Lyman & Lee Manuals

Discussion in 'Reloading' started by CaptainXL, May 31, 2012.

  1. Just noticed this --- Both the Lyman's 49th Edition and the Lee 2nd Edition Loading Manuals have notations in the .40 S&W sections of thier books that say not to use the data shown in for .40 S&W in chambers that are not fully supported.

    Specifically, in the .40 S&W section of the Lee 2nd Edition manaul it says: "Do not use reloads in Glock or similar guns with chambers that do not fully support the cartrige due to intruision of the feed ramp."

    The Lyman 49th Edition .40 S&W section it says: "Warning: Only use this data in handguns that fully support the cartridge in the chamber. If used in unsupported chambers, cases can ruture and cause harm to the shooter or bystanders."

    There are not any of the "warnings" printed in sections of the reloading manuals for any other calibers. The "warnings" are printed only in the .40 S&W sections both of the reloading manuals.

    Up until now I have reloaded only for 9mm. I have not loaded .40 S&W up until this point but recently bought a set of .40 S&W dies with plans to load for a G27.

    WTF??? Are they serious? I assume that everyone just ignores the warnings. Or, am I wrong? Should I take the warnings seriously and load .40 S&W only in lighter loads?

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. Loading...

    Similar Threads Forum Date
    Lyman reloading handbook question Reloading Aug 1, 2015
    WTS 4 Lyman Split Lock Rings Misc. Gun Stuff Jun 26, 2015
    Lyman Split Lock Rings Reloading Jun 26, 2015
    Lyman trigger pull gauge Gunsmithing Jun 9, 2015
    WTS: Lyman Great Plains Rifle .54 Caliber Flintlock (PA) Firearms Listings Apr 29, 2015

  3. TN.Frank

    TN.Frank Glock4Life

    Basically it's CYA for those Glock "Kabooms" that happen once in a blue moon. They don't want to be held responsible IF something happens like that.

  4. Ignore it and just look for warning signs. Most Glock barrels now are very well supported.
  5. Lawyer Ease,CYA ! SJ 40
  6. That's what I figured. I've read too many posts on this forum to think that anyone really paid any attention to the warnings.

    I guess everyone has to keep their back sides covered but I'm still curious as to why the warnings are only printed in the .40 S&W sections of the two manuals and not all of the other caliber sections of the books.

    Oh well, onwards and upwards.

    Hopefully will begin reloading some Precision Delta 180 gr FMJ .40's next week for the first time. Plan on using some Unique and some PP to work up some test loads.

    Have only loaded 9mm's up until this point in time.
  7. I wouldn't ignore the warnings! Suppose I had a Glock Gen 1 .40. That chamber isn't very well supported. Or course, I am guessing that there is actually a Gen 1 .40 - I wouldn't know. Sometime back, actually, a long time back, there was a problem with Glock .40s.

    But it IS a fact that there are still Glocks in circulation where the feedramp seriously undercuts the chamber.

    I would check my chamber by dropping a round in place and see what I thought about the support of the case near the feedramp.

    Somebody on this forum posts photos of the various barrels and I know I have seen similar photos in General Glocking. A forum search will probably turn up something.

    There's a reason the warnings are there. For newer models it may not be an issue but it certainly used to be a problem. As the warnings are only related to .40, it is also apparent that the folks writing the manual knew exactly which guns had the defect.

  8. You worry about everything. I said ignore the warning AND LOOK FOR WARNING SIGNS. Factory ammo in .40 is sometimes kinda stout PLUS brass in .40 back in the early days was a little thin. Download modern brass just a bit and it will work fine even in the old barrels.
    #7 Colorado4Wheel, May 31, 2012
    Last edited: May 31, 2012
  9. I agree!

    Look for signs by checking the round in the chamber and by looking at expended brass. Look for the photos of the unsupported chambers and look for photos of the Glock pimple. Good information to have.

    But the tipoff that looking is even required is right there in the manual. There was, at one time, a problem sufficient to justify adding the warning to the manual. Just something to show that some amount of investigation is warranted.

    Were it not for the published warnings, this thread wouldn't even exist.

    I have heard that Federal brass was a little wimpy in the early days but I have seen the photos of the unsupported cases and the Glock dimple.

    #8 F106 Fan, May 31, 2012
    Last edited: May 31, 2012
  10. WiskyT

    WiskyT Malcontent

    They have a term for that. It's called the "Ski Pass" syndrome or something like that. Back in the 70's, the ski resorts were getting sued. So they put a simple warning on the back of the lift pass. After a few years, the warnings had gotten so long, convoluted, and the print was so small, that no one bothered to read it anymore. That's what is going on here. They provide data and then spend a chapter in the beginning, and then several more throughout the manual, warning you to not use any of the info in the book.
  11. Ok, your confusing me now! Which isn't hard, is it pimple or dimple and is that anything like bulge? :rofl:
    #10 ColoCG, May 31, 2012
    Last edited: May 31, 2012
  12. I noticed this in a couple of my new ones, in my older ones it doesnt have this warning. Got another one that has a full page of disclaimers, boils down to someone tried to blame them for something and lawyers got involved. Old guy at work has some books from the 70s that make the loads in my books look like powder puff loads.
  13. Highspeedlane

    Highspeedlane NRA Life Member

    I have a Gen 2 made in 1995 and the chamber was huge. Looking at cases from it, I can see where the brass would likely fatigue pretty quick from resizing and reloading.

    Glock barrel on left, Wilson match barrel on right. What a difference.

  14. Glock Gen 2 introduced in March 1989. Gen 3 introduced in January 1998. .40 S&W designed in January 1990 and introduced several months later.

    There are though, I believe, three Glock chamber/barrel iterations for .40 S&W.
  15. I always thought of the bulge as a large ring entirely around the case. The entire chamber is too large.

    OTOH, the pimple (or dimple or whatever) is a section of brass that is bulged out right where it meets the feedramp. There are plenty of example photos of brass failure in this region. The entire head doesn't separate, just a blown out area where the feedramp is overcut.

    I realize this is kind of an old problem and it's been known for years and years. But it's strictly a .40 S&W Glock problem that, AFAIK, has since been corrected. Still, there are probably barrels around from the earlier versions.

    I don't load .40 but if I ever do, it will be for a Sig 229.

    #14 F106 Fan, May 31, 2012
    Last edited: May 31, 2012
  16. Booooooo.

    I hope I didn't scare anyone.
    #15 Colorado4Wheel, May 31, 2012
    Last edited: May 31, 2012
  17. Well, I do load for a Glock G21SF so that ought to count for something.

    The P229 would be a match for my wife's duty weapon. There's no way we're going to shoot reloads in the department's weapon but we might just buy a duplicate to use in practice.

    Around here, both the PD and the SO use Sigs - just the way the choices came out. The patrol guys use a P226 and the plainclothes folks use a P229.

  18. dkf


    For carry I'll take the barrel on the left any day.

    Here is a new vs old pic with a LW thrown in. As you can see the newer Glock barrel is better and good enough for me.

  19. Zombie Steve

    Zombie Steve Decap Pin Killa

    Start loading .45 auto. Problem solved.
  20. :phew:Well I'm glad you cleared that up.

    I also have an old Gen 2 G23 in .40 That never had a bulge of any size on it. For years I even did a couple of things with it that I didn't know you wern't supposed to do until I started reading on the internet.

    And that was load lead in the factory barrel and they were 155gr lead swc to boot. They fed, fired, and ejected fine without any noteworthy leading or bulges or pimples or dimples. :dunno:
    #19 ColoCG, Jun 1, 2012
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2012
  21. Yep, that is why I use my LW barrel for reloads and the Glock Factory barrel for factory ammo.

Share This Page

Duty Gear at CopsPlus