[Adam Rountree]

Does anyone have an extensive list of boolits by shape that load similar?

A picture would be great.

Just trying to get an idea which boolits I can use if the exact one isn't listed in the load data.

Thanks

 

[mckenziedrums]

You are WAY over thinking it. OAL, etc is more about fitting in the chamber than anything else. If you load to the maximum length that will fit (and start at the starting load) you'll always be fine pressure wise for the weight. Most reloading books have pictures with specifications for the cartridge.

 

[mckenziedrums]

Oh... along those lines.. Make up a dummy round without primer/powder and test in the barrel before you start cranking them out. If it feeds you can work up loads from minimum until you have as much oomph as you want.

 

[Adam Rountree]

Yeah I don't think you understand what I want and what I want it for. I get the oal/col and can get that from the manuals.

What I need is a page of info that groups bullets that are similar so when load info off a site I don't have to search around to what that abbreviation means and if I don't have that exact bullet what I can substitute it for.

And the characteristics of a bullet does matter to the amount of powder used.

Plus it would just be nice to look at a sheet with all the kinds to see what's out there and what they look like to educate myself


Why is it everytime I ask for info on this site half the comments have nothing to do with the post.

If you have a chart or a sheet of info all in one place like or what you use post please.

 

[Adam Rountree]

I've already loaded 200 rounds that work well this has nothing to do wi th testing oal.
Just trying to get used to name abbr and looks of boolits

 

[Catfish]

Is this what you're looking for?
http://www.selectguns.us/Useful_Links/Bullet Acronyms and Abbreviations.pdf

 

[mckenziedrums]

You can substitute any shape... There is no cheat sheet that has every combination.

I gave you everything you need to know. Weight is more important than shape. You can look up what the abbreviations are in the back of your reloading manual most likely.

Congrats on your 200 rounds... I've loaded a few more than that which is how I know I'm giving you good information in the first place.

 

[Adam Rountree]

Is this what you're looking for?
http://www.selectguns.us/Useful_Links/Bullet Acronyms and Abbreviations.pdf

I have that printed out, I was just hoping for pictures along with it and it sorted by shape not alphabetically. Thanks.

 

[JimB]

Why is it everytime I ask for info on this site half the comments have nothing to do with the post.

This may be the most succinct description of Internet forums I've ever heard!

The acronyms will come with time, don't sweat them.

I believe that you can safely swap bullet styles so long as you maintain the same bullet weight, powder charge and loaded case volume. Treat diameter as a constant so you can just work with the length variable. It's a simple two step calculation:

First calculate MinVolLen for a published load by subtracting boolit length from min OAL. (This is the minimum length of the space in the cartridge when the bullet is seated)

Then add this MinVolLen to the new boolit length and that's your min OAL using the new bullet. If you load longer than that you can start working up a powder load.

Obviously this isn't perfect, and don't forget to test OAL to make sure that the loaded round doesn't contact the rifling, but if you start with a starting load and an OAL longer than this new min you should be as safe as anyone can be when reloading.

I'm sitting in a bar, when I get home I'm going to test this against some published data, it's a good working theory.

For the record, you're talking about deviating from published data about 20,000 or so rounds before most new reloaders do. It's an interesting exercise to think about these things, but as I said in the other thread, start by buying components for which published data is plentiful.

 

[mckenziedrums]

Here's the thing... my comments have EVERYTHING to do with your post. If you don't understand that I'd suggest reading up on a few more reloading books. Bullet shape ultimately controls OAL whether it is for pressure purposes (not seating too deep, etc) or feeding in the gun. Different shapes work differently. However, you can safely load at minimum loads for really ANY shape bullet so long as you understand it's the space under the bullet that matters. That's what Jim was hinting at but with a lot more math than I usually would use.

http://ultimatereloader.com/reloading-101/pistol-bullet-basics/

There ya go... pretty pictures as to bullet types. Your original query was "which bullets I can substitute" and the answer is still: Any. IF, and this is a BIG if for someone that's only loaded 200 rounds... you understand why it is that weight is more important than bullet style and how bullet style can impact seating depths. You hand me a mixed bag of bullets of the same weight and I'll hand you back loads that are perfectly safe using the same powder after only looking up a single one in a book.

 

[charlie]

Yeah I don't think you understand what I want and what I want it for...
Why is it everytime I ask for info on this site half the comments have nothing to do with the post. .

I think that you might not understand enough to realize that many of the answers you get really do answer your questions. For every question there is a very simple answer that is either very wrong or very incomplete.

 

[Catfish]

Back to your OP - if you are using published data for a cartridge but a bullet that is same wt and different shape you are off in the weeds. You're heading into dangerous territory with next to no experience behind you to inform your judgement. I wish you luck and hope you will reconsider.

 

[noylj]

It would help if you were clear about what you want.
Next, because we aren't following you, maybe you should realize that your worry, whatever it is, is NOT of any major concern.
Any lead-core jacketed bullet of a given caliber and weight can use the same data as another lead-core jacketed bullet of the same caliber and weight. The MAX load with each bullet may be different, but you work UP TO the max load from the start weight and watch for pressure signs and the max load in any manual is as likely to be over-max in your gun with your components as it is to under-max. Thus, the MAX load in any manual means very little--you have to find the accuracy or max point for your gun and components.
If you change bullet, you re-work the load. You can't just drop one bullet in for another and get the same pressure/velocity/accuracy.
Lead and plated bullets use the same load data.
COL is bullet and gun dependent and the COL in a manual doesn't mean anything other than they used that COL for testing. For testing, they usually use a COL that is shorter than most reloaders would find optimum. Some labs do all testing in a Universal Receiver, so feeding and chambering have no bearing--they just pick out a short COL so testing will "pressure out" sooner and be safer for the reloader. So, since about 75% of the COL is determined by YOUR gun, how could any test lab give you a good COL?

 

[JimB]

Any lead-core jacketed bullet of a given caliber and weight can use the same data as another lead-core jacketed bullet of the same caliber and weight.

I'm new to reloading, but it seems clear to me that this is incorrect. You can't just ignore bullet profile and reliably load a safe round by starting 10% under published for a random published profile of the same weight. We don't know what the pressure vs capacity curve really looks like for the powder, and the increase in pressure from reducing capacity by 5% could be 25% or 200% or something else depending on the powder burn rate, bullet weight, etc. Since pistol powders are generally fast I'd expect the increase to be significant.

COL is bullet and gun dependent and the COL in a manual doesn't mean anything other than they used that COL for testing.

It is true that most folks reload longer than the OAL from published data, customizing their rounds to obtain the best accuracy and reliability for their gun, but this does not mean that the published OAL "doesn't mean anything." In conjunction with the published bullet weight and profile the published OAL determines the minimum case capacity. Again, if you go below that minimum results are not reliably predictable.

It seems to me that you may have a bunch of reloading experience and have decided for yourself that things are not quite as critical as the reloading manuals make them seem. That's okay, I tend to agree that there is a margin of safety built into the published data so if you have to tweak a bit you'll generally be safe. However, you're giving advice to someone who has just loaded a few hundred rounds and doesn't have the benefit of your experience to detect when things are starting to go wrong and so will go much further wrong than you would. Just as an example, he's shooting his first reloads in a semi-auto pistol, he will simply not notice when extraction starts to become more difficult where you would notice it immediately.

I appreciate your willingness to share your knowledge, but please be careful about broad generalizations and diverging from published data with new reloaders. They probably won't blow their gun up, but you are creating confusion and encourage bad habits.

 

[JimB]

To the OP, there are pictures with measurements along with definitions of acronyms in Hornady's Handbook of Cartridge Reloading, pages 84-113.

 

[Beef15]

@JimB you are correct. COAL does matter a lot in pistol cartridges, minor increases in seating depth can dramatically increase pressure, and some powders more sensitive than others. However, if you tailor your rounds to your firearm via "plunk test" and mag length it is highly unlikely (not impossible) you will be decreasing case volume further than published data. That said you don't know what you don't know so it is wise to determine a minimum COAL and stay longer or exercise great caution. I determine that using essentially the same method as you outlined above, and of course always start below max, the lowest max if find more than one reference. I do figure my COAL using data from a like constructed bullet, be it lead or jacketed.

@Adam Rountree not meaning to pile on, I don't think the chart you want exists. Without being massive it would be of very limited usefulness, general shape really doesn't mean much. There are only a few generic nose shapes RN (round nose), TC (truncated cone), HP (hollow point), SWC (semi wadcutter), WC (wadcutter) or FP/FNs (flat point/nose), combined with a few base treatments BT (boattail), BB (bevel base), FB (flat base), and HB (hollow base), but even those of same weight, construction, and general shape may vary significantly in length. Take for example the Lyman 356402 vs the Lee 356120, both are a single lube groove cast 120gr truncated cones, by eye without having them side by side you'd be very hard pressed to tell which you had, but the Lee is 0.05" shorter, in lead it's kinda meh, since you generally don't push them that hard but in jacketed it might be a big deal. And with some bullets, like JHPs or RN FMJs there can be a dozen plus different profiles of the same basic shape of the same weight and construction. Working with all these variables is one of the joys of handloading, and frustrations of reloading.

 

[Tailhunter]

Is this what you're looking for?
http://www.selectguns.us/Useful_Links/Bullet Acronyms and Abbreviations.pdf

Nice list but I think he wants pictures too.

OP - Google is your friend.

 

[JimB]

Adam, apologies if I've been to abrupt or condescending or anything, not my intent. In fact I appreciate questions posted by other new reloaders because organizing my thoughts to respond helps me to think clearly about the issues.

Thanks for your posts,
Jim

 

[billyh]

What I pay attention to rather than shape is weight and what the bullet is made out of. With those two things understood you can now take that info to any book and find out a good starting load. Also, once you find out what works don't change it up too much. I load lead because it's cheap. @mckenziedrums sold me my first press with a ton of stuff to go with it. In the last 2 or so years I've loaded less than 1k rounds for both pistol and rifle. But I've got 4 different manuals, 5 book marks for different online manuals, and several more magazines dedicated to reloading.

A 200gr round nose flat point at .452 diameter will have the same load data as a 200gr lead semi wad cutter. The same powder charge will not work with a full metal jacket or plated bullets in the same weight. Also, what you do load will stay the same I.E. dies and powder charge. Once you start mixing up pistol bullets you start having to change seating depth, powder drops, belling the case, and possibly the crimp die.

If what you are shooting is what you want to shoot keep it. If not then look at the bullet you want to shoot and try your best to keep it the same. I just picked up a new to me 1911 and will be loading these http://lucky13bullets.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=26&products_id=129 because they are very similar in shape with the hollow points that I shoot out of the gun.

The best advice I can give you is don't rush the learning part, take notes on everything, and NEVER take short cuts.

 

[Armorpl8chikn]

You can substitute any shape... There is no cheat sheet that has every combination.

I gave you everything you need to know. Weight is more important than shape. You can look up what the abbreviations are in the back of your reloading manual most likely.

Congrats on your 200 rounds... I've loaded a few more than that which is how I know I'm giving you good information in the first place.

Drummie you are a good kid and I like you.....so I will go easy on you.

I appreciate you giving advice in here, I don't want to do it. I have been at this for 34 years, and I don't like to argue. Reloading forums have always brought out the worst arguments, because so many people think they are pioneers in the practice.

Simply put....you are wrong. You swage bullets. You should know that changing the shape of a bullet changes its bearing surface length, and that DOES make a difference in what is maximum and minimum.
If you developer a load for a 180smk and switch to a 180 RN Prohunter, you could sure enough have problems. Yes you can switch different shapes within a weight class, but you better work up a new load.

The caveat would be switching from a known Round Nose (RN) load, to an BT.
The BT shape having a shorter bearing surface, would likely be fine and safe. It could likely be increased in charge. Remembering to stay within the weight class.

Different shaped bullets, absolutely CAN change the dynamics of the load.