NRA And Handloading

The NRA requested this as far as I know. I don’t think the club is making a judgement - particularly if it comes from a published source.
And how do they know it comes from a published source, you could just give them a load from one of the powder manufactures to satisfy them and then load whatever you like.

all getting very silly.

Just imagine if the rest of life was so focused on preventing a very low risk accidents, virtually whatever you purchased or use would need you to have done a course. Can I see your screwdriver certificate of competence before I allow you to use it please sir or madam? Your making a cake, can I please see the source data incase it may poison you.

Next move of the NRA ban home loads as unsafe with the goal to sell more ammunition.
 
And how do they know it comes from a published source, you could just give them a load from one of the powder manufactures to satisfy them and then load whatever you like.

Integrity of their members?

all getting very silly

Anyone can tell a fib - or make an error while loading. If under scrutiny though perhaps people will think twice about winging it, or using unreliable data.
 
Last edited:
Integrity of their members? 😂😂😂



Anyone an tell a fib - or make an error while loading. If under scrutiny though perhaps people will think twice about winging it, or using unreliable data.

Accidents happen, fortunately they are very very rare with home loading, why use a sledge hammer to crack a nut?

what’s under scrutiny? NRA standing over you why you load your ammunition, NRA testing one or two out of a 150 you are about to shoot, oh but hang on the error I made in reloading was not in the one or two they just tested so they better shoot all 150, all good now, I did not make an error, so crack on but, now have no ammunition to shoot.

Why would anybody use unreliable data, their has never been easier access to free manufacture data due to the internet then at anytime, read and digest the warnings follow the guidance they give, if you are not responsible enough to do that then you are not cutout to home load.
Why would a novice not follow such data and guidance or want to go out ot their way to load unsafe ammunition, once experienced enough to then benefit from tweaking the data to get the best from their rifle.

When did “winging it or using unreliable data“ when using an explosive become part of the home loading way?
 
Well I guess I could work backwards from what the Proof House used to test my K250 wildcat based on the 6X47SM case, but if not, any “published data” would by definition need to have emanated from this office as designer (I use the word advisedly) of said one-off chambering.

Something of a minefield for all owners of non-standard factory chamberings.

K
 
The NRA has been going around with their Labradar, checking velocities and pulling apart cartridges at Bisley. Not frequent but it does happen and has happened to two of my fellow club members.

I was party to a conversation that included an experienced competitive shooter, his assertion was the max load given in the manufacturers' load tables was his start point in load development. Similarly, I was discussing blow by in my .303, which I blamed on loose chambering, the chap I was talking to from a well-known gunsmith asked what load I was using, I said the max in the Viht tables 38.4gr, he said Viht were very conservative and I should add in half a grain so the case really expands and seals. I didn't, I stuck with the max published load and sent some cases to be annealed, which did help. I'm not saying it was bad advice, but it was anecdotal and not auditable and not something I could use in my defence if I had an accident.

I'm guessing that accidents happen for two reasons, one is deliberately loading hot for performance, the other is making a mistake due to a lack of understanding. I'm guessing the former is more likely with top-end target shooters and the latter for the rest of us.

Going back to the training course, a couple of bits of advice stick out, don't use Amrikan load data, we have a system of proofing in this country which they don't have. Their approach may include looking for pressure signs and backing off, we should never get near having pressure signs on the case. Then understand what you are doing, case thickness and thus capacity makes a big difference, use a load which nearly fills a case so it's obvious if you double fill, weigh all the completed cases, anything 20+gr out has got no powder and will be a squib, bullet seating depth also make a difference use the published COL. The load tables from manufacturers take all this into account and give a safe load.

I was simulating loads in GRT and taking the default .223 case volume of 31gr and then putting in my actual case volume of 30gr, the peak pressure difference with the same load was 9.3%.

I remain against compulsion but I don't know where you learn all of this without training.

Next move of the NRA ban home loads as unsafe with the goal to sell more ammunition.
I hope not it would cut the amount I shoot in half or push me away from my service rifles towards a .223, however, I can see them requiring training in the near future, after all, we live in a culture where there is zero-tolerance for risk and while shooting is an incredibly safe sport, probably the safest in the country, the perception of it is that it is dangerous.
 
The standard criticism of the NRA/Bisley has always puzzled me
‘It’s a money making exercise’

When it’s tuition So what? Training costs money to deliver.

The NRA has many failings providing tuition isn’t one of them. Could be said it’s what they do best.
 
I'm guessing that accidents happen for two reasons, one is deliberately loading hot for performance,

I can potentially understand the need for loading hot performance loads for big game shooting, but seriously for paper punching on a NRA range is that necessary or even desirable? In my experience the most accurate loads are very often not maximum loads. Must be getting old if the current thinking in hand loading is to ignore manufactures data warnings and advice and push to the very limits and beyond of a cartridge performance. If doing that then surly change to a more appropriate calibre operating within its design envelope.
 
Considering that millions of shots are fired at Bisley each year, has anyone got data showing the number of annual accidents caused by factory ammunition (such as the faulty GGG 155gr .308 cartridges that the NRA shop is currently selling and that blew up my pals rifle) versus the the number of annual accidents caused by handloaded ammunition. Until we get these data it is difficult to draw conclusions about the relative risk of factory ammunition vs handloaded ammunition.
 
Approximately 1000 people per year die from falling down stairs. We urgently need a stair operator course.

Considering how I failed a £500 per day, 3 day shoelace tying course for work and had to re-sit, I would strongly recommend taking the course material seriously and studying for the assessment.

:rofl:
 
I can potentially understand the need for loading hot performance loads for big game shooting

I load my .375 H&H for DG [and PG]. I would never consider loading hot. All my loads remain within powder/projectile specs.

Every reloader [whether shooting target or quarry] loads for safety and accuracy, surely. And I cannot see that anyone would trade either of those for higher MV/Pmax.

Certainly, hitting a DG target accurately is of primary importance to me.
 
I'm guessing that accidents happen for two reasons, one is deliberately loading hot for performance,

I can potentially understand the need for loading hot performance loads for big game shooting, but seriously for paper punching on a NRA range is that necessary or even desirable? In my experience the most accurate loads are very often not maximum loads. Must be getting old if the current thinking in hand loading is to ignore manufactures data warnings and advice and push to the very limits and beyond of a cartridge performance. If doing that then surly change to a more appropriate calibre operating within its design envelope.
I think it's probably the Amrikan influence from YouTube and the like for 'F' Class and long-distance. When you see some of Eric Cortina's videos about his 1,000yd grouping, it is easy to think more speed is the way to emulate. Plus the faster it goes, the flatter it shoots which is a holy grail of long-distance target shooting.
Considering that millions of shots are fired at Bisley each year, has anyone got data showing the number of annual accidents caused by factory ammunition (such as the faulty GGG 155gr .308 cartridges that the NRA shop is currently selling and that blew up my pals rifle) versus the the number of annual accidents caused by handloaded ammunition. Until we get these data it is difficult to draw conclusions about the relative risk of factory ammunition vs handloaded ammunition.
There were 3 major hand-loading incidents at Bisley last year, that they have reported. Surprisingly, they haven't reported on the number of old rifles whose bolts needed fixing after an encounter with the hot primers in GGG.
 
Plus the faster it goes, the flatter it shoots which is a holy grail of long-distance target shooting.
The drops are generally huge anyway, and the ranges are known. I get the impression that the 'need for speed' is combined with the use of slippery bullets to try to reduce the influence of the wind - a much harder factor to manage.

I guess the flatter trajectory is not infrequently a side-effect of this persuit, of course.
 
Back
Top