OK guys tell me if this sounds stupid

[autofix4u]

so I have about 750-1000 310-312 147gr jacked bullets pulled from some milsurp 7.62x54r. would it be safe to load these in a rifle with a 308 bore? thanks in advance for any suggestions or comments.

[MakeMineA10mm]

Safe, yes, IF you take the precautions of loading down. And, of course, then there's the question of HOW MUCH to load down. You won't find any load data out there to help you figure that out neither...

Also, you're looking at potentially rapid wear and tear on the rifle - extra strain on the locking lugs, throat erosion at it's worst, just to name two...

And, then, the question of accuracy comes into play...

I'd say this is only a good idea in a Red Dawn scenario.


Why don't you trade them to someone here at CB for some actual .308" diameter bullets that you can use properly? Plenty of guys here have 303s, 7.7 Japs, 7.62x54R, etc. that can use those bullets...

[shotman]

WOW - you better stay with cars. I dont think it would chamber

[Hiaboo]

I would be happy to trade you for appropriate sized .308 bullets or buy these off you..

Unless your bore is oversize, those bullets will squeeze down and get spit out, but the thing is the pressures would be high and this could be unsafe, the accuracy would be questionable as well.. Also there's the question of it being even able to chamber.

The guys below are correct, you can get a push through lee sizer from Midwayusa for about $15 in .308 and size those bullets.. No lube needed, I've done a few thousands of .223 this way. (putting them back in round)

[yondering]

Or just size them down in a .308" Lee sizer die. NOT a lubersizer press though. The Lee die in a good single stage press will handle it fine. Use case lube on the bullets before sizing. The Lee die may need a little polishing so it won't shave copper off the jackets.

[Marlin Hunter]

I agree with using a Lee sizer. In a survival situation I would use it the way it is, but a .312 bullet in a .308 bore would most likely cause more wear than normal. You could either use LLA or case sizing lube on the bullets. Those combloc bullets could have steel cores and steel jackets. Put a magnet on them to make sure. They should still be able to be sized, but may be a little tougher to push through a sizer.

[kyle623]

unless you want to take the chance of ruining your rifle, I would trade them or sell them to someone and get the right size boolits.

[Bret4207]

It could be done, but why risk it when you have an offer to trade? Jacketed will develop much higher pressures than cast so the ability to fire boolits +.002-3 oversize is lost.

[qajaq59]

I'd definitely trade them. That's a lot easier then sizing them.

[autofix4u]

thank you for the replys. I am not intersted in trades, as I have rifles in 7.7 jap, 303 and 7.62x54r. the reason I asked is my son and I are working on rebarreing a M44 nagant and the only barrel I have found is .308 and did not want to run into an over pressure situation. thank you all.

[KYCaster]

OK guys, I don't disagree with the wisdom of your answers....BUT....why does Ruger make their Mini-thirty in 7.62X39 with a .308 barrel and don't provide any warnings about oversize bullets and pressure problems?

If you can run the bullet through a Lee sizing die without stressing the press, that's not a whole lot of pressure required to reduce the size...and then it still has to be engraved by the rifling when its fired.

Just curious. :confused:

Jerry

[docone31]

Trade them.
Folks with a .303 British military rifle will love them.
I fire .312 in mine.
You can size them, but if you have an alternative, why?
If you size them, .309 is a good fit.

[StarMetal]

Another over rated myth. I'll side with KYcaster on this one. Wideners has been selling new .311 7.62x54R bullets and they come with a warning that they are oversize for .308 bore and to use caution when loading. So you reduce your loads some is all. It doesn't put any more measurable wear on your barrel (that is if they are copper alloy..steel jackets would "some") and doesn't put undue stress on your bolt lugs, etc.. The highest pressure comes from the initial engraving of the bullet into the bore and after that it's near the same as a correct size bullet. I believe Ackley wrote about that. The bullets I have even have a steel/iron core, but the core is wrapped with a sleeve of lead. That means when the rifling cut into the outer jacket the displaced metal has somewhere to go. With lead core the displacement is even better. An example of some extremes. We all know that the 357 magnum has extremes in groove diameters. Some have even been know to run as tight as .354. All 357 mag jacketed bullet are .357 - .358 diameter. Getting the idea now? Do the reloading manuals tell you to slug your 357 to see if it's safe to shoot their bullets? Nope. I'd go ahead and load them normal for the 303, 7.7, and 7.65 as they have near appropriate groove size for the bullet and don't start with the top top load for .308 (or smaller) groove barrels. Then work up. To put your mind at ease look at all the milsurp rifles out there that had been properly cared for in war. Many of them have excellent bores. That with having fired corrosive ammo and steel jacketed ammo in many instance. The few bullet you have aren't going to hurt your rifle one bit.

Joe

[Bret4207]

As I said, it can be done. But we're also dealing with jacketed bullets of unknown composition and exact size. Given a barrel with actual .309+ dimensions and if the bullets are a uniform .312 and of normal construction then with judicious loading it could certainly be done. OTH if the barrel is a tight .307/.308 and the bullets are non-uniform and run from .311 to .313 for instance and of stiff construction and IF common sense loading procedures were NOT followed...well, bad things can happen.

Common snense rules here and it's ultimately up to the OP to make the decision.

[WILCO]

unless you want to take the chance of ruining your rifle, I would trade them or sell them to someone and get the right size boolits.


Ditto for me.

[Leftoverdj]

Jeez, Louise!

SovBloc ammo can run as fat as .313, and M-N barrels as tight as .308. If there were a major problem, you might think someone would have noticed. That's an extreme, but a couple of thous either way makes very little difference in sloppy military chambers.

As for Ruger, they briefly made the Mini Thirty with .308 barrels and a long tapered leade to handle mil-surp ammo. They soon switched to proper 7.62x39. That must have been 25 years ago, and they ain't never gonna live it down.

[44mag1]

Ive pulled 7.62x54r bullets, dumped the powder into a 30-06 case, seated the 7.76x54r bullet on top and they shoot fine. All the 7.62x54r bullets Ive measured were between .310 and .311. I wouldent do this to a .308 without reducing the charge.

[wiljen]

what was the old story about the 6.5 Arisaka being used with 7.7 ammo? I'd say worse than .312 to .308 swaging has been done by accident many a time. I also think I wouldn't do it on purpose on general principals. I'd look around for a .312 barrel for the M44 project or do something else chambering wise with it. A standard 7.62x54R Reamer used in a .308 bore is gonna have a strange step in it too as it is designed around a .312 bore.

[Uncle R.]

Don't overlook the fit in the chamber neck - it's probably much more important than a bullet that's .003 oversize in the bore. If your loads with .312 bullets cause ammo to wedge in the chamber neck area and don't allow the case necks to expand and release the bullets pressures can go VERY high. That's likely to be the area of greatest danger.
Uncle R.

[StarMetal]

Told you it was a lot of hype. Now that I broke the ice other's are coming forth saying the same thing. Of course common sense is very important. Now I would imagine if you had a max to hilt ready to blow 308 load and loaded the "fat" Mosin bullet things could go bad fast, but then again, common sense, the manuals tell you not to switch style or brands of bullets EVEN if they are the same weight.

Although the difference aren't as large, how many of you fired or know of someone that has fired .308 bullets out of the K31's....hmmmmmm. Those have tighter dimensions.

Easy to figure the composition of the bullet Bret, section one. Use a magnet for the jacket because steel jackets are copper washed. That's why I sectioned one of my Widener bullets to see how it was built. Talked to Ricochet about it and he has no qualms either about shooting them from .308 bores. He told me the same things I said here. I have shot the Widener bullets out of my 30-40 Krag...with excellent result, albeit the Krag has a .309 groove. That's how sure I am of what I'm doing. I'll tell you another rifle that have lots of .308 bullets down their barrel (even rechambered to 308 Win) and that are the French MAS rifles. They have a tighter groove too!

That fit in the neck of the chamber IS the important issue.

Joe

[Bret4207]

Do as you wish. An opinion call was asked for and answered. In the end it's up to the OP and what he wants to do.

This isn't a "I'm right and you're wrong" question Joe, so don;t try to turn it into one please.

[StarMetal]

Do as you wish. An opinion call was asked for and answered. In the end it's up to the OP and what he wants to do.

This isn't a "I'm right and you're wrong" question Joe, so don;t try to turn it into one please.

Bret, I'm not. There's a lot of us that grew up never experimenting to find out what's written in the holy Grail is not all true. I did, I experimented safely all my life. Let give you another person that experiments and maybe his test will enlighten you. Jumptrap wanted to blow up an M44 Mosin Nagent. After numerous supposedly dangerous loads with rifle powder he asked me what to do. Now before I tell you what I told him, Jump concluded that you could literally scoop a 7.62x54 case full of powder and push the bullet in it and not blow up the rifle. Only on some occasions was the bolt difficult to open. He said amazing given that the loading manuals have strict data to adhere too. Now, I told him load with Bullseyes, which he did. Results: slightly swelled chamber and bolt too hard to open. He screwed the barrel off (which he mailed to me) and the bolt worked. Nothing was hurt on the rifle and even more amazing to me is the brass didn't let go. I'm sure you might remember when he did this. Now does this mean you can neglect the loading manuals? NO It just goes to show you there is a pretty good safety margin built into them, but like other things in life they can be manipulated to get negative results. Over sized bullets are in this area. To tell you the truth (and don't any of you go and do this) If, if, you could even get the next caliber size up to chamber, it probably would blow the rifle. Ackney done this too.

I wouldn't tell the poster to load down and work up some with the slightly oversized bullets if it was dangerous. I sure as heck wouldn't tell him under any circumstances to use a case full of Bullseyes either.

Toss you one more. You can get away shooting the fatter later 8mm bullets in the earlier .318 Mausers. That one I don't suggest only because of the age of those rifles.

Joe

[felix]

The SEE condition is the ONE to fear 100 percent, and the tight neck condition as 98 percenter. ... felix

[briang]

The SEE condition is the ONE to fear 100 percent, and the tight neck condition as 98 percenter. ... felix

What does "SEE condition" mean?

[felix]

Means the powder goes bananas and tries to ACTUALLY burn all at once from any CAUSE. Usually, a forerunner is the "click-bang" syndrome. Another is lots more recoil than expected. If all the remaining powder is affected, and that powder amount is substantial, the gun literally becomes a BOMB. SEE = Seconday Explosion Effect. ... felix

[briang]

OK, thanks.

[Marlin Hunter]

Jeez, Louise!

SovBloc ammo can run as fat as .313, and M-N barrels as tight as .308. If there were a major problem, you might think someone would have noticed. That's an extreme, but a couple of thous either way makes very little difference in sloppy military chambers.




If you looked at the history of communist soldiers (Russia, Vietnam, N. Korea, China, Africa, etc), you would notice that the rifle didn't have to last very long since the soldier didn't last very long either. :mrgreen::drinks:

:Fire:

[StarMetal]

Means the powder goes bananas and tries to ACTUALLY burn all at once from any CAUSE. Usually, a forerunner is the "click-bang" syndrome. Another is lots more recoil than expected. If all the remaining powder is affected, and that powder amount is substantial, the gun literally becomes a BOMB. SEE = Seconday Explosion Effect. ... felix

Felix,

In a lengthy conversation one time with a Hodgdon powder tech we discussed SEE. In their opinion it doesn't exist in hand held firearms. He said the term originated from the Navy as it was an occurrence that happen with Naval cannons. He explained it as a second explosion of powder outside and in front of the barrel. He said don't give him the usual story of 2.7 grains of Bullsyes with a 148 grain hollow base wadcutter in a 38 Special blowing the revolver up. Said it just isn't going to happen and would guarantee that it was a multiple load of powder.

Don't get me wrong, I don't know what to think about it. I've heard the stories too and also the ones that it's been duplicated in the labs, but then I've heard stories that the lab stories weren't true. Would be nice if some professional outfit would finally get to the bottom of it. Here's what I do think. In this day and age with all of the technology there is no reason why this supposedly event could not be recreated. I certainly do not think it's as mystifying as say UFO's, etc...

Joe

[BerdanIII]

Burn them up in the .303 and the 7.7mm; you'd be amazed at the length of bullet engraved by the rifling in a .303. I've pulled bullets on three spam cans of Albanian 7.62x54mmR; the bullets are either an out-of-round 0.310" or an out-of-round 0.311". Remington's 180-gr. ".303" bullets are 0.310" diameter, probably to keep people out of trouble in case they screw up and stuff them in a .30-'06.

There will be considerable resistance to sizing through a 0.309" Lee die due to the steel core. I did about a dozen and had a devil of a time using a Rockchucker. RCBS case lube or Imperial sizing wax; no difference in effort.

There was an article in The Fouling Shot either earlier this year or late last year in which the author gave the groove diameters of alleged 0.308" bores from various rifles. Most were over 0.308" and some were at 0.310". As long as you reduce the load and make sure that the chamber neck is large enough to handle the bullet, there shouldn't be a problem.

[MtGun44]

Most likely cause of the 2.7gr BE 147 WC .38 Spl blowups is DOUBLE BOOLIT, not double
powder. It will fit if you are seating them a tad long and esp wit HBWCs. I have permission
to test this combo in Hodgdon's pressure bbl, just haven't gotten around to it yet.

It isn't only the dbl boolit wt that does it, it is the DRAMATIC reduction in powder chamber
volume, even compression of the BE is likely.

Bill

[Dale53]

There is a simple check to determine if those bullets are safe to fire in a .308 bore. Take a fired case and see if the bullet will enter the neck to seating depth (just use your fingers). If the bullets won't, then they are too big to safely use. This is the danger area as has been stated. If the bullet is wedged between the case neck and the chamber pressures can sky rocket resulting in rifle damage and maybe worse.

Sizing jacketed bullets in a Lee die is basically a bad idea. The lead core will size and stay there. The jacket, being guilding metal, will spring back. You end up with a loose jacket. Accuracy goes to pot and maybe you end up with leaving a jacket in the bore (if it is a soft nose). BAD JOOJOO!

Just swap the bullets for correct size bullets and stay "out of the swamp".

Dale53

[felix]

Powder burning outside of the barrel is not a SEE condition, Joe. That Navy scenario deals with not enough oxygen being included (molecule wise) within the completed powder formula during its manufacture. I have a combo that will produce a SEE, and offered to deliver the gun and the same ammo components to a gun lab. No takers after the condition was explained in detail. Prolly their reason was that the renumeration I required to repair the gun should it have to be replaced. ... felix

[Dale53]

Frankly, the 2.7 Bullseye "story" isn't a story. It was fully documented in the American Rifleman. H.P. White was commissioned by the N.R.A. to discover the reason for all of the blownup .38 Special revolvers during the height of the PPC era.

It was determined to be a combination of factors:
1 - A double charge of Bullseye

PLUS

2 - Deep seating of the bullet caused by failure to clean the bullet lube
from the bullet seating die (too many were more interested in their
"rounds per hour" reloading speed than making safe, accurate rounds).

2.7 grs of Bullseye with a hollow base wadcutter OR a solid base wadcutter produces a very mild pressure (about 9000 psi). A double charge of Bullseye with the same bullet produces about 30,000 psi (this, alone, will not blow up an S&W K-.38 nor a Colt Python). However, a double charge of Bullseye plus deep seating of the bullet (remember, we were dealing with near flush seated wadcutters that severely reduced case capacity) by just 1/16th of an inch raised pressures to 67,000 psi that WOULD cause catastrophic failure of many, many revolvers.

H.P. White could easily (and did) reproduce those results after they determined how they occurred. They are NOT urban myth and were thoroughly documented in the American Rifleman.

NOTE:
A contributing factor (that I don't believe was covered in the article) is that we had a large number of new shooters and new reloaders that jumped on the PPC bandwagon as it was a very popular sport ALL OF A SUDDEN. At that same time, progressive presses became more popular. You had this sudden influx of new shooters, without much, if any, reloading experience turned loose with a progressive press without ANY background. It was a prescription for failure to those who didn't want to take the time to learn and/or who lacked mechanical skills.

When Cowboy Shooting burst upon the scene, the same thing happened. New shooters, with MUCH more available income jumping on new progressive presses with little or no experience reloading who, very often, do NOT pay attention, using very light loads of fast burning powder that can easily be double charged. The difference is, the .38 Special "K" frames could handle an occasional double charge. The thin chambers and popularity of .45 Colt Single Action Army and some clones with maybe marginal strength and you have, AGAIN, the same prescription for failure.

For those that "pay attention" and do their home work, the risk of reloading is minimal. For those that do not (just look at all of the drunk drivers, as an example) the risk is MUCH greater.

I would like to apologize for getting off topic here - however, I could NOT just "let this one go". There is too much erroneous material regarding safety and had to chime in here.

Dale53

[StarMetal]

Powder burning outside of the barrel is not a SEE condition, Joe. That Navy scenario deals with not enough oxygen being included (molecule wise) within the completed powder formula during its manufacture. I have a combo that will produce a SEE, and offered to deliver the gun and the same ammo components to a gun lab. No takers after the condition was explained in detail. Prolly their reason was that the renumeration I required to repair the gun should it have to be replaced. ... felix

Felix,

No argument from me, call Hodgdon bring it up with their powder techs.

Joe

[StarMetal]

Frankly, the 2.7 Bullseye "story" isn't a story. It was fully documented in the American Rifleman. H.P. White was commissioned by the N.R.A. to discover the reason for all of the blownup .38 Special revolvers during the height of the PPC era.

It was determined to be a combination of factors:
1 - A double charge of Bullseye

PLUS

2 - Deep seating of the bullet caused by failure to clean the bullet lube
from the bullet seating die (too many were more interested in their
"rounds per hour" reloading speed than making safe, accurate rounds).

2.7 grs of Bullseye with a hollow base wadcutter OR a solid base wadcutter produces a very mild pressure (about 9000 psi). A double charge of Bullseye with the same bullet produces about 30,000 psi (this, alone, will not blow up an S&W K-.38 nor a Colt Python). However, a double charge of Bullseye plus deep seating of the bullet (remember, we were dealing with near flush seated wadcutters that severely reduced case capacity) by just 1/16th of an inch raised pressures to 67,000 psi that WOULD cause catastrophic failure of many, many revolvers.

H.P. White could easily (and did) reproduce those results after they determined how they occurred. They are NOT urban myth and were thoroughly documented in the American Rifleman.

NOTE:
A contributing factor (that I don't believe was covered in the article) is that we had a large number of new shooters and new reloaders that jumped on the PPC bandwagon as it was a very popular sport ALL OF A SUDDEN. At that same time, progressive presses became more popular. You had this sudden influx of new shooters, without much, if any, reloading experience turned loose with a progressive press without ANY background. It was a prescription for failure to those who didn't want to take the time to learn and/or who lacked mechanical skills.

When Cowboy Shooting burst upon the scene, the same thing happened. New shooters, with MUCH more available income jumping on new progressive presses with little or no experience reloading who, very often, do NOT pay attention, using very light loads of fast burning powder that can easily be double charged. The difference is, the .38 Special "K" frames could handle an occasional double charge. The thin chambers and popularity of .45 Colt Single Action Army and some clones with maybe marginal strength and you have, AGAIN, the same prescription for failure.

For those that "pay attention" and do their home work, the risk of reloading is minimal. For those that do not (just look at all of the drunk drivers, as an example) the risk is MUCH greater.

I would like to apologize for getting off topic here - however, I could NOT just "let this one go". There is too much erroneous material regarding safety and had to chime in here.

Dale53

BINGO!!!!

Joe

[felix]

Vice versa, Joe. They will call me should they want my input. ... felix