“Dear Editor,” it read. “For twenty years, I used my father’s data for the .44 Mag. 240-grain Sierra over 21.5 grains of 2400. Last month, that load keyholed at 25 yards. My new chronograph shows pressure signs he never had. Is the powder different? Or have I just forgotten how to listen to the brass?”
“October 2011. Issue #274. Reduce 58.0 to 55.5 grains. Work up in 0.5 increments. Reason: Dad’s powder lot was 1992. New H4895 is faster. Also: I’m not him. That’s fine.” “Dear Editor,” it read
It was signed: “Uneasy in Idaho.”
He turned to page 47. “Understanding Lot-to-Lot Powder Variation,” by J. R. Walmsley. Last month, that load keyholed at 25 yards
The feature article, “The .30-06: A Century of Precision,” wasn’t what caught his eye. It was a small, cramped letter to the editor in the back, squeezed between a powder review and a classified ad for a vintage Lyman mold. Or have I just forgotten how to listen to the brass
He looked at the box on his bench. .45-70 Government. Three hundred grain hollow points. He had inherited the rifle—an 1886 Winchester—from his own father in 1997. But the load data his dad had scribbled on a stained index card (58 grains of H4895, CCI 200) now grouped like a shotgun pattern.