Help me break the code on QuickLoad

[SaintPanzer]

Yes, 7.62X63 is just another name for 30-06. CIP lists the round as 30-06, but it's helpful to know the metric measurement when comparing to other cases.

I chose the CIP dimensions because the QL book explicitly states "Most values in the shipped database are related to piezoelectric measurement, which delivers normally higher, but true, numbers with rifle calibers than CUP – copper crusher method figures at both equal pressures. For safety reasons, in many European countries, it is illegal to use cartridges exceeding CIP maximum pressure values." I'm firing in Germany, so that's valid, and because the data is more biased to piezo, it seemed a better idea to go in that direction. It's amazing what you learn when you RTFM.

Yes, I'm working with the modern Steyr first, because I think there's a little more room for slight error there.

The Scorion is a HPBT bullet, which is why the A-Max numbers confused me so much! The Scenar might also be a good comparison. I was using the numbers from VV's online manual, as well as their app, thinking the app is most up to date (it matches the online version). I went to the app because the Scorion is a new bullet, and thought it might be listed.

Here's a funny thing about being in Germany. If you think there is a shortage in the US for US made bullets, imagine what it is like overseas! I went to one of the larger shops (in Ulm), and when I asked for Hornady bullets, the salesman just laughed. Scorions were in stock. IMR powder would also be difficult to get. Two good reasons for selecting the VV are it is a very clean burning powder, and it's available. I did score (online, from a place up north) the last 50 Woodleigh 160 grain 6.5mm round nose, and the last 100 Woodleigh 270 grain .375s. So I have that going for me.

I still need to email VV. I will try your "fill and weigh" trick, just to see where it ends up. I'll also look at the Scenar loads. Right now, I was leaning towards starting at 51,0 grains (just above the Hornady load, 2500 fps and 41Kish psi) and stepping up in 0.2 grain increments to either pressure signs or 54.3, which should give me 2663 fps and 49642 psi. If there are no pressure signs I might step up a bit more, but I'll speak to VV first.

Once I find the combustion nodes I can start playing with bullet seating depths. This rifle fires fairly cheap RWS "Cineshot" ammo to a little under 1MOA, I'd like to get a little tighter than that, and should be able to. If I can, then I'll work up a good hunting load. The hunting bullets are a little expensive here, and the lead free even more so. So I want to practice load work with the "cheaper" stuff first.

 

[Shootist43]

KE Johnson, my bolt was a little hesitant but not really sticky. Both of my 404(s) shoot under an inch with this load.

 

[SaintPanzer]

By the way: Funny Mannlicher story which I'm still trying to figure out (and why I was really hoping I could learn to depend on software:

Round was a 6.5X54. Talking with VV, they did not have a tested load for the round, but did say N160 was the best powder to try. Had some Woodleigh protected point bullets (where did I put them?). Talked to Woodleigh, and they recommended a similar load to the Hornady 6.5 round nose load. They further went to say they'd used 37.5 grains of H4350, which was faster burning than N160, so a similar charge would be a quite safe starting load. I've entered that load into QL, where it looks good... but:

I did something wrong, and I'm still not sure what it was. The rotary magazine is sensitive to length, and more so with a spitzer bullet, so I loaded a bit long, but was not in the lands. I started with 37 grains, and had all kinds of pressure signs, to include a dropped primer. Scary for a gun proofed in 1939. Going with a smaller load was even worse, but that could have been due to an "under-load". Other possibilities include either an unnecessary taper crimp, or when I adjusted the die I bumped the shoulder back a bit too far, causing excessive head space. Also on my list of things to do is contact Pacific Tool and Gauge and get some case gauges made. Playing with old rifles is fun, but a bit challenging at times.

Oh, and Brian, I have the Westley Richards dimensions, but I have to start here as long as I'm still shooting in Europe:

https://bobp.cip-bobp.org/uploads/tdcc/tab-i/tabical-en-page72.pdf

 

[benchracer]

I have loaded 9.5X57 with 42 grains of IMR4895 pushing the 270 grain RN and had excellent results.

I 'developed' that load over 40 years ago by seeking to replicate the original recommended load of "Cordite 43 grs. MAX.' and, over more recent decades of internet use, have become aware of several other M1910 shooters who do the same. I've never owned a chronograph, just observed that the load shoots and behaves well. My M1910 is a Take Down Model, 60cm barrel. Use round nosed projectiles seated at proper 'factory' depth for effortless feeding through the Schoenauer magazine.

View attachment 459431

View attachment 459438
View attachment 459439View attachment 459459
View attachment 459440View attachment 459441

Notice that the 1930s DWM chart above lists Rottweil Smokeless Rifle Leaf Powder #2 for the 6.5X54 and #5 for the 9.5X57. Whether that is a direct interchange for today's Rottweil R 902 and R 905 I do not know.

I have likely shared some or all of these with you in the past but here, in no particular order, are several old reference and catalog images relevant to the 9.5X57 and a few of 6.5X54.

View attachment 459432

View attachment 459433

View attachment 459434
View attachment 459457View attachment 459458
View attachment 459436View attachment 459437

DWM:
View attachment 459461

View attachment 459446

View attachment 459447

View attachment 459452

View attachment 459453

View attachment 459449
View attachment 459450
View attachment 459451

View attachment 459456
No idea what 'powder' is used here, but 52.5 grains in a 9.5X57?


View attachment 459460



View attachment 459448

There's just SO MUCH historical stuff in this post that I think is REALLY COOL!

 

[benchracer]

Yes, 7.62X63 is just another name for 30-06. CIP lists the round as 30-06, but it's helpful to know the metric measurement when comparing to other cases.

I chose the CIP dimensions because the QL book explicitly states "Most values in the shipped database are related to piezoelectric measurement, which delivers normally higher, but true, numbers with rifle calibers than CUP – copper crusher method figures at both equal pressures. For safety reasons, in many European countries, it is illegal to use cartridges exceeding CIP maximum pressure values." I'm firing in Germany, so that's valid, and because the data is more biased to piezo, it seemed a better idea to go in that direction. It's amazing what you learn when you RTFM.

Yes, I'm working with the modern Steyr first, because I think there's a little more room for slight error there.

The Scorion is a HPBT bullet, which is why the A-Max numbers confused me so much! The Scenar might also be a good comparison. I was using the numbers from VV's online manual, as well as their app, thinking the app is most up to date (it matches the online version). I went to the app because the Scorion is a new bullet, and thought it might be listed.

Here's a funny thing about being in Germany. If you think there is a shortage in the US for US made bullets, imagine what it is like overseas! I went to one of the larger shops (in Ulm), and when I asked for Hornady bullets, the salesman just laughed. Scorions were in stock. IMR powder would also be difficult to get. Two good reasons for selecting the VV are it is a very clean burning powder, and it's available. I did score (online, from a place up north) the last 50 Woodleigh 160 grain 6.5mm round nose, and the last 100 Woodleigh 270 grain .375s. So I have that going for me.

I still need to email VV. I will try your "fill and weigh" trick, just to see where it ends up. I'll also look at the Scenar loads. Right now, I was leaning towards starting at 51,0 grains (just above the Hornady load, 2500 fps and 41Kish psi) and stepping up in 0.2 grain increments to either pressure signs or 54.3, which should give me 2663 fps and 49642 psi. If there are no pressure signs I might step up a bit more, but I'll speak to VV first.

Once I find the combustion nodes I can start playing with bullet seating depths. This rifle fires fairly cheap RWS "Cineshot" ammo to a little under 1MOA, I'd like to get a little tighter than that, and should be able to. If I can, then I'll work up a good hunting load. The hunting bullets are a little expensive here, and the lead free even more so. So I want to practice load work with the "cheaper" stuff first.

OK. There were some things stated earlier that I found confusing. Understanding you are doing this in Germany puts a different face on things. NOW it all makes sense to me.

Other than increased expense and spotty availability in the U.S., VV powders are in the same class as Lapua brass: Best stuff made! It's not hard to find a reason to use them.

Once you get the process figured out, you will find that one of the key advantages to using QL is its ability to help you develop loads with a much reduced round count. If you are loading for accuracy, the barrel time data provided in QL is very useful for determining where to test in the charge range for accuracy nodes. I know this is contrary to conventional wisdom, but establishing seating depth first makes for a much smoother process, though you will end up in the same place either way.

 

[Shootist43]

SaintPanzer, Woodleigh makes two different 160 Gn. bullets in 6.5 caliber. On QuickLoad they are called the 80A and the 80B. There is a tremendous difference in the charge weights of H- 4360 for these two bullets. I use the 80B in my 6.5 X 55 Swedish Mauser.

 

[benchracer]

By the way: Funny Mannlicher story which I'm still trying to figure out (and why I was really hoping I could learn to depend on software:

Round was a 6.5X54. Talking with VV, they did not have a tested load for the round, but did say N160 was the best powder to try. Had some Woodleigh protected point bullets (where did I put them?). Talked to Woodleigh, and they recommended a similar load to the Hornady 6.5 round nose load. They further went to say they'd used 37.5 grains of H4350, which was faster burning than N160, so a similar charge would be a quite safe starting load. I've entered that load into QL, where it looks good... but:

I did something wrong, and I'm still not sure what it was. The rotary magazine is sensitive to length, and more so with a spitzer bullet, so I loaded a bit long, but was not in the lands. I started with 37 grains, and had all kinds of pressure signs, to include a dropped primer. Scary for a gun proofed in 1939. Going with a smaller load was even worse, but that could have been due to an "under-load". Other possibilities include either an unnecessary taper crimp, or when I adjusted the die I bumped the shoulder back a bit too far, causing excessive head space. Also on my list of things to do is contact Pacific Tool and Gauge and get some case gauges made. Playing with old rifles is fun, but a bit challenging at times.

Oh, and Brian, I have the Westley Richards dimensions, but I have to start here as long as I'm still shooting in Europe:

https://bobp.cip-bobp.org/uploads/tdcc/tab-i/tabical-en-page72.pdf

In a previous post, you mentioned your hopes to use QL to help you with data for older cartridges, such as the Mannlicher 6.5x54. You are absolutely correct that it will be useful for that. I have used QL to good effect with 6.5x55 and 7x57. The data available for many "obsolete" classic cartridges is frustratingly bad, and gets worse over time, because it is not updated as improved components become available.

The ability to run "what-ifs" in QL breathes new life into these cartridges in terms of range of appropriate components and the ability to define safe performance limits.

 

[SaintPanzer]

SaintPanzer, Woodleigh makes two different 160 Gn. bullets in 6.5 caliber. On QuickLoad they are called the 80A and the 80B. There is a tremendous difference in the charge weights of H- 4360 for these two bullets. I use the 80B in my 6.5 X 55 Swedish Mauser.

Yes. That's why I contacted Woodleigh directly. The RN (80B) bullet is "proper" for the M1903, but it loses so much speed and energy so quickly. Shortly after you hit 100m, you're no longer in the optimal velocity for bullet performance. I thought the higher BC of the PP (80A) would be a benefit here, but the 80A bullet does not have a load listed in the Woodleigh manual, so I contacted Woodleigh to learn how to adjust. Woodleigh (not QL) recommended a similar starting point for both bullets.

 

[shootist~]

Yes, 7.62X63 is just another name for 30-06. CIP lists the round as 30-06, but it's helpful to know the metric measurement when comparing to other cases.

I chose the CIP dimensions because the QL book explicitly states "Most values in the shipped database are related to piezoelectric measurement, which delivers normally higher, but true, numbers with rifle calibers than CUP – copper crusher method figures at both equal pressures. For safety reasons, in many European countries, it is illegal to use cartridges exceeding CIP maximum pressure values." I'm firing in Germany, so that's valid, and because the data is more biased to piezo, it seemed a better idea to go in that direction. It's amazing what you learn when you RTFM.

30-06 as I "assumed", but you learn quickly when discussing reloading on the internet, not take anything for granted. Always better to waste a few keystrokes than assume anything.

Random thoughts:
Both CIP and SAAMI use piezo pressures - just taken at different places on the case. QL seems to jump back and forth - my 30-06 runs come up as SAAMI pressures, but when I pull up some of my other saved files (6.5 Creedmoor for one), pressure is shown as CIP.

Interesting that my 30-06 /168 Gr / 54.0 VV N-160 QL projection came up much closer to VVs numbers and your your QL projection (IIRC) at 50.4 came up near max pressures. You almost have to have overwritten one of the defaults. Easy to fix, just pull up a caliber other than 30-06 to clear the field, then start a New 30-06 projection and the defaults should reset.

Your 6.5x54 pressure issues with H4350 and a (160? grain RN) could indicate a headspace issue - or possibly the sizing die needs to be backed off. Both can happen at the same time, btw as I found out reloading for a military Swedish 6.5x55 Mauser years ago. Backing off the sizing die to just neck size is one way to mitigate the issue.

Should you be able to source any, the 30 Cal 150 grain Hornady FMJ-BT is inexpensive, accurate, and at least over here - very easy to find. Plus it works with lots of different powders. I shoot quite a few per year just practicing from the sticks.

 

[Brian Rothhammer]

... I asked for Hornady bullets, the salesman just laughed. Scorions were in stock. IMR powder would also be difficult to get. Two good reasons for selecting the VV are it is a very clean burning powder, and it's available. I did score (online, from a place up north) the last 50 Woodleigh 160 grain 6.5mm round nose, and the last 100 Woodleigh 270 grain .375s. So I have that going for me.

You were fortunate to get the RN 6.5 160 and 9.5 270 projectiles.
Hornady 3715 is all but extinct on the marketplace with the Woodleigh 270 RN not far behind.

 

[Brian Rothhammer]

...or when I adjusted the die I bumped the shoulder back a bit too far, causing excessive head space. Also on my list of things to do is contact Pacific Tool and Gauge and get some case gauges made. Playing with old rifles is fun, but a bit challenging at times.

Oh, and Brian, I have the Westley Richards dimensions, but I have to start here as long as I'm still shooting in Europe:

https://bobp.cip-bobp.org/uploads/tdcc/tab-i/tabical-en-page72.pdf

Always good to have a cross reference. I'll be archiving the CIP chart and dimensions you have linked.

Headspace is critical on the MS, particularly with the 9'5X57 as there is such a slight shoulder.

Do let us know how it goes with the gauges and what they cost, if you will.

 

[Brian Rothhammer]

There's just SO MUCH historical stuff in this post that I think is REALLY COOL!

Glad you enjoyed!

You may also enjoy a dive into these: https://www.africahunting.com/threa...908-m1910-m1924-m1925-or-high-velocity.47277/

 

[Frederik]

Just another tip on using QL and cronographs.

The moment te bullet leaves the barrel it looses speed so by having your crony 15 feet away form the muzzle good chace you have already lost 20 fps.

Then as other mentioned the H2O volume is very important on the cases and you must measure fired cases not new or sized cases. That will give you the true H2O on your case for your firearm.

Certain brands of brass can vary with the volume while your more expensive brass has less variation.
Once you have loaded and shoot over a crony you can imput your data in QL and actually change the burning rate factor of the powder to match what you are getting.

Keep in mind that when using a crony 15 feet away subtract some speed.

QL works but when it comes to large cases and calibers I find that more tweaking is needed.

As a last point QL seems a bit conservative but then again the rifle won't be pushed in the red the whole time.

 

[SaintPanzer]

A few follow ups:

I heard back very quickly from VV. I really do love their customer service! Their guidance was that it was safe to use the Lapua Scenar specs, as the bullets were similar in design, and were within 10% weight. So we will see where that goes.

On the Mannlicher front: I spoke with Pacific Tool and Gauge. Headspace gauges for both rifles will not be a problem. They will have to make custom case gauges, which in itself is not a problem, they are just not sure on cost. Normal cost for a custom case gauge is $90, but the manufacturing involves starting with another case in the same "family", so the person I spoke with wanted to speak with an engineer and get back with me on cost. He said if I don't hear from him by Monday, call back.

I did make a dummy round for the M1910 today. I'm a little concerned, because the bullet seemed "loose" after seating. It doesn't help that the bullet has a cannelure, and I do not have a roll crimp die. I tried seating the bullet long to be outside the cannelure (it's only a dummy round/snap cap), but that didn't seem to work. I contacted CH4D to see if I can get a third die. If I can't find the die, I may have to find bullets without a cannelure. My next choice was a Brenneke TOG, but they do have a cannelure, so maybe Hawk? I do have a 3 die set with a taper crimp die for the M1903, so that shouldn't be a problem.

 

[shootist~]

A few follow ups:

I heard back very quickly from VV. I really do love their customer service! Their guidance was that it was safe to use the Lapua Scenar specs, as the bullets were similar in design, and were within 10% weight. So we will see where that goes.

On the Mannlicher front: I spoke with Pacific Tool and Gauge. Headspace gauges for both rifles will not be a problem. They will have to make custom case gauges, which in itself is not a problem, they are just not sure on cost. Normal cost for a custom case gauge is $90, but the manufacturing involves starting with another case in the same "family", so the person I spoke with wanted to speak with an engineer and get back with me on cost. He said if I don't hear from him by Monday, call back.

I did make a dummy round for the M1910 today. I'm a little concerned, because the bullet seemed "loose" after seating. It doesn't help that the bullet has a cannelure, and I do not have a roll crimp die. I tried seating the bullet long to be outside the cannelure (it's only a dummy round/snap cap), but that didn't seem to work. I contacted CH4D to see if I can get a third die. If I can't find the die, I may have to find bullets without a cannelure. My next choice was a Brenneke TOG, but they do have a cannelure, so maybe Hawk? I do have a 3 die set with a taper crimp die for the M1903, so that shouldn't be a problem.

You should always be able to get a tight bullet fit in a sized case - crimp or no. If using an oversize expander ball, you can turn it down a .001" or two by putting it in a drill and using Emory cloth.

Is there a chance your bullets are being driven back into the case when chambering? That would account for the unexplained pressure signs. Making several dummies and chambering smartly several times might show if that is an issue. (Measuring COL before and after to look for a meaningful difference.)

Neck tension: I like to see >.001" (preferably .0015 to .0020") difference between the neck OD of a sized case and a case with a bullet seated.

 

[Brian Rothhammer]

I did make a dummy round for the M1910 today. I'm a little concerned, because the bullet seemed "loose" after seating. It doesn't help that the bullet has a cannelure, and I do not have a roll crimp die. I tried seating the bullet long to be outside the cannelure (it's only a dummy round/snap cap), but that didn't seem to work. I contacted CH4D to see if I can get a third die. If I can't find the die, I may have to find bullets without a cannelure.

What is the true diameter of your projectile?

Are your case necks thin? What brass are you using?

When I first acquired my M1910 I researched (pre internet) and found the dimensions of .375 Nitro Express Rimless / 9.5X57MS (old American Rifleman articles, 'Shooter's Bible', other sources), then ordered a two die set from RCBS and a 'Lee Anniversary' loading kit (low budget was me).

At that time Hornady 3715 projectiles were readily available 'off the shelf' but 9.5X57 brass was something of which I had no access with the exception of Berdan primed original DWM 531. I read about reforming .30-'06 brass to 9.5X57 (in stages) and reasoned that .35 Whelen brass, which was available to me new, would be a closer fit. My 'old duffer' mentors agreed.

At first attempt I tried running a .35 Whelen through in a single pass and it worked. I then cut to proper length, loaded them with the Hornady #3715 and 42 grains of IMR 4895 (I may have run 40 grains on the first few - it's been a while). They worked perfectly, seating right to the cannelure.

After resizing, trimming, and loading the remainder of the cases purchased, I shot them all, have reloaded and fired them since.

I have some Qual-Cart 9.5X57 brass now, a stock of (apparently Hornady 3715) .375 270 grain RN 'blems' acquired through Midway a few years back (of which I find no 'blemishes', anomalies, or defects of any sort) and also some .375 260 grain Nosler Solids (#29755) in 'unleaded' to stuff in case I get a chance to go after some feral hogs (can't shoot critters with lead in this state any longer). Haven't dug out my bench or loaded any of them yet.

When I do, I'll likely load the 'Blem' 270 grain RNs as I had previously and figure a proper load for the Noslers and stuff them in the properly headstamped Qual-Cart brass.

 

[SaintPanzer]

Thanks to both of you.
I'm a little baffled by the slippage. The dies are brand new CH4D. At first I thought I'd not run the sizing die far enough (paranoid about pushing the shoulder back) and was only sizing the "tip" of the neck. Finally seemed to get that right, but am still able to "spin" the bullet in the case. I can't push it all the way in, and cannot pull it by hand, but it does slip exactly as far as the cannelure is wide. Will try and measure the neck size tonight, I can say the bullet did not "fall in" when placed in the seating die, so fairly tight before hand.

Will measure the bullet diameter tonight, they are Woodleighs in .375.

Case providence is kind of "unknown". They are once-fired brass from my purchase from Dorfner in Vienna, and I'm not sure if he makes his own, has a supplier, etc. They are properly head stamped.

Sourcing some Qual-Carts is on my list, but ITAR, etc. makes the logistics behind that non-trivial for now. I do troll eGun on an almost daily basis. I have a great collection of NOS unfired RWS brass for the 6.5...

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

@SaintPanzer

Re: 7.62x63 - I assume you are entering this in QL as the 30-06 Springfield? That's what I'm looking at in both my Hornday manual and in QL. My QL is based on SAAMI (not CIP) - and I Assume that both our Hornady manuals also lean toward using SAAMI for max pressures.

Looking at the 168 grain A-Max and the QL (30-06/SAAMI) data and my Hornady manual (30-06) and VV N-160 I do not see much of a difference.

My (and your) Hornady Manuals agree on the minimum load being 54.0 grains for 2,400 FPS for all the Hornady bullets in the 165 - 168 grain class. (We know of course that they will test differently in different barrels and even between different bullets, most likely.)

Using my QL (SAAMI) I get 54.0 grains of VV N160 and the 168 A-Max @ COL 3.225", (H2O Overflow Volume 69.4 Gr = my Lapua Brass?) = 2,447 fps at a modest 40,218 psi (note MAX SAAMI pressure for the 30-06 is 60,000 psi).

Per the Internet on CIP Vs SAAMI:
The reason CIP differs from SAAMI is very simple...the data is taken at very different points on the case. CIP measures pressure at the case mouth (or thereabouts) and SAAMI take their measurement in the middle of the case. This the ONLY reason there is a difference in the numbers.Aug 27, 2020

I would always have more faith in data from the Hornady manual - especially when using their bullets. But I always try to cross reference with another manual and similar bullet - which you have done.

If it were me, (with the A-Max) I would start about a grain above the Hornady manual's minimum number (VV is much higher); load just two or three, and see what the LabRadar tells you.

My QL:
Cartridge : .30-06 Spring. (SAAMI)
Bullet : .308, 168, Hornady A-MAX 30502
Useable Case Capaci: 59.696 grain H2O = 3.876 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.225 inch = 81.92 mm
Barrel Length : 22.4 inch = 569.0 mm
Powder : Vihtavuori N160 *C

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-20.0 82 43.20 1942 1407 22064 6146 74.3 1.677
-18.0 84 44.28 1990 1478 23411 6389 75.7 1.636
-16.0 86 45.36 2039 1552 24844 6632 77.2 1.596
-14.0 88 46.44 2089 1628 26368 6875 78.6 1.557
-12.0 90 47.52 2139 1707 27990 7118 79.9 1.519
-10.0 92 48.60 2189 1788 29716 7359 81.3 1.481
-08.0 94 49.68 2240 1872 31554 7598 82.6 1.445
-06.0 96 50.76 2291 1959 33513 7834 83.9 1.409
-04.0 98 51.84 2343 2048 35604 8067 85.1 1.374
-02.0 100 52.92 2395 2140 37833 8295 86.4 1.338
+00.0 102 54.00 2447 2234 40218 8520 87.5 1.300
+02.0 104 55.08 2500 2331 42765 8738 88.7 1.263
+04.0 106 56.16 2553 2431 45492 8951 89.8 1.228
+06.0 108 57.24 2606 2534 48415 9156 90.9 1.193
+08.0 111 58.32 2660 2639 51549 9354 91.9 1.160 ! Near Maximum !
+10.0 113 59.40 2714 2747 54914 9543 92.8 1.128 ! Near Maximum !

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 102 54.00 2601 2523 48000 8986 94.4 1.201
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 102 54.00 2267 1917 33267 7735 78.1 1.413

@shootist~
Looking at the results from quick load does my head in. It's to complicated for this black duck.
That's why I like load from a disc with it hundreds of listed cartridges and projectiles from most manufacturers.
Pick a cartridge
Pick a projectile
You can adjust COAL
Pick a powder
Click screen. It will give loads lowest to highest with pressures and velocity, as well as recommending a load.
That simple even I can use it
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

What is the true diameter of your projectile?

Are your case necks thin? What brass are you using?

When I first acquired my M1910 I researched (pre internet) and found the dimensions of .375 Nitro Express Rimless / 9.5X57MS (old American Rifleman articles, 'Shooter's Bible', other sources), then ordered a two die set from RCBS and a 'Lee Anniversary' loading kit (low budget was me).

At that time Hornady 3715 projectiles were readily available 'off the shelf' but 9.5X57 brass was something of which I had no access with the exception of Berdan primed original DWM 531. I read about reforming .30-'06 brass to 9.5X57 (in stages) and reasoned that .35 Whelen brass, which was available to me new, would be a closer fit. My 'old duffer' mentors agreed.

At first attempt I tried running a .35 Whelen through in a single pass and it worked. I then cut to proper length, loaded them with the Hornady #3715 and 42 grains of IMR 4895 (I may have run 40 grains on the first few - it's been a while). They worked perfectly, seating right to the cannelure.

After resizing, trimming, and loading the remainder of the cases purchased, I shot them all, have reloaded and fired them since.

I have some Qual-Cart 9.5X57 brass now, a stock of (apparently Hornady 3715) .375 270 grain RN 'blems' acquired through Midway a few years back (of which I find no 'blemishes', anomalies, or defects of any sort) and also some .375 260 grain Nosler Solids (#29755) in 'unleaded' to stuff in case I get a chance to go after some feral hogs (can't shoot critters with lead in this state any longer). Haven't dug out my bench or loaded any of them yet.

When I do, I'll likely load the 'Blem' 270 grain RNs as I had previously and figure a proper load for the Noslers and stuff them in the properly headstamped Qual-Cart brass.

@Brian Rothhammer
I'm still a cheapskate still using my old Lee anniversary press after God knows how many years or how many thousands of rounds.
Bob

 

[Brian Rothhammer]

@Brian Rothhammer
I'm still a cheapskate still using my old Lee anniversary press after God knows how many years or how many thousands of rounds.
Bob

"If it works, don't fix it.'