Hey Klallen

Hi WING MASTER  >>  I'll be honest with ya, I don't do a lot of long range inanimate "target" shooting.  Seems like lots of things succeed here.  Most being small case capacity stuff that folks want cause they are more manageable, recoil wise.  Folks who shoot competition would know more about this than I.

99% of the long range stuff I do is on the varmints.  With that, I've never rationalize the importance of added fps.  Lots of folks can.  Not I.  The way I see things, it's quite simple.  With anything added, if my accuracy is not compromised, I'm silly not to improve trajectory, wind drift, lessen time of flight and increase energy delivered to game by doing so.

As far as MAX loads, I strongly favor them not only in my long range rifles, but everything I shoot.  Downloading has never made sense to me, anyway.  I've only loaded for one cartridge that did not respond favorable to having the fps pushed to MAX.  Interestingly, that was my .270; go figure.?.?.?.?  For optimum accuracy, I buy into the notion that the uniform burn column present when a case is full helps emensely and is noticeable at longer ranges.  A slightly compressed load giving MAX performance would be my ideal load.

So :

"Does 50 or 100 feet per second help that much in long range shooting?"

For my purposes and in my opinion, yes.  If accuracy is not compromised (and most times with a MAX load it won't be), 50 - 100 fps will help on several fronts.

If it helps you at the range on inanimate targets, I suppose that's for you to decide.  I'd be very interested to hear the opinions you come to when you get things rolling at long range.  Good luck to ya.  >>  klallen

Thanks guys,

I dont load max loads in any of my rifles. When I was working up loads I start at about middle way and start going up. It seems like I can tell if components are working together before going too far. Then if something looks promising I go up until I get an acceptable group and have stuck with that. Maybe I am quitting too early. I will go back and load a little closer to max and see what happens.

Just a side note on max loads. I was at my father in laws house recently and was looking at a speer reloading manual with a copyrite date of 1967. The max loads are quite a bit higher than they are in my new speer manual. I dont know if components have changed or it is a safety issue. Seems like if they were safe then they would be safe now.

Thanks again

Wing master

Tash, I am afraid your right. I guess thats why I have not seen signs of high pressure in my loads.

I think I am going to move a little closer to max loads and see what happens. I will let yall know what I find out.

Wing master

>>>have the common sense to understand the difference between a printed MAX load, for liability reasons, and a "true" MAX load for my specific rifle using specific components<<<

i think korey hit the nail on the head here. reloading manuals are kind of like factory ammo. they have to be generally usable for any refile, regardless of age or condition. with this in mind, it is safe to assume that, more often than not, the published max will be well short of the specific rifle's max.

having said that, i would strongly urge anyone to observe the basic (and SAFE) rule of starting development at least 10% below max, and then working up from there, watching for pressure signs as you go. if you reach the published max with safety, then it is more than possible that your specific rifle will handle a bit more. whether this helps with accuracy and other important factors or not, i cannot say.