Difference in bullet brands

[Dietrich]

I have not been reloading for as long as a lot of the folks here and I was just wondering.When I use a recipe for say,.45 cal. 230gr.bullet,I usually look in my Speer reloading manual.Sometimes I use other manuals but let`s just say Speer.They load with Speer bullets and Speer brass.Therefore,is there a great amount of difference if I use a different brand of brass like Winchester or Remington and a bullet of the same type [JHP] and weight but from Precision Delta? Or is it something I don`t even need to worry about? I`m probably being an old lady about this but old ladies don`t injure themselves with piss poor reloading practices.The older I get the more careful I become.[I seem to get hornier too but that`s another thread,another day.] Thank you for your input.

[Bawanna]

I use the recipe for like bullets in same weights. I don't think any loading data exist specifically for say Precision Delta. So I just use my Speer or Hornady book for the same weight / style.
Say a fmj 230 gr bullet. I try to find a load chart for a hollow point in similar fashion if I can but if not I just consider it a jacketed bullet. The main difference there would be the overall length.

Same with lead. I just make sure not to use jacketed data for lead bullets etc.

[OldLincoln]

Given the advent of on-line recipes why do you need a book? I looked through my books then went to a couple powder sites and printed them out. I watched a bunch of how-to videos and read press manuals, etc., with forum help filled in most of the blanks I had.

True I missed setting up the scale at eye level, but it was missing from all else I had read and the videos showed it sitting on the table like mine. Bawanna and others said they had theirs on a shelf but I thought that was to keep them out of the way.

[100percent]

Bullet length and nose shape can make a difference in how much space is in the loaded cartridge. A HP or a truncated cone is going to be probably longer than a round nose. If you load them all to the same overall length you could well in up with a higher pressure round when you use the longer bullet.

I think it is important.

Old Lincoln. I always look in both of my books and may look online too for a load. A book like lymans was written by people who actually tested the pressure and velocity of a round. There are sites where users submit data. How much do you trust something that "may" not be verified.

[MW surveyor]

^^^^What he said^^^^

Really depends on the molds that each of the bullet mfgs use. There is a difference in same grain weights in the same design of the bullets. Example for me - RNL bullets - two different mfgs, same length bullet, same weight bullet, way different ogives. Enough to make a difference in the seating depth when not using a flat set in the bullet seating die.

I do not use "pet loads" submitted by people on sites such as handloads.com . Rather work out my own. I will take some suggestions with my revolver loads though as long as they are for target type loads. Also, for loads for my semi-autos as long as they are target type loads.

[Tilos]

100precent is, well, 100 percent correct.
The bullet shape also determines the length of engagement of the rifling, and this affects pressure too.
With 2 bullets of the same weight, the shorter bullet will hae a longer engagement length, as I think the only variance would be jacket thickness and the radius at the bullet base.
As long as you are not one of those who starts at max, I see no reason not to use data of like components.
Where I've gotten into trouble, is using (dum) logic instead of science in my compilation of data.

Tilos

[Dietrich]

100precent is, well, 100 percent correct.
The bullet shape also determines the length of engagement of the rifling, and this affects pressure too.
With 2 bullets of the same weight, the shorter bullet will hae a longer engagement length, as I think the only variance would be jacket thickness and the radius at the bullet base.
As long as you are not one of those who starts at max, I see no reason not to use data of like components.
Where I've gotten into trouble, is using (dum) logic instead of science in my compilation of data.

Tilos
Seeing as I only load for target practice,I tend to stay toward the minimum powder load.I also try to stay toward the high side of the maximum OAL to keep my pressures down.I figure seating too deeply could quickly cause a problem that I don`t need and I use my chronograph quite a bit as well.Am I doing what I need to do to cover my behind or do I need to do more?