I was a a bit surprised when I compared load data between my 49th ed Lymanreloading manual and my2nd ed Lee Modern Reloading manual for S&W460 load data.

Lyman: Barnes XPB 250 gr., H110 powder
Starting : 36.5gn Max: 38.5gn
1985 fps 2123 fps

Lee: Barnes XPB 250 gr., H110 powder
Starting : 39.0gn Max: 41.5gn
1985 fps 2133 fps

I am a little spooked when I see one statring out above the max reccomended load of anouther source. I would greatly appreciate any help regarding this issue since this is not a round I want to risk an excessive load on. (none for that matter)
Thanks

Take a look at the differences in oal. Are they being seated at the same depth?

No they are the same. 2.20", that was the first thing I checked.

I know powder can differ from lot to lot,but that's a pretty big swing.Hodgdons website is the same as Lee.If your in doubt, call Hodgdon an tell them your concern. They should be able to set you straight.

Ferggie,

It is completely normal to have two sources list different starting and ending loads. What is really interesting is I checked Hodgdon, and their data is exactly the same as the Lee you posted. Exactly.

I checked Hogdon as they also list pressure. Is there any listed pressure associated with the Lyman and Lee numbers you posted? I tend to always start with Hodgdon, as they do list pressure, and I have a lot of history with their data working out for me with other rounds (I do not have a 460). I like to consult at least 3 or 4 sources if I can find them, and I pay attention to OAL (as Lefty noted) and especially the listed test platform or pressure barrel.

In this situation, I would see that Lee and Hodgdon are in agreement, perhaps try and find a fourth source, and if this fourth source agrees with Lee and Hogdon, I would tend to be comfortable with that data.

Craig

Hodgdon's is my bible when it comes to data, but I will also check the bullet maker's data and if much different I just split the difference to start. Hodgdon's is always warmer than the others, but sometimes not that much.

Lee only lists the max pressure

Lyman: 38.5 gn = 56,000
Lee: 41.5 gr = 56,800

Once again the Lee is identical to Hodgdon. It sure looks like Lee's data is Hodgdon's. With the pressure data you listed, it looks like Lyman is being a little more conservative. At least this is how I would interperate. As S4 pointed out, I too have a lot of faith in Hodgdon, especially as it is their powder.

A chrony will tell you if you have started too low with H110, and for me personally I do not get too worked up on the top end, as I usually do not try and go there anyway ;^)

Craig

Lyman is pretty conservative with all their data. I agree with Bearbait, go with Hodgdon's data.

Lee commonly takes the loading data furnished by the powder manufacturers, and re-publishes it in their manual, rather than developing that data through their own testing. They state that in their manual.
It's also common for Lee to take identical Winchester and Hodgdon powders and show identical pressures, loads, and velocities in their manual, obviously without doing their own testing. Look at HP-38/231 and 296/H110 in any number of calibers.

The primers specified:

Lyman: LRM
Hodgdon: LRM
Lee: LR

But the load data is exactly the same from Lee & Hodgdon.
I have seen where people have said that mag primers make a difference and NEVER use magnum primers with VV powder and yet Lyman list vv (N110) with magnum primers.

good info

I check the bullet mfg. as well. The problem is Barnes doesn't list a thing for some of their bullets. The 325 gr. barns buster is one of them. The only info I have found was the Lee and called personally to confirm which data to use for the 325 and they told me to use the Jacketed data.

Its not unusual to have differing powder quantities. What to notice, and is the guide IMHO, is the velocity. A chronograph is essential when you're playing at top end. Note the velocities are nearly identical. I honestly don't worry too much about the top end loads - if I have velocity to go by. Think of how a rifle cartridge works. It is basically pressure-volume relationship. In general more pressure equals more velocity. For a given amount of the same powder, smaller volume = more pressure/velocity, more volume = less pressure/velocity. Seemingly small differences in chamber size can mean significant changes in pressure/velocity.

I always default to pressure tested data. - most powder mfrs will list pressure for a given recipe. You'll find given like components, barrel lengths and bullets velocity will be similar. If you have a chrono, go by the velocity and not so much by what ABC says is the top load. I have a 7mm RM that hits top velocity with 2 gr less powder than most manuals call for. I have several others that need a grain or 1.5 to get there.

BTW: I don't believe in the mythical "fast barrel". Usually when someone has a gun that gets more velocity than is normally called for, they also have higher pressure to accompany it - even if the classic pressure signs are absent.

Also BTW: Lee simply lists other mfrs data which is why it is identical to Hodgdon.

I don't find this to be true in general. I don't shoot VV powder but tend to shoot magnum primers on any cartridge that burns 60+ grains of powder. Check out primer brisance testing. Win primers tend to be the hottest. A win LR is almost as hot as most of the magnum primers - especially Rem. I tend to use WLR for all loads, if they group well, and WLRM for all loads shooting 60+ grains of slow burning powder.

I don't know VV powders but find it hard to believe they wouldn't want a person to use a magnum primer with large doses of their slower powders. The example you listed is a good example.