Starting Loads

[jlc204]

I have a light weight 270 Win. that I'm currently reloading for. Using Hodgden's data for H4350 and 130gr bullets, they list a max of 54.3 gr. I started 10% below this, but because of the rifle's light weight, it still packs a hefty recoil (at least more than is pleasant to shoot). Question is-could I go down to 20% below max? I have read about not reducing slower powders too much, but I don't know if 20% would be too low.
I know there are other options for reducing recoil, such as lighter bullets and faster burning powders, but I would like to use up the powder and bullets I currently have before moving on.
btw-I'm not loading for deer hunting, just shooting paper now and maybe coyote hunting this winter.
Thanks

[Rick in Oregon]

jlc: Never, never ever reduce minimum starting loads listed in any reloading manual. This can and has created a condition known as "detonation" with slow burning powders, and has destroyed rifles, and created horrendous injuries. (Saw it myself once....not pretty.)

If you want to reduce recoil in that light .270, either put weight in the stock, or use lighter bullets. I personally would make the rifle a bit heavier in the buttstock to solve the issue. JMO

[jlc204]

RIO,
I'm inquiring about going 20% below max loads. Is that too far?
Thanks

[RAMOS]

Do not go lighter than the minimum load listed, ever.

[Fred_C_Dobbs]

Rick is referring to something known as the "secondary explosion effect." It is documented to occur but is not reliably reproducible, which means they can't precisely define its limits, which means you don't want to go anywhere near it. I've seen a "rule of thumb" that you should not go below 85% of the max charge weight but a safer rule is not to go below the manufacturer's recommended minimum charge. The best solution would be to switch to a powder that will produce the velocity/recoil you're after and still be within the manufacturer's recommended min and max charge weights.

[Rick in Oregon]

RIO, I'm inquiring about going 20% below max loads. Is that too far? Thanks

In my opinion and that of people much smarter than I: "Yes" Anything below minimum is too much and risks the kind of danger you don't want in your life. This is a very easy 'problem' to fix, but going below minimum is not one of the options.

FWIW, I've hunted for over 40 years using my pet pre-'64 M70 in .270 Win, and have never had a problem with recoil. Of course it weighs just over 8.5 lbs w/scope, so it's weight greatly helps in reducing felt recoil using it's Pet Load of H4831 and the 130gr bullet. Make the rifle heavier, or consider a different rifle/caliber, or different load combination that will produce less recoil.

I actually had to lighten up my .270W for ease of carry all day, so went with a McMillan stock. My point is that there's an "ideal" weight for a hunting rifle, balanced between handling, easy of carry, and felt recoil. Maybe changing the stock would add enough weight? Here's my .270W....veteran of over 40 hunting seasons:



When I lived in logging camps up in BC, we could shoot 10 (yes 10) deer a year, so you can imagine how many deer this rifle has slayed over its lifetime with me. (Can you say "alot"? ) It's weight is a perfect balance (for me) for carry and recoil.

Fred C.: Thanks for the proper explanation/definition. Good advice.

[jlc204]

Thanks Fred, I have read about the secondary explosion before, hence my concern. I just couldn't find a percentage below max load to stay away from. You have answered my concern.

As far as manufacturers minimum recommended loads, most I have found are less than 10% below max loads, however on the powder bottle it states to start 10% below and work up. So according to Hodgden, I can go slightly below minimum load listed. Ex. 51gr listed start load, 54.3gr listed max load, but 10% below max would mean a start load of 49gr., which is where I started.
Thanks everyone.

[Rick in Oregon]

jlc: I believe the mfgrs are saying start 10% below max and work up....... I've never seen anything published to start BELOW a minimum load.

Noted on a Hodgdon powder bottle: "Maximum loads - Do not exceed - Reduce by 10% to start"

[jlc204]

RIO, yes I should have clerified, max load is listed on the bottle...start 10% below max and work up. I was just stating that 10% below max load puts me below listed starting load on their website.

[Rick in Oregon]

jlc: Understood....strange that they didn't do the math themselves to see their own error. Honestly, I'd just never go below listed minimums to be safe. There are better ways to reduce recoil.

Sidebar: My wife talks to Chris Hodgdon almost daily.....I'll see if she'll mention this to him.

[btlbrn]

NEVER...NEVER.... I REPEAT...NEVER go below minimum loads in any manual!!!!!!!!!

[futuretrades]

Myself, personally, I really hate the recoil of higher caliber rifles. I am a real pu$$y when it comes to recoil. I am also shooting a 270 in an older model 77 Ruger. The recoil pad was so hard, that it was not doing anything as far as the recoil situation. My cure for this was to change the recoil pad to a Limbsaver pad. The pad is soft enough to absorb that punishing recoil demon. Now I can shoot that 77 as much as I want in 1 setting, without the bruising, and the recoil is cut by almost 1/2. I also put a Limbsaver pad on my 1100 Remington, 12ga. I only shoot High base loads in it. A good day in the Dove fields, can really beat you up, and make you flinch with every shot. At times, I was even wishing no more dove come my way. Now I am able to shoot to my hearts content.
Just my 2 cents