't allow it for legal reasons etc and everyone was in agreement (or nearly everyone) and saying that "never will load data be allowed to be published on the Wire" etc and if someone did the forum cops would kick there arse.

Then working my way through the years, all of a sudden load data is published and not a peep out of anyone?

 

When did the rule about publishing powder amounts for reloading change and why?

 

P.S I'm for load data, thankful that I was able to find what I was after last night because CAS loads are thin on the ground in reloading manuals (though there is some) and the Wire is the perfect place to share and ask and be able to be told what others are using.

[Abilene, SASS # 27489]

I can't say for the "why" other than everybody wanted it.  The Wild Bunch forum allowed it before that.  Anyway, it was in late 2018, prompting this informative post:

 

[Quiet Burp]

Thanks Abiline (Cool alias) and thanks for the link.

 

Also there's a WB forum?????

 

I haven't ponied up for the WB gear yet, but thinking of it. 

[Abilene, SASS # 27489]

Yeah, the WB forum isn't quite as visible on the SASS home page.  You have to click on Wild Bunch first, then Forum.

https://www.sassnet.com/wildbunch/forum/index.php

[Nickel City Dude]

I believe that the reason that loading data was finally approved is that wile you couldn't put it on the forum you could send a PM to someone about the data.  I which case if the data was wrong only the sender and receiver could see it and no correction could be made.  By being able to show loading data on the open forum if the data was wrong everyone got to see it and a correction could be made.  I think that this was a good move and adds a little safety to not getting load data from only published loading manuals. 

[Driftwood Johnson, SASS #38283]

11 hours ago, Quiet Burp said:

Then working my way through the years, all of a sudden load data is published and not a peep out of anyone?

 

There sure was a peep out of me.

 

I remember clearly commenting that I did not think it a good idea to be posting load data on the wire,.

 

Too easy to make a mistake posting by an errant key stroke and accidentally post bad data.

 

Yeah, I know lots of other boards have always posted data.

 

I try to be scrupulously accurate when I post data these days.

 

And I NEVER  use data from the internet.

 

I always go to a reliable, published loading manual.

[Branchwater Jack SASS #88854]

 

[Garrison Joe, SASS #60708]

Couple of reasons why publishing "peer-tested" loading data is important to growing and supporting the SASS game.....

 

1 - Lots of new members have not been serious reloaders before, if at all.  They often don't know how to use loading data and perhaps EXTRAPOLATE down to lower velocities than most of today's loading manuals and on-line data collections want to publish.

 

2 - We ARE by our competitive practices heavily persuading shooters to shoot very light, gallery loads.   In the past, gallery loads were a common type of ammunition and loading data was often published for them by Ideal, Lyman and the powder makers.   In our age of mostly semi-auto handguns, light gallery loads and rimmed cartridge loads are NOT the major sales interest of powder manufacturers.   Very little commercial data available.   Extrapolation off the bottom end of published data sets has become common.  Squibs and other low-pressure induced failures to fire have been way too common.

 

So, rather than making beginners try to figure out on their own how to make safe low velocity loads for rimmed and even antique cartridges, posting loading data on the SASS Wire for general review and critique is about the safest path forward to help the beginning shooters safely start to build their own loads.  Especially now with continuing pressures from both supply issues and labor shortages and our (relatively small) sport's special needs.

 

Yes, we all need to be very careful about posting accurate numbers, edit-checking other pards suggestions, and adding the warnings appropriate to low velocity loading.   But I think we have been able to keep the game alive during this very rough couple of years where commercial pistol loads have been VERY hard to come by, through enabling most pards to reload their own.

 

good luck, GJ

 

 

[twelve mile REB]

A change in ownership may have been a contributing factor.

[Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933]

7 hours ago, Garrison Joe, SASS #60708 said:

"peer-tested" loading data

 

That was part of the problem.  Peer-tested just means someone did it no matter how dumb it might have been.  No pressure testing or any other actual "data."

 

 

7 minutes ago, twelve mile REB said:

A change in ownership may have been a contributing factor.

 

What change in ownership?  The owners on the corporation papers are still the same.

[twelve mile REB]

3 hours ago, Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 said:

 

That was part of the problem.  Peer-tested just means someone did it no matter how dumb it might have been.  No pressure testing or any other actual "data."

 

 

 

What change in ownership?  The owners on the corporation papers are still the same.

Management

[Happy Jack, SASS #20451]

The SASS incorporation papers in IN do not show the previous owners of SASS, just Misty.

[Matthew Duncan]

6 hours ago, Happy Jack, SASS #20451 said:

The SASS incorporation papers in IN do not show the previous owners of SASS, just Misty.

You left out that Misty is listed as CEO.

[Constable Nelson #11784]

On 1/23/2022 at 11:49 AM, Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 said:

 

That was part of the problem.  Peer-tested just means someone did it no matter how dumb it might have been.  No pressure testing or any other actual "data."

 

 

 

 

I'm with Larsen on this one.    It seems to me to be one thing for us to load ammo that is right off the official  charts for OURSELVES...and another thing entirely to represent these online as "safe" or in any way "tested" in the way loading manual loads are .... Especially to new reloaders!     Doesn't that seem even vaguely worrying? 

[July Smith]

Hodgdon, IMR, and Alliant all have excellent and current load data online for all of their powders in all of the various SASS calibers.  Every gun store I have ever been in has had the latest manuals from Speer, Hornady, and Lyman.  Many reloading die sets come with reloading data.  There is no excuse to not have this information at your fingertips while reloading.

 

Some of the worst reloading advice I have ever heard has come from SASS members.  A lot of guys seem fixated that the perfect load is .2 grains above what is otherwise a squib (actual advice given to me at a club).  I've even been told by club members that they need to increase their "ideal" load by a few 10ths of a grain in colder weather to prevent squibs before dialing it back in warmer months.

 

Stick with published loads in reputable reloading manuals/powder manufacturers websites and you will be fine.

[John Kloehr]

Section 230 established forums (like this one) are not liable for content posted by members. This protection applies to a lot of content posted by forum members.

 

Don't know if this was a factor for the change on this forum, but prior to this legislation, this forum could theoretically have been held liable for a member blowing up their gun or hand or face...

[Garrison Joe, SASS #60708]

On 1/25/2022 at 7:30 AM, July Smith said:

Stick with published loads in reputable reloading manuals/powder manufacturers websites and you will be fine.

 

Many low end loads on-line and in print are very non-competitive - but many shooters want something lighter.    They can experiment on their own, or they can use what other SASS members submit as workable in their own experience .  We now enable the second choice.  Haven't seen anyone try to claim the loads placed on the wire are tested to the same level as commercial loads developed with access to calibrated pressure testing equipment.

 

If the range of published loads satisfies their needs, great.   So many ask for something lighter, though.   Usually there is a safe load lower than commercially tested ranges, but not always.  Better to know that by reported experience than having to find out on their own what is squibby.   

 

Almost none of our shooting endangers shooter or others, as long as bullets don't stick in barrels and another round is fired.  This is NOT  typical centerfire cartridge loading, where a common error is to damage firearms with overpressure.  If a SASS reloader prevents double charging, he's probably not going to hurt  a firearm or person(s).

 

ALL loading should be done with an eye toward the velocity and pressure signs that metallic cartridges will provide, however. 

 

And, YOU should verify by a check against what ever references you trust that a load makes sense.   Even if your favorite top notch competitor says it's great.

 

good luck, GJ

[Constable Nelson #11784]

On 1/26/2022 at 11:02 AM, Garrison Joe, SASS #60708 said:

 

Many low end loads on-line and in print are very non-competitive - but many shooters want something lighter.    They can experiment on their own, or they can use what other SASS members submit as workable in their own experience .  We now enable the second choice.  Haven't seen anyone try to claim the loads placed on the wire are tested to the same level as commercial loads developed with access to calibrated pressure testing equipment.

 

 

Nor have I .... but, conversely, when posting here do we see folks ALWAYS emphasising that they are well off the published load charts?  OR...are new shooters/reloaders left with the IMPRESSION that these loads are completely kosher?  I suspect that IS often  the case...   Beginner loaders don't have the knowledge to even know what to question...... and sites like this can seem very authoritative..  

[Pee Wee #15785]

I like the https://oregontrailbullets.com/xcart/images/filemanager/uploads/otbc-load-manual.pdf load manual.   I use this manual if not loading black powder/777