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.

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

Hey, thanks dust off. Not going to lie, been lurking on these forums for a while, just recently became very active lol.
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.

Welcome Cat.

     Heavies  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''.        
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''.
      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.  We're new to .308 precision shooting.
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 .   

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?

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 .   

....
That brake cleaner tip was from my warped brain.
Non chlorinated brake cleaner and newspapers to remove grease and oil from brass or ammo

....
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 

     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   

     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.

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.

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.

Oh yeah, don't breath the fumes too much or you'll end up writing like ROCKY!
...

But seriously, it's bad sh..t. I think it could cause you to pass out or have heart palpitations.

Oh yeah, don't breath the fumes too much or you'll end up writing like ROCKY!
...

But seriously, it's bad sh..t. I think it could cause you to pass out or have heart palpitations.

2nd OF'S brake clean/carb clean.  I do it outside, on an old towel, where I don't want any grass growing.

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. 

Okay, brain is in euphoria. Ballistics, guns, Bullets, explosions...woah.
-
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

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 , 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?

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 , 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. 



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. 

      Guess I forgot a step to bullet seating depth/ogive intermingle.
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  ), 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 ! 

When I was reloading, I took some reject casings (split necks, stress marks on case body, damaged primer pockets, etc) and made dummy rounds. Some of those dummy rounds were snug but two of them cycle just fine. I made them to practice my Mad Minute skills. I'll take those two and use them as a starting point. I'll try rebuild the others to their specs and see what happens. From there, I'll do the dowel method and gain an average from that.
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.

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.

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? 

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!
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 Do you mind Sharing it's details? For scientific research, of course...

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!
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 Do you mind Sharing it's details? For scientific research, of course...

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.

Heavies,  its a reduced load, 16 grains of 2400.  Got that from castboolits.gunloads.com
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.   

No matter what condition a milsurp is in, shooter or plinker, I love it. I've seen P14s that just look like they were abused and some that you could see the history played out on them, but love that. If these rifles could tell what they've seen...it's really humbling and sobering.