NOE 311-165 vs. SC311-165

[dot6]

I'ld like to get a new hollow point .30 caliber mould from NOE, but I'm torn between the 311-165 and SC311-165. I like the larger frontal diameter of the SC, but am wondering how well it would feed through a Winchester '94, Mauser '98, BAR, Remington 7600, 600, 673, and Springfield 1903 and 1898 Krag as compared to the regular 311-165. There are no reviews posted for either. Anybody have experience with the SC or both?

[GabbyM]

I have the 311-165 RF. It's nose is over .300" so it doesn't fit either of our 30-30 rifles which have .300" bores. So I'd suggest checking your fit.

[cainttype]

In 30-30, your throat length should be checked. The SC is designed with a short throat in mind, that's why the diameter is reduced a short distance from the crimp groove. The original 311-165 can fill a more generous throat length. Slugging your firearm's throat will help you decide.
I use both, with very good results. I generally use the original when I can, to better fill longer throats. Both have been used in various 30-30s, 308s, and 30-06s with total satisfaction.
I understand the SC is required for some newer manufactured Marlins because of short throats, but I haven't had that issue yet.

I'm not sure that you would see any difference between the two designs on game, since both are available as FNs, HPs, and Cup-Nosed.
The original does appear a little more streamlined aerodynamically, if that matters to you.

[dot6]

Thank you, gentlemen, for your input. Any more folks have experience with these?

[Mr Peabody]

I know the Krag won't like it and I wonder if the staggered box rifle's will feed either properly from both sides of the magazine. The Krag I had wanted round noses and lots of length overall. I'm using the 160gr Harris design from NOE right now and my P14 won't feed it from the left side of the magazine.

[dot6]

Thanks, Mr. Peabody. Those sort of details are very helpful in making my choice as to which design to go with.