Post by: Cat112 on December 11, 2016, 04:02:14 PM
Cat here, doing my thing. So, as a new reloader, I have found that using the Lee Handloader kit is extremely fun...and extremely slow. Especially for a complicated round such as 303 Brit (many have commented and commended me on taking on such a task). Anyways, Today I finally Got a chance to get some data in for the rifle. And well...Its kind of weird. To sum up what I did, heres a small break down of what i had:
20 rounds prvi partisan 180 grn, soft point
(handholds had the same input: winchester/PPU casings, winchester magnum primer, lee dipper 2.8cc of BLC-2)
20 rounds Hornady 174 gr boat tail
20 rounds Speer round nose 180 gr
20 rounds Speer soft point 180 gr
Alright, so now begins the fun. The factory load was to be my control. I measured all of them and got the average OAL and diameter. I basically dissected the bullet to get a feel for what standard i was looking for. Of course, I would build up with this knowledge. Then there was the range...the factory loads went everywhere. I was using paper plates (9 inch circumference) at 100 yards, bench rested. I COULD NOT GET A SINGLE GROUPING :grrr:
Then on another plate, i started shooting handholds. To note, the boat tails felt more "predictable" in terms on shooting, and the soft points coming in close second. the round noses seemed to have a weird pattern of grouping low...more on that later.
To make this even more quirky, i also had an idea on playing with the OAL, so long as it did not exceed the max OAL. I understand SMLE have VARIOUS chamber sizes and thus, OAL is hard to gauge for them, how ever, i appears that mine is a little blown out but short. i noticed that all rounds would fit right into the breech just fine, but the length of the bullet on some would prevent the bolt from properly closing. Of course, ejected, set aside. How does this relate? The shorter rounds (75.4 i believe was my estimated average), seemed to be the best. I did not really take too much note on the round noses because i felt that id most likely be loading boat tails and soft points, but i will still retain the data for later use.
Now for the humorous part. I decided "Hey, why not go Olympic shooting with this bad girl?" So, I stood up and shot 100m with an SMLE. And what do you know, ACURRATE GROUPINGS!!! :geekdanc:
I took groupings of 5 soft point and 10 boat tail. The soft point scored an AMAZING 1/12 grouping, while the boat tail scored 3" groupings. How i did this better than bench rested with factory ammo, I don't know, i guess it was Pit love (inside joke for any Marines reading this). i continued to send rounds benched after finding this out with the same results as standing.
Now to Questions of a newbie part, now that we got the mad science out of the way. WTH was going on with the factory loads? was i maybe the way the powder ignites or maybe the way the cases expanded? Im trying to figure out how those groupings came to be so foul. I will try to retest to see if it replicates.
As for the handloads, I believe I know what I must do; for the 174 gr, slowly back down so its a minimum load, slow it down a little so its not spreading as much. the soft points are my scalpel rounds lol. Ultimately, I do wish to make my rifle a shooter, and see what I can do i competition shoots. I do like the BLC-2, and will probably try another powder, but i think BLC will be my standard. Im using the Win. Magnum primers, making a good combo with the BLC, but any other suggestions? She may be old, but she isn't taking age into account.
Do want to make a shout out to Inspector and the crew at the range. With out the help of those projectiles and priceless advice, wouldn't have any clue as to what I was doing. Was great getting range time with you guys!
Post by: Cat112 on December 11, 2016, 04:21:48 PM
The first pic with markings is my standing.
The other two are the prvi partisan factory Ammo,
Post by: oldfart on December 11, 2016, 04:58:11 PM
Am I reading this right? You shot groups at 100 yds that measured 1-1/2 to 3 inches from a standing position?
Post by: Cat112 on December 11, 2016, 05:28:48 PM
When you say "handholds", do you mean "handloads"?
Yeah autocorrect can sometimes be annoying, case in point. Translate handholds to handloads HAHA
Am I reading this right? You shot groups at 100 yds that measured 1-1/2 to 3 inches from a standing position?
I was just as surprised, to the point where Im just going to take it for what it is. I can account for that one flier as i rushed and jerked the trigger. I use a 3-9x40 scope to spot and when i tried spotting for myself, it wasn't happening. Even in my data book my calls were nowhere near what I thought i was hitting, although i had the right direction (high or low, left or right). The picture is there to show proof (old internet adage of "Pics or it didn't happen"); This target was what I pulled after standing.
I think I need to try again to confirm these holds with this rifle.
Post by: oldfart on December 11, 2016, 05:58:08 PM
I was just as surprised, to the point where Im just going to take it for what it is. I can account for that one flier as i rushed and jerked the trigger. I use a 3-9x40 scope to spot and when i tried spotting for myself, it wasn't happening. Even in my data book my calls were nowhere near what I thought i was hitting, although i had the right direction (high or low, left or right). The picture is there to show proof (old internet adage of "Pics or it didn't happen"); This target was what I pulled after standing....
I think I need to try again to confirm these holds with this rifle.
I'm still trying to wrap my brain around your messages.
I see the target. You shot that from an unsupported standing position?
...
You said the ammo looked "blown out". Does that mean the fired shell casings look bigger and bloated than factory ammo?
....
What are "scalpel" rounds?
.....
You shooting an old Lee Enfield bolt rifle? how about a pic?
.....
Were you reloading the fired shells at the range immediately using the Lee loading kit?
Some precision rifle shooters do something like that.
...
Wow
Post by: Cat112 on December 11, 2016, 07:38:09 PM
-
I apologize for my newbie terms. I try to describe things as I see them or use terms I note down for myself (part of my mad scientist methodology :P). As you said, the casing do seem swollen compared to the factory casing and other casings that seemed okay. I only neck size them, but as I learned today from Inspector, I may have to full length resize. I tried inserting the swollen cases into the chamber and they didn't fit well; the bolt wouldn't close all the way or the extractor wouldn't catch.
-
In my data book, i title different loads with different names in reference to their purpose. "Scalpel" rounds is what denotes for match grade rounds. They should be giving me more precise groups in comparison to factory rounds. Again, excuse my madness and newness.
-
I loaded these prior to the range, not at the range. I did use reused brass. I did use some remoil to clean them of any gunk and them use case lube before reloading casings. It seems to work but I do intend to clean them in some acetone and put them through a tumbler. Maybe I stumbled onto something...
-
its a new purchase but I just love the SMLE rifles. It's a BSA Sht LE manufactured in 1917. Barrel has definate muzzle wear but the lands and grooves are in good shape.
-
On a side note, I think I may turn this into a living post and start a blog/YouTube channel to help people getting into shooting and reloading
Post by: ren on December 11, 2016, 08:39:46 PM
I'm not familiar with that particular load.
I don;t know what your are trying to accomplish but like any problem in life - break it down and work one variable at a time or you can manage.
Charge weight. Bullet seating depth. Components. etc.
It's rare to see soft points as "scalpel" or match rounds. Consistent bullet jackets are formed from the base to the tip with a small hollow cavity or point. This is to produce the best concentricity on the outside diameter of the bullet.
Post by: Cat112 on December 11, 2016, 09:11:16 PM
I was surprised that the soft points did so well. I figured the boat tails would be closer but I guess I hit the sweet spot with the SP and have to tailor the BTs. I'll keep the same data for the SP and load three sets of BTs; one a lighter load, one previous established load, and one load that's built up.
definately going to post the results. Hopefully I'll get there this sunday
I really appreciate the hints and tips guys. I'm hoping today's data was a weird fluke and got some good info. Research has to be done...FOR SCIENCE!
Post by: oldfart on December 11, 2016, 10:25:45 PM
Obviously you have a bit of experience shooting rifles.
Feel free to tell us where you learned how to shoot.
...
RE. Factory ammo, bloated shells, accuracy.....
Usually shells fired from YOUR bolt action rifle will readily fit back into the same gun.
If your cases look bloated when compared to factory ammo, then maybe the chamber is loosey-goosey.
That might explain poor accuracy with factory ammo.
If you reload the cases from your own rifle, they would be much more accurate, simply because the shells have fire formed themselves to the chamber.
Post by: Cat112 on December 12, 2016, 12:10:57 AM
Interesting thread.
Obviously you have a bit of experience shooting rifles.
Feel free to tell us where you learned how to shoot.
...
RE. Factory ammo, bloated shells, accuracy.....
Usually shells fired from YOUR bolt action rifle will readily fit back into the same gun.
If your cases look bloated when compared to factory ammo, then maybe the chamber is loosey-goosey.
That might explain poor accuracy with factory ammo.
If you reload the cases from your own rifle, they would be much more accurate, simply because the shells have fire formed themselves to the chamber.
I started a thing! ;D
-
I give credit to Uncle Sam's Misguided Children LOL.
-
Ahhh okay. Got it. Based on this, if I were to full length resize the casing, it would change how the casing expands in the chamber, correct? If so, that would lead me to create another batch with plinking in mind to form those casings to the rifle. I mean, I'm not complaining that I have to shoot more and do more reloading :thumbsup:
Post by: Inspector on December 12, 2016, 04:38:41 AM
I sold him 100 rounds of brand new brass and bullets. He told me he did not full length resize the brass before he loaded and shot them. My feeling is one should always FL resize brand new brass before the first use. SMLE's are well known for having large/loose chambers and if you FL size your brass after every use it won't last very long. Neck sizing is recommended after the first fire forming. Case head failures are common with reloads in this cartridge/rifle combination.
I can also verify his results as I watched him bring back his targets and viewed them for myself.
The SMLE is inherently an accurate rifle if you use the correct components with your reloads. Assuming wear on the rifle is within tolerances. Why the commercial ammo is not performing very well is a mystery. But to see his reloads (and his skill) work so well first time off is amazing to me!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Post by: Cat112 on December 12, 2016, 06:18:23 AM
That was my one fear with loading these rounds; I really did not want a case head separation. I'll try full sizing the bloated casing and see what happens. This is a new aspect of shooting I'm finding (more like stumbling into) that's entertaining...it's also starting to entertain my wallet lol
Post by: Inspector on December 12, 2016, 06:53:42 AM
I got a pretty good grouping on my pack too :roflThe case head separation typically happens after full length sizing "bloated" cases several times. The FL die works the brass really hard. That is why I recommended just FL sizing the first time and neck sizing each subsequent time. There may come a time where you have to FL size your brass again. I found that after a while the brass starts fitting tightly into the chamber. I have successfully reloaded some of my 303 British brass 8 or 9 times so far. Of course I am shooting light reloads. So the brass isn't stretching as much per shot. Just watch for signs of case head separation on your brass.
That was my one fear with loading these rounds; I really did not want a case head separation. I'll try full sizing the bloated casing and see what happens. This is a new aspect of shooting I'm finding (more like stumbling into) that's entertaining...it's also starting to entertain my wallet lol
To answer your other question regarding powder and light loads....
The Hodgdon's website recommends only using H4895 in a whitepaper they have on their site: http://www.hodgdon.com/PDF/H4895%20Reduced%20Rifle%20Loads.pdf
If you really want to try a really reduced load you can try using Trailboss: http://www.hodgdon.com/PDF/Trail-Boss-Reduced-Loads%20R_P.pdf
If you decide to go to the lead (dark) side, then you open up another world of powder choices. I typically use H4895 and IMR 4198 but mostly the 4198.
With all that said, there is a world of load data out there from people who are doing reduced loads using IMR 4895, IMR 4064, IMR 3031, IMR 4227 and many more. Then there are those who use pistol/shotgun powders in very small quantities to light off a medium to large rifle round. I don't like to recommend recipes as I don't want responsibility for anything happening to your particular gun. I use a 200gr lead round nose boolit with gas check that is sized properly for my rifle to .313.
I recommend you slug your barrel. You might be surprised as some of these old war horses can have barrels up to the .315 range. My rifle slugs out to .311 so I can use a proper .311 jacketed or .313 lead boolit.
Post by: Cat112 on December 12, 2016, 11:12:30 AM
I do need to slug the rifle now that I know its quirks, and go from there. Seeing as how I'm working my way into collecting Milsurps, this will be a good starting point.
I'm already in the process of sorting casings for various purposes. I did notice on the bloated cases that the expansion chamber (right terminology?) above the head do have definitive stress marks, where you can see the "ring". Have to keep an eye on that.
As far as powders go, again, going to stick with BLC2 and once I get all the data established, then experiment with other powders. I did however see what others were doing with powder formulas and combinations with projectiles. Interesting to note that the enfields favor the higher weight Bullets.
Post by: Inspector on December 12, 2016, 12:29:49 PM
I'm already in the process of sorting casings for various purposes. I did notice on the bloated cases that the expansion chamber (right terminology?) above the head do have definitive stress marks, where you can see the "ring". Have to keep an eye on that.Those "stress marks" as you called them are pretty normal for that cartridge. Just keep a close eye on them. The brass will get thin there if it is getting close to failing. Just neck sizing will help the longevity of your brass.
Post by: Bushido on December 12, 2016, 08:45:16 PM
I can verify he was standing while shooting. He knows his way around a rifle for sure. Though his backpack is a little worse for wear. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I sold him 100 rounds of brand new brass and bullets. He told me he did not full length resize the brass before he loaded and shot them. My feeling is one should always FL resize brand new brass before the first use. SMLE's are well known for having large/loose chambers and if you FL size your brass after every use it won't last very long. Neck sizing is recommended after the first fire forming. Case head failures are common with reloads in this cartridge/rifle combination.
I can also verify his results as I watched him bring back his targets and viewed them for myself.
The SMLE is inherently an accurate rifle if you use the correct components with your reloads. Assuming wear on the rifle is within tolerances. Why the commercial ammo is not performing very well is a mystery. But to see his reloads (and his skill) work so well first time off is amazing to me!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
He's got a good guy guiding him.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Heavies on December 12, 2016, 09:48:47 PM
On the OAL and length of the bullet question. Different bullets have different profiles. The portion of the bullet where it transitions from "pointy" to "straight" will vary with the different bullet types. Boat tail bullets usually have a longer "pointy" portion with the "straight" shank occurring further down the aspect of the projectile. Of course, conversely, round nose type projectile have the straight part way up at the tip of the bullet. This is called "ogive". You where right not to fire the rounds that would not chamber. The ogive could have been jamming into the lands and grooves of the barrel. Depending on your load that could have caused excessive pressure.
(http://accurateshooter.net/Blog/bulletshapes4.jpg)
(http://i1195.photobucket.com/albums/aa393/Nomercy448/BulletComparator3_zps1064efec.jpg)
In bolt action rifles, usually one may get away with only neck sizing for two or three reloading cycles before the case expands too much to allow easy-ish bolt closure. In military rifles, chambers may be a little more generous, to allow for fouling and dirt in combat conditions. I think I have read somewhere that Enfield's are notorious for fairly large chambers. This maybe the situation here and the cases may not last very many reloadings. Brass is a funny metal and as it works, by sizing, it actually gets harder and more brittle. If the chamber is on the really large size, the brass might not last too many cycles. Watch carefully for case head separation and look for the signs of that and cracked necks. Advanced reloaders may opt to "anneal" the necks, only the neck, of cases to have them last more reloading before cracking. However, if your rifle's chamber is on the large size, that probably wouldn't help much, as the case body will not last too many cycles. Keep an eye on it.
No real experience with Lee Enfields so I am not too sure about the quirks of reloading them. The case headspaces off of the rim. so may be you really do need to full size the cases for them to fit back into the chamber. You could experiment with setting the die up proud, then slowly lowering it into the press, so that it sizes the case minimally; testing as you go to see at what point the case fits into the chamber. (Don't forget to trim the necks down to correct Case Overall Length)
Check out this article:
http://www.accurateshooter.com/technical-articles/case-head-separation-cause-diagnosis/
(http://accurateshooter.net/Blog/casehead03.jpg)
For case lube. It is a good thing to remove all the lube from the cases before firing the rounds. You want the case to be clean and oil free, so that when the round is fired the case expands, seals the chamber, and the brass "grabs" onto the interior walls of the chamber. This will greatly reduce the recoil force on the bolt. In some instances oiled cases can be dangerous and cause excessive force on the bolt lugs.
Lastly, Be sure to trim all cases, after sizing, to the correct case lengths. If your rifle has a real generous chamber, the brass will grow a lot. You definitely do not want the neck of the case jammed into the lands and grooves of the barrel. That would be a bad day for sure.
Post by: Cat112 on December 13, 2016, 01:03:42 AM
-
Thanks for the heads up on that Heavies and the support. I figured that that's how OAL played out in the chamber but never thought about the projectile itself. More research and notes to be done. On this next trip, I'll take more detailed notes and post them with results. I'm really liking Hornady's stuff.
As far as trimming cases, Since these are the first series of casings fired through the rifle, I'm going to verify their case length and see what's going on. I'll dissect a casing too, especially a stressed one so I can really learn a thing or two. To also keep my "quasi scientific research" constant, going to use new brass and not the previously fired cases, just to confirm what I have now. What I usually say in such matters, "seems legit". Just to clarify, what did you mean by "anneal" the neck? Is that the method of using a full length die to size just the neck?
-
On a side note, I hope this helps others too, especially someone on the fence about reloading and shooting. Need to start recording and getting that vlog up and running.
Post by: Inspector on December 13, 2016, 04:12:44 AM
He's got a good guy guiding him.:oops: :oops: :oops:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: dustoff003 on December 13, 2016, 04:47:23 AM
Annealing is a form of heat treatment. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annealing_(metallurgy)
There is a vast amount of info on web about the process as it relates to cartridge cases.
I hope to start reloading myself in the future and to add a Lee Enfield rifle to my collection.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Cat112 on December 13, 2016, 08:06:38 AM
Howdy Cat welcome and thanks for sharing. You have the right crew of folks here providing guidance I know them all and they are all class acts knowledgeable in reloading.Hey, thanks dust off. Not going to lie, been lurking on these forums for a while, just recently became very active lol.
Annealing is a form of heat treatment. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annealing_(metallurgy)
There is a vast amount of info on web about the process as it relates to cartridge cases.
I hope to start reloading myself in the future and to add a Lee Enfield rifle to my collection.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Going take a look at all this. SO MUCH KNOWLEDGE!!! again, will post results. Of course guidance from the all-knowing ones is a must (throw in Star Wars Sith reference)
Hopefully this post will help you (and I hope it currently is) in reloading. I love the history behind SMLEs and what they can do as a bolt gun. It's easiest to find them up on gunbroker; shipping here is a pain but every so often you'll find a sweet deal that's worth it. In the process of reading an Lee Enfield book to find the history on my girl.
Post by: Rocky on December 13, 2016, 11:26:27 AM
Heavies :wave: beat me to the ogive variable.
In our reload data for .308 Win, we kept track of types of primers, cases, times cased used, powders and measurement's, bullets, projectile speed, COAL and ogive.
What we found was one of the biggest contributors of consistent speed and accuracy was the ogive.
Granted, some primers, cases, times cased used, powder combinations had better results than others, but as long as this bullet and ogive were maintained, the best results occurred for that specific combination of variables.
So far, we have found that our best load of a 168 gr Sierra HPBT MK with a speed in the 2600 range had an Ogive of 3.275'' and a COAL of 2.815''-2.825''. :worship:
Keeping these measurement specs gave us the most consistent speed and accuracy and grouping regardless of all other factors.
COAL varies slightly as the tip of this HP is not perfect and there can be as much as 0.010" difference between bullets. (mind you SAAMI COAL is 2.490 min- 2.810 max).
COAL also varies between types of bullets. ???
Nosler 168 gr PPT has a COAL of 2.620''. :o
Our max ogive seating (with this bullet in this rifle) is 3.385'' so at 3.3275'' we have a bullet "jump" of 0.11".
This is still short of our maximum / minimum "jump'' goal of 0.002, but so far I don't think we can get much tighter with our .555'' three shot groups and .89'' seven shot groups at 100 yds. ;D We're new to .308 precision shooting. :oops:
As our distance increases, we'll try heavier bullets.
As for Case lube, ya gotta get them cases clean. I think it was Inspector who said to use spray Brake Cleaner . I think it was non-teflon type. Don't know, just brought it back up the garage yesterday.
Now ya get to cram more data into yur head . :crazy:
Post by: Cat112 on December 13, 2016, 02:18:18 PM
-
So to make sure I got this, COAL has a direct impact on ballistics due to the relationship between case pressure and bullet seating depth. My question is if the ogive on a certain manufacturer is quite long, could reducing the load while seating the bullet lower (of course within spec) yield a desireable effect? I'm speaking hypothetically.
Also, how would I measure the ogive correctly?
Post by: oldfart on December 13, 2016, 05:12:45 PM
Welcome Cat.....
As for Case lube, ya gotta get them cases clean. I think it was Inspector who said to use spray Brake Cleaner . I think it was non-teflon type. Don't know, just brought it back up the garage yesterday.
Now ya get to cram more data into yur head . :crazy:
That brake cleaner tip was from my warped brain.
Non chlorinated brake cleaner and newspapers to remove grease and oil from brass or ammo
Post by: Rocky on December 13, 2016, 05:28:34 PM
....
That brake cleaner tip was from my warped brain.
Non chlorinated brake cleaner and newspapers to remove grease and oil from brass or ammo
Sorry OF, I knew it was you Inspector or some other ancient reloading Guru
Your warped brain?
I went from Non chlorinated brake cleaner to non-teflon :crazy:
So to make sure I got this, COAL has a direct impact on ballistics due to the relationship between case pressure and bullet seating depth.
Close, Bullet seating depth has a direct impact on ballistics due to case pressure.
My question is if the ogive on a certain manufacturer is quite long, could reducing the load while seating the bullet lower (of course within spec) yield a desireable effect?
I'm speaking hypothetically.
You'll find longer (usually heavier) bullets have less of a load than lighter bullets due to the fact that they are longer and must be seated in the case deeper (thus increasing pressure) so the "fit" into the barrel
Also, how would I measure the ogive correctly?
With a McGiver :wacko: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Actually, the device is called a "Bullet comaparator.
This vid kinda explains some of the things I mentioned and may answer some of your questions.
https://2ahawaii.com/index.php?topic=25810.0
Here's another link regarding seating depth to mess you up some more
http://www.sinclairintl.com/GunTech/Determining-Bullet-Seating-Depth-/detail.htm?lid=16131
Now both of you "elders" can correct me. :love:
Post by: ren on December 13, 2016, 05:45:37 PM
If you get a tumbler it would be faster.
I throw all my lubed brass in a wet tumbler then for more bling, into a tumbler with corn cob loaded with NuFinish.
Post by: oldfart on December 13, 2016, 06:35:35 PM
mineral spirits work well.....
If you get a tumbler it would be faster.
I throw all my lubed brass in a wet tumbler then for more bling, into a tumbler with corn cob loaded with NuFinish.
Never tried mineral spirits but I first used carburetor cleaner. Remember carburetors? Holley, Rochester?
The kind of carb cleaner to use has little or no alcohol.
In recent years I switched to Johnsens or CRC non-chlorinated brake cleaner which smells and feels just like the carb cleaner I used to use.
I also liked Macs from napa ...see pic
For my tumbler, I prefer dry tumble. Corn cob and walnut with polish like white rubbing compound for cars.
Squirt some charcoal lighter fluid prior to adding brass.
Post by: oldfart on December 13, 2016, 06:42:42 PM
...
But seriously, it's bad sh..t. I think it could cause you to pass out or have heart palpitations.
Post by: Heavies on December 13, 2016, 06:56:14 PM
Oh yeah, don't breath the fumes too much or you'll end up writing like ROCKY! :shake: :wave: :wacko: :shaka: :thumbsup:2nd OF'S brake clean/carb clean. I do it outside, on an old towel, where I don't want any grass growing.
...
But seriously, it's bad sh..t. I think it could cause you to pass out or have heart palpitations.
I feel like Neo in the Matrix: "I know Kung Fu." This supports my idea that we need to upgrade out brains with internal hard drives and external ports...mad scientist things
-
So to make sure I got this, COAL has a direct impact on ballistics due to the relationship between case pressure and bullet seating depth. My question is if the ogive on a certain manufacturer is quite long, could reducing the load while seating the bullet lower (of course within spec) yield a desireable effect? I'm speaking hypothetically.
Also, how would I measure the ogive correctly?
First, work up a loads powder charge to an acceptable accuracy node. Once you find the node, play with seating depth to fine tune the groups.
Look into Optimal Charge Weight by Dan Newberry. I use this method with great success, with less expenditures in powder and lead, than other methods.
http://optimalchargeweight.embarqspace.com/
Essentially, you are looking for a node where a small range of charge weight sends rounds to a common group center. Once that range of charge weight is found, seating depth adjustment brings shot groups closer together.
The key when using this method is NOT to look for the smallest group size, look for the range, of say 3 different charge weights, where all the groups centers, in that range, fall into the same area.
Post by: Cat112 on December 13, 2016, 07:41:30 PM
-
Well, reading the article heavies posted, it seems like there are two theories that have the same outcomes, but go about achieving them in different methods. Either fine tune loads to a specific rifle OR find the OCW, compared to other loads, regardless of rifle, as the author describes. I believe that an OCW exist, in that rifle can achieve a standard MOA with an OCW load. What I would lightly disagree is that each rifle IS different, and thus does require a bit of fine tuning, according to that specific rifle.
As much as I hate cat metaphors...there are many ways to skin a cat. Good read; gave me things to think and consider, and something to compare to.
-
Now to read up on bullet seating depth
Post by: Cat112 on December 13, 2016, 07:59:01 PM
-
Now for this tool, it's something I'm going to have to get at some point, probably the hornady one. For now though, the dowel method should suffice to give me an idea. Has anyone noticed that They can methodically replicate results to the +/- 0.01 difference in loading a round? The reason I ask is that given the dowel method, it could possibly be .06 in difference. Given that, it would give me an idea where to aim at, then go from there. Couple this with the OCW method introduced by heavies, we got ourselves a Catalina one wine mixer. This is becoming my new addiction...someone stop me.
-
On another note with this new found info, which again, THANK YOU :shaka:, looking at the hornady boat tails and the Speer soft points, boat tails have secant and Speer has tangent ogives. This may explain why the SPs had a better grouping that the boat tails. If I seat the bullet above or below the crimp canelleur, is that ok?
Post by: Heavies on December 14, 2016, 01:37:15 AM
Now for bullet seating depth, oh boy...
-
Now for this tool, it's something I'm going to have to get at some point, probably the hornady one. For now though, the dowel method should suffice to give me an idea. Has anyone noticed that They can methodically replicate results to the +/- 0.01 difference in loading a round? The reason I ask is that given the dowel method, it could possibly be .06 in difference. Given that, it would give me an idea where to aim at, then go from there. Couple this with the OCW method introduced by heavies, we got ourselves a Catalina one wine mixer. This is becoming my new addiction...someone stop me.
-
On another note with this new found info, which again, THANK YOU :shaka:, looking at the hornady boat tails and the Speer soft points, boat tails have secant and Speer has tangent ogives. This may explain why the SPs had a better grouping that the boat tails. If I seat the bullet above or below the crimp canelleur, is that ok?
I wouldn't worry too much about being exactly exact. The difference of a few thou isn't going to show too well on a mil sup rifle. On a straight up target rifle or benchrest rifle it is the difference between sub MOA, sub half MOA, and sub 1/4 MOA. I'd say a gross changes of maybe .005 to .010" would get you there.
This is what I use for checking bullet seat depth and also use this device to check shoulder bump when sizing match cases.
(http://www.larrywillis.com/OALPIC.jpg)
I have tried using other devices that go onto, and depend on, calipers, but can never get real consistent results in the measurements.
Also to add, using OCW finds the optimal charge and seat depth adjustments is what fine tunes the load to individual rifles.
Post by: Rocky on December 14, 2016, 09:10:16 AM
Instead of using a dowel to find my starting point, using my subject bullet which fit slightly snugly but long in a prepared (clean, sized, no powder or primer) case, I chambered it over and over ( at least 50 times total :shake:), measuring each time to get an average.
When chambered, the bullet would seat into the barrel and push back into the casing giving me an idea of where the bullet started to hit the rifling.
I got so anal on this, I cut grooves in the neck of a case with a dremel so I could get a more accurate reading ! :crazy:
Post by: Cat112 on December 14, 2016, 12:09:46 PM
I figure that using the dummy rounds would give me a better average and then use the dowel to confirm and fine tune.
Since the SMLE chambers had a lower tolerance for fit, I figure a slight slack in tolerance for the round and chamber will be okay, especially once the casings are fire formed. Kind of like an ak and how steel casings tend to do better compared to brass 7.62.
Post by: OldMose on December 14, 2016, 01:49:51 PM
Thought I'd share another perspective on shooting milsurps, that is
shooting on the cheap with cast bullets. I use Lee loaders to neck
size brass for the bolt actions and 0000 steel wool to wipe the case
necks. This Sept I tried a 155 grain cast in a 03A3 and a No1mk3
enfield. I originally bought this bullet mold to make training rounds
for the 300 blackout in hdf type classes; another story. The mold
drops bullets at .313 to .314 so bullets are sized to .311 for 30 caliber
and .314 for 303 with gas checks. Figure the cast cost 6 cents total,
most expensive part of the bullet is the gas check at 3.2 cents each.
I think you guys will be able take this bullet and load/shoot better than me.
Rifles/target and bullets Target: center group is the enfield, 6:00 group is
the 03A3 at 50 yards. Right pic: 300 black, 30 06, 303 and 308.
Post by: Heavies on December 14, 2016, 02:38:03 PM
Hi Everybody,
Thought I'd share another perspective on shooting milsurps, that is
shooting on the cheap with cast bullets. I use Lee loaders to neck
size brass for the bolt actions and 0000 steel wool to wipe the case
necks. This Sept I tried a 155 grain cast in a 03A3 and a No1mk3
enfield. I originally bought this bullet mold to make training rounds
for the 300 blackout in hdf type classes; another story. The mold
drops bullets at .313 to .314 so bullets are sized to .311 for 30 caliber
and .314 for 303 with gas checks. Figure the cast cost 6 cents total,
most expensive part of the bullet is the gas check at 3.2 cents each.
I think you guys will be able take this bullet and load/shoot better than me.
Rifles/target and bullets Target: center group is the enfield, 6:00 group is
the 03A3 at 50 yards. Right pic: 300 black, 30 06, 303 and 308.
That is NICE work! What speed are you pushing those in the '06?
Post by: Cat112 on December 14, 2016, 02:39:36 PM
I see a lot of good results from cast loads, especially in old rifles that have worn barrels. My only question is that can a cast bullet get as good groupings as a jacketed projectile? I mean, I have seen nice groupings with cast loads, but compared to BTs or even SPs, the groupings are tighter. Not sure I worded that right or clearly. I also wonder what a cast load could do at longer distances (200, 300, 500)
Is there a way to make cast loads have a BT like characteristic? Seems like the only comparison I can draw to a cast v jacketed is SPs.
Iove seeing other SMLEs, especially mk IIIs. Beautiful rifle you got there :thumbsup: Do you mind Sharing it's details? For scientific research, of course...
Post by: Inspector on December 14, 2016, 02:44:32 PM
More and more I'm drawn to casting and this isn't helping the itch. But one step at a time I suppose. Nice shooting though!The problem I have run into using cast boolits is that you have to slow them down quite a bit depending on the rifle and weight of the boolit. And whether the boolit has a gas check or not. I have a Mosin Nagant and I had the perfect 200gr gas checked cast boolit for it but I could never get the accuracy from this combination as I can with jacketed bullets. Until one day I looked in the correct loading manual and found out I was pushing the boolit too fast. I brought it down to around 1400 fps and now all of the sudden it is accurate with this boolit. But at the sacrifice of a higher velocity. From my experience with cast you have to slow them down from their jacketed counter parts. Generally speaking of course. This also means if you are shooting in a long range match then cast boolits are probably not the best choice. At 100yds or less I think you can work up something that will work just as good as jacketed.
I see a lot of good results from cast loads, especially in old rifles that have worn barrels. My only question is that can a cast bullet get as good groupings as a jacketed projectile? I mean, I have seen nice groupings with cast loads, but compared to BTs or even SPs, the groupings are tighter. Not sure I worded that right or clearly. I also wonder what a cast load could do at longer distances (200, 300, 500)
Is there a way to make cast loads have a BT like characteristic? Seems like the only comparison I can draw to a cast v jacketed is SPs.
Iove seeing other SMLEs, especially mk IIIs. Beautiful rifle you got there :thumbsup: Do you mind Sharing it's details? For scientific research, of course...
Post by: OldMose on December 14, 2016, 07:05:21 PM
Said to be 1500 fps, but I don't have a chronograph. Maybe you can chrono it?
Cat, if I could only have one milsurp it would be a no1mk3. One in the pic is just a shooter,
just has new wood. Yours is probably more accurate. Bought it from the same friend who
sold me my first one in the mid 90's. First one looked like it was in a war a long time. He
also sold me a Lee loader, 180 grain cast bullets and a tube of bullet lube. Told me to load
up with 10 grains of Unique (pistol/shotgun powder) and don't forget to set the sights at 600
yards. So I did. I'll ask him to try 2A, next time he sells a milsurp. Give you guys first crack
at it.
Post by: Cat112 on December 14, 2016, 09:53:40 PM
Post by: rklapp on December 18, 2016, 12:46:22 PM
Post by: Heavies on December 18, 2016, 01:01:47 PM
Post by: OldMose on December 19, 2016, 01:32:33 PM
Isn't rl15 a bit slow for reduced loads? I think a faster powder would give you better results for low power reduced load ammo.
Ya, think powder is too slow, looked at a powder burn chart; never used RL15. Do use 4064,
varget and blc2 which has a similar burn rate. Personally I wouldn't use 15 grains of RL15,
would be concerned with getting a pressure spike condition.
Post by: rklapp on December 19, 2016, 02:35:53 PM
I already have ARcomp and Win 748. Any of those might work?
Post by: OldMose on December 19, 2016, 03:38:48 PM
I tried Varget with the same results. Maybe try blc2 or is that gonna be the same as Varget?
I already have ARcomp and Win 748. Any of those might work?
I wouldn't use any of the rifle powders mentioned above for 15-20 grain reduced loads with
any bullet. For rifle powders I'll use the lyman cast bullet handbook and the lyman AR
handbook. Hope this link works. Interesting read, using pistol/shotgun powders for
reduced loads in military rifle cases.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?13425-Cast-Bullet-Loads-for-Military-Rifles-Article (http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?13425-Cast-Bullet-Loads-for-Military-Rifles-Article)
Post by: rklapp on December 19, 2016, 06:10:20 PM
"For gas-check bullets loaded without the gas- checks, for cases like the .303 British, 7.62 NATO, 7.62x54R Russian and 30-06, I use 6-7 grains of almost any fast burning powder. These include, but are not limited to Bullseye, WW231, SR-7625, Green Dot, Red Dot or 700-X. I have also had fine results with 8 to 9 grains of medium rate burning pistol or shotgun powders, such as Unique, PB, Herco, or SR-4756 in any case of .303 British or larger."
Post by: OldMose on December 19, 2016, 06:58:47 PM
Interesting but am I reading this correctly? Does the Lyman cast bullet handbook have load data for pistol powders in a 54r?
"For gas-check bullets loaded without the gas- checks, for cases like the .303 British, 7.62 NATO, 7.62x54R Russian and 30-06, I use 6-7 grains of almost any fast burning powder. These include, but are not limited to Bullseye, WW231, SR-7625, Green Dot, Red Dot or 700-X. I have also had fine results with 8 to 9 grains of medium rate burning pistol or shotgun powders, such as Unique, PB, Herco, or SR-4756 in any case of .303 British or larger."
Lyman cast bullet handbook does have pistol/shotgun powder load data in the 3rd ed
but not much in the 4th ed. for .303 and 7.62x54 russian. So would recommend keeping
an eye out for the 3rd ed at gun shows.
Post by: rklapp on December 19, 2016, 07:11:33 PM
Perhaps I'll look to see if the gun stores have one I can take a snap shot of.
I already have the 15 to 20 loaded up so I'll see what results this provides. Also, the rounds are landing a foot below aim, not above so perhaps I'm having a different issue.
Post by: Inspector on December 19, 2016, 07:14:56 PM
Interesting but am I reading this correctly? Does the Lyman cast bullet handbook have load data for pistol powders in a 54r?First I want to say that using RL-15 in a reduced load (less than published data) risks having pressure spikes. Not saying it will happen, just saying it could. Slower burning powders are not recomnended for reduced loads. Small amounts of fast burning rifle powders and faster burning pistol powders are normally used for reduced loads.
"For gas-check bullets loaded without the gas- checks, for cases like the .303 British, 7.62 NATO, 7.62x54R Russian and 30-06, I use 6-7 grains of almost any fast burning powder. These include, but are not limited to Bullseye, WW231, SR-7625, Green Dot, Red Dot or 700-X. I have also had fine results with 8 to 9 grains of medium rate burning pistol or shotgun powders, such as Unique, PB, Herco, or SR-4756 in any case of .303 British or larger."
I assume that you are trying to find a good reduced load for your Mosin Nagant? Reason I'm asking is you don't want this for an SKS or other semi auto. And I am assuming you want this for target shooting and plinking not hunting. If my assumptions are wrong, please let me know.
If you are reloading for a Mosin Nagant I suggest you slug your barrel before you continue. Reason is I have seen Mosin barrels up to .315 and your .311 boolit won't stabilize in your barrel if it is anything larger than around a .313 bore. The barrel of my Mosin slugs out at .314 and I use a 200 grain lead boolit sized to .313 with a gas check. I probably don't need the gas check after I found the best load for this rifle/boolit combination but I don't want to change anything now that I found the right load.
To answer your question the Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook does list some pistol powders and fast burning rifle powders for reduced loads. The pistol powders it lists are 2400, SR-4759, IMR-4227 and 5744. It also lists fast burning rille powders such as IMR-4198, N-133 and RX-7. I prefer powders that fill up the cases as much as possible rather than using a few grains of really fast burning pistol powders such as the ones you referenced. The use of these fast burning pistol powders is quite popular and economical. But there is very little published data for using these. In order to find the correct recipes I would recommend reading the cast boolit forum on gun loads dot com. If you are willing to trust the data you find on there you shouldn't have a problem. I for one don't like to trust a lot of what I read in these forums unless I can find some published data to substantiate what I read on the net.
Last thing I will say is that on Hodgdon's website there are 2 white papers that explain how to use 4895 only to load reduced loads. You start out finding out the max load and then reduce the load to 60% and start and work up from there. Also, there is a white paper regarding the use of Trail Boss in rifle cartridges. You mark the case where the bottom of your bullet sits and fill the case with Trail Boss up to that line. Weigh it and that is your max load. You can then reduce that load to 70% and start and work up from there. I have just started playing with Trail Boss in rifle cartridges. Fun stuff to play with so far.
Post by: rklapp on December 19, 2016, 07:56:17 PM
I used the manufacturer's load data but that didn't work until I reduced the load to 20 gn. The 91/30 worked pretty well with .312" Hornady 150 gn SP with 35 gn Varget powder at 50 yards using my red dot scope. I haven't been able to find cast bullets over .312" but I did order some .312" from Beartooth Bullets. I'm curious to see if these shoot like a cast or a jacketed bullet with the left over Varget I have.
Post by: oldfart on December 19, 2016, 07:57:16 PM
I can look up some data.
Post by: Inspector on December 20, 2016, 04:26:58 AM
You are correct, sir. Maybe someday I'll start casting my own bullets.Generally speaking I found that cast boolits don't work very well, if at all, when pushing them at jacketed velocities (ie 2500-3000 fps). Even when pushing them at mid speeds (2000-2500 fps) sometimes does not work. As an example, the 200 gr boolit I use in my Mosin works best at the published 1,626 fps. I tried for almost a year to get this boolit to stabilize and group. I was trying to keep it in the 1,800 to 2,100 fps range. And it was not until I brought the velocity way down that it finally works. So be aware that Varget may still be too slow burning to get good, consistent reduced velocities. And it may be too slow to use in a reduced load scenario. While it may be that you won't get pressure spikes with Varget, there is the possibility that you could. I would suggest you not consider using it in a reduced load scenario. I would highly suggest you stick with published data from reliable sources. Here is a forum post that may help:
I used the manufacturer's load data but that didn't work until I reduced the load to 20 gn. The 91/30 worked pretty well with .312" Hornady 150 gn SP with 35 gn Varget powder at 50 yards using my red dot scope. I haven't been able to find cast bullets over .312" but I did order some .312" from Beartooth Bullets. I'm curious to see if these shoot like a cast or a jacketed bullet with the left over Varget I have.
http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=37158&s=f252a6a465b7e5ac3ace36b36ad359d1
Here is a forum I highly recommend for obtaining the information you are looking for:
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/forum.php
You will find many hours of good reading regarding cast boolits and reduced loads here.
Post by: oldfart on December 20, 2016, 05:49:29 AM
Can email it if you like
Post by: oldfart on December 20, 2016, 06:02:58 AM
Post by: rklapp on December 24, 2016, 04:54:19 PM
To answer your question the Lyman Cast Bullet Handbook does list some pistol powders and fast burning rifle powders for reduced loads. The pistol powders it lists are 2400, SR-4759, IMR-4227 and 5744. It also lists fast burning rille powders such as IMR-4198, N-133 and RX-7. I prefer powders that fill up the cases as much as possible rather than using a few grains of really fast burning pistol powders such as the ones you referenced. The use of these fast burning pistol powders is quite popular and economical. But there is very little published data for using these.
So I got the 7.62 Russian and 303 British pages from Dave. It's an older edition. The 303 lists Unique and 2400 and the 7.62 lists Red Dot, 700x, Green Dot, PB, Unique, and SR-7625. Except for 2400 powder, it says the minimum charge is around 10 and max around 13. I've never gone lighter than 15 before. I have 700x. Should I try 10.0 to 13.0 grains in the test load or can I go higher and watch for pressure signs?
Post by: Inspector on December 24, 2016, 07:54:55 PM
While I have never used 700-X for reduced loads it falls right in the proper burn rate for using it as a reduced load. I would start at the published minimum 10gr and work up from there. I would not go over the published 13. The idea is to find the sweet spot velocity which is probably around the 1600 - 1800 fps range for your weight of boolit. And you will probably get that with 10-13 grains. Going to a higher load and the subsequent higher velocity could be counter intuitive to trying to load for reduced recoil and obtain acceptable velocity unless going faster does increase accuracy. The idea is to push the boolit fast enough to stabilize and provide acceptable accuracy but not go so fast that you start losing accuracy. Your desire to go up to 15 grains will probably push the boolit too fast and accuracy will suffer. And of course you will risk an over pressure situation.
So I got the 7.62 Russian and 303 British pages from Dave. It's an older edition. The 303 lists Unique and 2400 and the 7.62 lists Red Dot, 700x, Green Dot, PB, Unique, and SR-7625. Except for 2400 powder, it says the minimum charge is around 10 and max around 13. I've never gone lighter than 15 before. I have 700x. Should I try 10.0 to 13.0 grains in the test load or can I go higher and watch for pressure signs?
If accuracy steadily increases up to the maximum13 grains without signs of falling off, you do have other choices. You could try increasing your load in small increments until accuracy starts to fall off. I don't recommend that as you are going over the recommended published load. It might be okay but do you really want to risk things when you have other choices? Especially since most visual signs of over pressure, or lack of signs can be quite misleading. After you hit the maximum 13 grains you could step up to using H4895 in a reduced load starting at 60% of maximum as written in the white paper I referenced. That should start you at around 1800 fps and you can go up to a maximum load from there. Safely as stated in the white paper.
I have a tendancy to err on the side of caution. I do not go over published maximums as there are almost always other choices in powders that can push bullets a little faster and stay within maximum pressures if I find I need to do this. This is JMHO. YMMV.
Post by: rklapp on December 24, 2016, 08:23:00 PM
I have a tendancy to err on the side of caution. I do not go over published maximums as there are almost always other choices in powders that can push bullets a little faster and stay within maximum pressures if I find I need to do this. This is JMHO. YMMV.
Makes sense. Of course the problem with the published data is that I'm not using the exact rifle and bullet they used but it's close. I'm curious to see if it does go supersonic at a quarter of a regular powder load.With R15, I wasn't supersonic until over 25 gn.
Post by: Inspector on December 25, 2016, 05:47:37 AM
Makes sense. Of course the problem with the published data is that I'm not using the exact rifle and bullet they used but it's close. I'm curious to see if it does go supersonic at a quarter of a regular powder load.With R15, I wasn't supersonic until over 25 gn.What type of chronograph are you using to determine if your load is going supersonic? You will be getting well over that with your minimum 10 grain charge of 700-X. What velocity were you obtaining with your 25 grains of R-15?
Post by: rklapp on December 25, 2016, 10:26:58 AM
Post by: Inspector on December 25, 2016, 10:47:36 AM
No chronograph. Just listening to the crack of supersonic or pop of subsonic. Someday I'll get one but not cheap.I hate to say this to you but all of your loads were supersonic. At 10 grains of 700-X you will probably be around 1,400 fps plus or so which is way over supersonic. Your 25 grains of R-15 was probably around 1,800 fps plus.Since supersonic is right around 1,100 fps you would honestly have to load well below 10 grains of anything to be below that. Just like with trying to use visual signs for over pressure, which can be very unreliable, the sound of the supersonic crack is not a reliable cue if you don't detect it.
Post by: rklapp on December 25, 2016, 12:57:01 PM
I hate to say this to you but all of your loads were supersonic. At 10 grains of 700-X you will probably be around 1,400 fps plus or so which is way over supersonic. Your 25 grains of R-15 was probably around 1,800 fps plus.Since supersonic is right around 1,100 fps you would honestly have to load well below 10 grains of anything to be below that. Just like with trying to use visual signs for over pressure, which can be very unreliable, the sound of the supersonic crack is not a reliable cue if you don't detect it.
Agreed. Hard to tell without a chrono. All I know is that my 42.5 load makes a loud crack and my 18 load makes a pop like a cork gun with practically no recoil. The bullet drop is about 12 inches compared to the jacketed load. I still have about 50 cast bullets left. I'm waiting for the .312 bullets I ordered from Beartooth on 12/18 but haven't heard from them since.
Post by: Inspector on December 25, 2016, 01:15:08 PM
...my 18 load makes a pop like a cork gun with practically no recoil. The bullet drop is about 12 inches compared to the jacketed load...Welcome to the world of Milsurps shooting reduced lead loads. Since most Milsurps shoot high as they are usually sighted in for somewhere around 200 yards or so at a minimum, having a 12" drop is a good thing. Most of my Milsurps all hit to POA or with some I have to aim to 6 o'clock which is more than acceptable. As long as you are getting the bullet to stabilize and give you decent accuracy it should hit close to POA at 100 yards.
I am just now experimenting with using Trail Boss in these Milsurps. So I am hoping to be shooting ust around supersonic velocity. My goal is to try and get subsonic and still stabilize the bullet. Then we'll see what kind of accuracy I am getting. My wife just gave me a Magneto Speed so now I can verify what my loads are actually doing and what it takes to go subsonic. I am going to be doing some special loads today or tomorrow.
Post by: O3A3man on January 02, 2017, 12:27:53 PM
So many variables it's hard to know your combo. Nice 303 rifle. As mentioned earlier you don't need to full length resize once you fire the new rounds as long as you only use them in the same rifle. 303 Brit is known to have a sloppy chamber for reliability of using ammo from various war manufacturers. Also, the accuracy of any rifle actually depends on the last 2 or 3 inches of the bore being good. It could be your old 303 has a muzzle bore ruined by years of cleaning using the std military steel sectioned cleaning rods rubbing against the bore. Many old M1 Garands had this issue.
Most 303 loads I played with only required a standard large rifle primer (not Magnum rifle primer). On a 303 Brit the case is a rimmed one and the headspace is on the rim just like a Win 30-30-----so the headspace should be more forgiving of your sizing.
Try only neck sizing and seat the bullets just to the bottom of the case neck. Also, it was not clear on what size bullet you were using----for a 303 it should be a .312 diameter bullet (not a 308 diam). If you were using 308 that would account for the large grouping on the targets. You don't need a hot load for the 303----a good medium load can be accurate and comfortable to shoot.
Post by: rklapp on January 06, 2017, 10:37:55 PM
I tried 700-x powder from 10 gn to 14 gn based on the Lyman cast bullet manual. I mostly hit paper but wasn't accurate. I got one in the red. Probably a lucky shot since the next didn't hit paper.
There were no pressure signs so went to 16 and 18 gn. Still not accurate but with less bullet drop. There was primer cratering with no other pressure signs. The report was cracking instead of popping like the lighter loads.
Don't think there's any point in continuing with the 700x. Does anyone want to trade for a bottle of Reloader 7?
Post by: Inspector on January 07, 2017, 07:27:15 AM
Update to the .3115" cast bullets. First, I used a cracked empty case to measure the seating depth in the MN9130 and got 2.70" which is massively short but easier to lock the bolt down now.Have you slugged your barrel yet? Without that little tidbit of knowledge your accuracy problems could be the incorrect diameter boolit. You will want to remove any and all other variables before blaming the powder.
I tried 700-x powder from 10 gn to 14 gn based on the Lyman cast bullet manual. I mostly hit paper but wasn't accurate. I got one in the red. Probably a lucky shot since the next didn't hit paper.
There were no pressure signs so went to 16 and 18 gn. Still not accurate but with less bullet drop. There was primer cratering with no other pressure signs. The report was cracking instead of popping like the lighter loads.
Don't think there's any point in continuing with the 700x. Does anyone want to trade for a bottle of Reloader 7?
Are your boolits keyholing at all? Just curious if you are seeing this.
Post by: rklapp on January 07, 2017, 07:33:46 AM
Post by: Inspector on January 07, 2017, 07:37:27 AM
Not yet. A .312 does not pass through the barrel. Anything bigger than .312 is worthless to me until I catch the casting bug (which it hasn't yet). I have 25 of the .3115" cast bullets left. I'd like to try R7 but would rather trade for the 700x.What weight bullet are you using?
Post by: Inspector on January 07, 2017, 01:38:05 PM
Not yet. A .312 does not pass through the barrel. Anything bigger than .312 is worthless to me until I catch the casting bug (which it hasn't yet). I have 25 of the .3115" cast bullets left. I'd like to try R7 but would rather trade for the 700x.I am not sure how not being able to drop a .312" diameter bullet into your barrel tells you anything? The .312" diameter bullet you are trying to drop into your barrel is being held back by the lands of your barrel. The lands should be around .308" in diameter. So of course your bullet won't drop in. You want to slug your barrel to determine the diameter of the grooves. The grooves for your mosin are probably somewhere around .312" to .315". And you use this diameter to determine what size cast boolit to use.
The rule of thumb from the cast boolit website is groove diameter plus 0.001" for cast boolits. So if your groove diameter is .314" you need to use a .315" boolit. The rule of thumb for jacketed bullets is groove diameter. So if your groove diameter is .314" you should be using a bullet that is .314". These recommendations are for optimum performance. If you go below the recommendations you run the risk of the bullet not stabilizing and therefore not being accurate. And if you go above the recommendations you run the risk of an over pressure situation. I am not saying these recommendations are set in stone. YMMV