jmr600 wrote:
This goes the same for factory ammo.
YES! This is exactly my point!
The argument for/against handloads from a "liability" standpoint is argued often, but so -MANY- of the folks who claim to carry handloads do so because they also claim that factory ammo isn't reliable enough for them, or they'll express the idea that because THEY loaded it, they can be "sure" that it will be reliable.
My assertion is that unless you know what's in that primer (factory or handload) any idea that you know it's going to run is misguided.
I like to swap brass... and I'm looking for .32 H&R Mag, .327 Fed Mag, .380 Auto and 10mm. If you have some and would like to swap for something else, send me a note!
While we're speaking of primers, I'm just finishing up on 1000 CCI SP primers that I purchased in 1979. Normally my primers never even get close to that age but some how they kept getting pushed to the rear. Anyhow they all went boom. Jim
Werz wrote:It may be possible to handload highly reliable ammunition, but that would require extensive attention to each cartridge, and it's difficult for a handloader to reproduce all the the quality control mechanisms that are built into the factory production of premium defensive ammunition.
I'd have to disagree, Werz. By definition, handloaders are doing this by hand so they can easily visually inspect each round at every step of the process and ensure that cases are properly formed with flash holes, primers are properly seated, each case has the correct powder charge, and each cartridge has a bullet seated to the correct depth and case properly crimped. What quality control mechanism can go beyond this level of inspection?
The term handload like "hand crafted" implies that every item is unique and different in some way from every other item.
One thing that a capable production machine does that no human can do is perform an operation exactly the same way each and every time so that the first part is exactly the same as the 1 millionth part and the 1 millionth part is exactly the same as the 1 billionth part. It does this by verifying each and every operation and sounding an alarm if any condition even approaches a control limit.
The idea of inspecting quality into a product is old school and obsolete in modern manufacturing.
This is true for component machines and assembly machines.
I believe in American exceptianalism
Fear the government that fears your guns
NRA endowment life member
Weigh a few rounds of commercially produced ammo and you might be surprised how "uniform" each is to the next.
NRA Benefactor If the police are not present to stop a crime they are just armed historians. A 1911 beats 9-1-1 every time. Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity - Hanlon's razor
The weighing is supposed to tell you that the projectile, case, primer, and powder quantity are correct.
Serious competitive shooters who do their own loading (or have a trusted individual doing it) prefer to weigh the components, as well as things like figuring out case capacity, powder bulk, etc.
For killing paper, it's really irrelevant if you're doing SD practice or just trying to get used to the gun & trigger.
Just IMHO, the real reason to carry factory loads is the presumption of consistency, and to keep an attorney from going after you for using some kind of "kill everybody you meet" ammunition. IMHO, most practiced handloaders can put together a load that'll be just as reliable as anything else (about the only thing you can't control is the primer - you can spot a missing anvil, but maybe not a missing chemical pellet).
Regards,
Stu.
(Why write a quick note when you can write a novel?)
(Why do those who claim to wish to protect me feel that the best way to do that is to disarm me?)
Werz wrote:It may be possible to handload highly reliable ammunition, but that would require extensive attention to each cartridge, and it's difficult for a handloader to reproduce all the the quality control mechanisms that are built into the factory production of premium defensive ammunition.
I'd have to disagree, Werz. By definition, handloaders are doing this by hand so they can easily visually inspect each round at every step of the process and ensure that cases are properly formed with flash holes, primers are properly seated, each case has the correct powder charge, and each cartridge has a bullet seated to the correct depth and case properly crimped. What quality control mechanism can go beyond this level of inspection?
The term handload like "hand crafted" implies that every item is unique and different in some way from every other item.
One thing that a capable production machine does that no human can do is perform an operation exactly the same way each and every time so that the first part is exactly the same as the 1 millionth part and the 1 millionth part is exactly the same as the 1 billionth part. It does this by verifying each and every operation and sounding an alarm if any condition even approaches a control limit.
Yeah, but, who sets the control limits? QA or the bean counters? Does top shelf Federal buck-a-round ammo have the same control limits as Federal American Eagle? How are the suppliers (powder, metals ) controlled? If there are "control limits" to the process, doesn't that insure that the first part will absolutely be different than the millionth part and absolutely different from the billionth part? How is the process verified? And again, what about that powder we're dumping into this process?
The idea of inspecting quality into a product is old school and obsolete in modern manufacturing. Only from a cost standpoint. Honestly, I long for the days of "burn the toast and scrape it".
This is true for component machines and assembly machines.
Winchester's quality control missed this one and another one just like it. Good luck clearing the stoppage one of them caused by the primer blowing out and locking the action up, thing wouldn't budge. The gun would've been out of the fight in a SD situation. Several large men tried to rack the round clear to no avail.
It wasn't SD ammo, but I have no idea if this gets checked any better for duty ammo.
That's one thing that a reloader would catch for sure
As far as civil/criminal liability goes, I'm just not concerned. If you load with one of the same bullets offered in SD ammo and you load within published data, any decent defense attorney should be able to refute any arguments based on handloading. I just don't see the issue, a good shoot is a good shoot. Just don't fill your hollowpoints with poison.
See? You've missed the whole point. Winchester doesn't have "Quality Control" anymore. Those QC guys were old, made too much money, and had too many weeks of vacation. So they fired 'em and replaced them with an ISO recognized, faith-based manufacturing process. Just like Toyota.
WestonDon wrote:"Commercially produced" does not necessarily equal "capable production machine".
What is the correlation between weight and performance?
If the powder charge or bullet weight is sufficiently inconsistent, it will create velocity variations sufficient to affect elevation of the point of impact at a given distance.
If the case weight varies, that can be an indication of variations in thickness and powder space, which can affect pressure... potentially dangerously so.
Life comes at you fast. Be prepared to shoot it in the head when it does.
SMMAssociates wrote:Serious competitive shooters who do their own loading (or have a trusted individual doing it) prefer to weigh the components, as well as things like figuring out case capacity, powder bulk, etc.
I never do this for handgun ammunition, nor do I know any serious handgun shooters who do. Assuming that the components aren't substandard and the powder measure of normal accuracy, any variation at 50' or 50 yards results in a smaller CPE than does the ability of a human being to hold.
I ALWAYS do it for rifle ammunition, trickling and weighing EVERY charge. The results show up in standard deviation of the shot to shot velocities, and the resultant consistency of elevation in the point of impact.
Friends who are much better shooters than I am also weigh both their bullets and cases and segregate lots of ammunition by those factors.
Life comes at you fast. Be prepared to shoot it in the head when it does.
deanimator wrote:I ALWAYS do it for rifle ammunition, trickling and weighing EVERY charge. The results show up in standard deviation of the shot to shot velocities, and the resultant consistency of elevation in the point of impact.
What's interesting is that many bench rest competition shooters do not weigh every charge. Or, well, any charge. Some charge volumetrically and they win in their ultra-precision game.
I've always defaulted to the ideas that:
--there are many ways to skin a cat
--you've got to work within a system that gives you confidence in your loads
...however it is that you get to that point. Some clean primer pockets. Myself, I'm a former primer pocket cleaner.
I like to swap brass... and I'm looking for .32 H&R Mag, .327 Fed Mag, .380 Auto and 10mm. If you have some and would like to swap for something else, send me a note!
If you can't reload handgun ammo to at least the standards of factory ammo your doing something wrong. Its the same components, the only difference is your doing it on a much smaller scale.. It's been mentioned here about the use of a chronograph in development of hand loads for handguns. Get a good loading manual, its already worked out for you. It is a excellent tool for long range rifle loads, not so much for handguns. Jim
Sevens wrote:What's interesting is that many bench rest competition shooters do not weigh every charge. Or, well, any charge. Some charge volumetrically and they win in their ultra-precision game.
They also shoot at much shorter distances [other than the .50BMG benchrest shooters]. Even minute elevation changes show up badly at 600 and 1,000 yards. The Commonwealth types shoot at even longer ranges.
Life comes at you fast. Be prepared to shoot it in the head when it does.
[Okay, moved to Handloading forum (where it probably belonged all along) --TR]
TunnelRat
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.