.25 ACP rifle, what powder?

[35remington]

Crank, you never did sound defensive.....just a guy wanting an explanation.

I don't know that you need to purchase multiple powders. You can narrow it down some by getting a little data from Quickload, if Chev wants to provide it, and then go from there. The slow end of suitable powders would be found where 100 percent or better loading density starts dropping off in pressure below your planned peak. Say, where you couldn't get 15,000 psi any more, or whatever your planned peak psi is. Since blowback movement of the bolt is proportional to the weight and velocity of your bullet, as opposed to that of your original rimfire the gun was intended for, maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea to avoid what is possible and go for what is more prudent in terms of safety and not overdriving the gun.

Excessive breech opening is to be avoided, as is excessive bolt velocity. I would think that 1100 fps would be plenty with a 50 grain bullet and really cannot see where more speed would help with the advantage in killing power of the larger diameter bullet going to the 25 already at such a speed. Such a velocity would be within hailing distance of the original load, and the idea is not to kill the gun early, but rather duplicate the 22 or better it. A 50 at 1100 will do this. If RD would still somehow have one of his flatpoint 25 cast bullets available or if you could get Swede Nelson of NOE or some other custom maker to offer the design (he offers RD moulds now.....don't know about the 25 design for the 25 Auto though) you would be in tall cotton.

I would find a powder that gets this velocity and meters well in the small charges and call it good. If I had Bullseye, Universal, maybe Power Pistol or your AA #5 that would be a good enough selection that I would let accuracy and "close enough" velocities make the decision on what to use.

Since tiny charges of large flake powders meter poorly in a lot of measures and I hate to weigh every charge, I'd go after a fast to medium fast speed fairly dense powder of small granulation that meters well. Since double charges won't be a problem there may not be such a thing as "too dense."

Why not try book charges of Bullseye or some other good metering, dense powder and see where they land you. I know this may not get everything the cartridge may give, but you ought to consider what the rifle was designed for and come to some reasonable approximation of that.

I've shot an awful lot of small game with flatpointed 25 caliber bullets at speeds like this. They kill very well, and are a step above the .22.

[Chev. William]

Crank,
What powders do you have on hand at the moment?
If you would like, I will try running QL calculations on those powders presently in your inventory at near 100% fill to see what the Theoretical Results are.
Best Regards,
Chev. William

[35remington]

Just for grins, and to find the slowest practicable powder more as an exercise than anything else, find the powder that at 100 percent load density is the slowest that produces 15,000 psi at said load density. A hint is to look for the heaviest charge weight at said pressure as well. You know you've reached it when a still slower powder with a heavier charge weight does not reach the desired 15,000 psi.

I'll still advance the notion that hotrodding or trying to find maximum speed in a rifle that was originally a blowback operated rimfire is not a good idea. It's still the rifle it was before and it's still blowback operated. A rifle of this type is the worst imaginable in terms of using it for deliberate higher pressure loads. Keep the pressures down to standard 25 ACP levels at least for starters. More is not better. Most definitely the energy of the bullet should approximate that used to drive the rifle in when it was chambered for a rimfire to keep bolt velocity down.

Some of the faster high density powders may not allow 100 percent fill before the SAAMI max for 25 ACP is reached.

[35remington]

Another suggestion regarding speed......like the long rifle, it may be advisable to keep the velocity in the 1050-1080 fps range at the muzzle with a 50 grain bullet to try to mimic the "target 22 long rifle effect" wherein the slower bullet has less wind drift and better accuracy than rounds in the 1200 plus fps range. Such a velocity has a trajectory flat enough to be useable to about 60 yards on tree squirrels with a dead center hold and only mild rise above line of sight at midrange, making it very useful.

This would get about 122 to 129 foot pounds, just what is needed in terms of operating the gun correctly.

[Crank]

35remington,
I think I understand what you are saying about powders and will try to wrap my head around the concept. As for hotrodding, that isn't the goal, I want to duplicate the cycling and reliability of the .22. If that means loading a .25 hotter than what works in a Browning Baby or a Raven, I won't lose a lick of sleep over it since I don't own a pistol in that caliber to confuse loadings. Dang! you are fast, I just saw that you posted while I was pecking this out.

Mark

[35remington]

And....if this is a 1903, originally chambered for the .22 Winchester Automatic, ballistics are a 45 grain bullet at around 1050 fps, for 111 foot pounds. Another reason not to run the 25 too fast.

You won't have to run the 25 hot to cycle or hotter than what works in a BB or a Raven. You've got potentially more bullet weight and energy already. Standard 25 Auto pressures will function the gun easily.

Hopefully you've got a candidate cast bullet lined up that has a flatpoint on it yet with enough ogive for smooth feeding.

[Crank]

Read the part about fresh factory ammo, not leaving the barrel LOL

[35remington]

That's known as a missing powder charge, and that's entirely different from underloading. Again, you don't have to load the 25 hot to function your gun. You've already proven that with the 35 grain bullet and loads of a projected 14,000 psi or so.

[Crank]

35remington,
When I went to the range with the mixed bag, I got about 40 rounds that exited the gun, but I bought one fresh box of PMC, just in case and that one got the bullet to within 1/2" of the muzzle. The other two that didn't exit were from the mixed bag and got to within 6" of the muzzle. That outperformed the IMR4227 loads and I know they had powder, those rounds went about 6-8" from the chamber. I also mentioned that the first rounds out of the gun had a vertical spread upwards of 3 feet+ at 100yds and the cases were barely clearing the gun. The travel time to the 100yd berm was like that of a pellet rifle.

Mark

[35remington]

Bore drag is your enemy. In your earlier reference i thought you were talking about a pistol not functioning, not your rifle. FMJ rounds have far greater friction than cast bullets and powders may be used that are as quicker or quicker than Bullseye. In addition, operating pressures in 25 ACP are low. Add it all up and you get stuck bullets.

Things change when a cast lead bullet is substituted. Bore drag and friction are way, way less, and a load that sticks a FMJ in the barrel may get quite good velocities with a cast bullet, even with an otherwise identical quick powder. Powders for .22's also tend to be slower burning than those used in the 25 Auto, but pressure plays its role as well, and high pressure gets better velocity than low pressure and won't stick bullets even if the powder is quick.

All of this should definitely not prevent you from trying something like Bullseye with a lubricated cast lead bullet. Here powder quickness is no real handicap even in a fairly long barrel due to the ease of pushing a bullet down the barrel. High bullet friction and low pressures are definite handicaps to getting a bullet out the barrel. Fast powder speed has advantages in making a more quiet report. The soft lead bullet is likely easier on what is probably fairly soft barrel steel in your Winchester 03. If it says "nickel steel" though it's pretty hard.

Just for giggles lube the PMC bullets, the part sticking out of the case, with Lee Liquid Alox and let it dry. I bet few to none stick then. But by now you might be darn tired of pushing stuck bullets out of barrels.

I'll reiterate that standard 25 Auto pressures will function the gun easily. You've just got to use the right bullet. A FMJ with a tiny low pressure powder charge won't cut in in terms of getting the bullet out the barrel.

[35remington]

Another question.....how deep is the rifling in your barrel? How many lands? How wide are they?

45 ACP revolvers supposedly were fitted with shallow rifled barrels to prevent the FMJ bullets from sticking, even in pistol length barrels. Rifling depth on 45 ACP revolvers is much less than on my old five screw 38 and 32 Smith and Wesson revolvers, which have deep, wide land rifling expressly intended to be used with, predominantly, lead bullets.

Modern revolvers have much narrow lands than the old Smiths do, mostly because they shoot more jacketed bullets these days and sticking bullets at low 38 Special pressures can be a problem if the lands displace a lot of metal on jacketed bullets.

[Chev. William]

After reading the last few posts (page 5 of this Thread) I think Stevens got their barrels Right in the 1890s;
The Examples I have all have narrow lands/wide grooves which show up as wide spaced narrow slots on the Lead Slugs I have driven through them. This gave adequate spin to the lead bullets used at the time and made cleaning up after BP reasonable, especially with 'take down' barrel design. The 1885 Winchester barrel I have also has 'narrow lands" (just slightly wider than the Stevens ones) so it may have been 'common knowledge' in the era.

Anyway, my offer to run some QL calculations on charges of the powders that Crank has on hand at the moment still stands.

Best Regards,
Chev. William

[Crank]

Sorry, work has kept me distracted and too tired to think about this one for the past couple of days. I will inventory what I have for powders and get those to you Chev. I am still waiting for those boolits from CCB, which would follow along with the reduced friction as 35remington mentioned. Lead will be my projectile of choice, so hopefully many of the gremlins will go away. I will hopefully be pre-occupied with my .327 barrel tonight, so this thread may take a back seat for a couple of days.

Mark

[Chev. William]

Today I completed reaming a "Dummy Chamber" for my .250ALRM cartridge, and the reamers worked better than I did (as an 'Amateur' unpaid gunsmith apprentice). the cartridge sample goes in snugly right up to the rim being slightly below flush with the 'breech end' which is probably correct as the rims on the samples are not at exactly .050 thick. I still need to get a 'extraction groove' cut into it so I can pull the cartridge out by the rim instead of pushing it out with a long pin.

This is a .25ACP but the case length is 1.250". I also have some .250ALS cases (1.125" long) and some .250ALR cases (1.050" long) that are part of a planned experimental testing group to see what can be done with this small diameter straight walled family of cartridges using .251" nominal bullets in .250" Groove Diameter Barrels. Lead Bullets would run around .253" to .255" for these cartridges. On the light end there are 35 grain HP bullets available, most bullets are around 50 grain and I will need to get a mold for a 65 to 69 grain bullet to explore the range further. By the way my Blank test barrel has 1:9.4 Twist according to the maker.
Best Regards,
Chev. William

[Chev. William]

Crank,
On Beartooth Bullets "Shooters Forums" there are a couple of threads about .25ACP Reloading and it is noted on one of them that the Taurus Pistols have Groove Diameters at the SAAMI maximum listed dimensions, which lets Gas bypass the Jacketed bullets in Factory Loads. I wonder if your Barrel is slightly 'large' on the Groove Dimension?

I have one Stevens Barrel that has a Groove diameter of about .257" but was marked "25" as it had been "Bastardized by the previous owner, They had begun remachineing the Tenon to dimensions for a Stevens 44 receiver and since receiving it I have turned it down to fit a Stevens Favorite Receiver without further shortening the barrel (doable as the Favorite Tenon is smaller than the '44' Tenon dimensions).

Best Regards,
Chev. William

[Crank]

Chev,
I just re-read all of the posts and I neglected to include that the slug I recovered was fully engraved all the way into the grooves, so Lothar Walther sent me the correct bore size. Sorry for the lack of input, I have been moving along with my .327 conversion and this one is in a holding pattern for load development. I finally got my boolits from CCB, but I foolishly forgot to include to have them sized, so I need to get a sizer and take care of that.

Mark

[Chev. William]

Crank,
!. May I suggest you use a .253" size die? Also, it may be a good Idea to lube the bullets before sizing as the lube grooves are shallow an may close up if sized before lube.
2. Any progress on the list of Powders you would like me to do QL Runs about?
Best Regards,
Chev. William

[Crank]

Chev,
I apologize for not getting that info to you, I am at work, but will try to remember to look tonight. I do recall one powder I neglected to mention that I have, I have a keg of Titegroup that I split with a friend and forgot that I had it. I haven't even looked at the size of the grains to see if it would be user friendly. The bullets from CCB are already lightly lubed, just "as cast" at .258, so at least I can avoid that. I have an old Lyman? sizer that I have never used, so I need to drag it out to make sure of what I need to locate for a die. I am guilty of never having cast my own, so I am only now slowly gearing up for that. I just need to make sure what size will still fit in the case and allow the round to chamber, since the chamber is far from oversize.

Mark

[Chev. William]

RE: .25 Stevens (Long) RF capacity. It is more than a .25ACP; The .25 Stevens Short RF on the other hand is closer to the .25ACP dimensions, but was not loaded to perform as it might have to keep it at or below the 'long' performance.

Best Regards,
Chev. William

[Chev. William]

Chev,
I apologize for not getting that info to you, I am at work, but will try to remember to look tonight. I do recall one powder I neglected to mention that I have, I have a keg of Titegroup that I split with a friend and forgot that I had it. I haven't even looked at the size of the grains to see if it would be user friendly. The bullets from CCB are already lightly lubed, just "as cast" at .258, so at least I can avoid that. I have an old Lyman? sizer that I have never used, so I need to drag it out to make sure of what I need to locate for a die. I am guilty of never having cast my own, so I am only now slowly gearing up for that. I just need to make sure what size will still fit in the case and allow the round to chamber, since the chamber is far from oversize.

Mark

Crank,
Hodgdon Titegroup is a possible powder for the .25ACP cartridge and I have run some trials with it in QL.
Hodgdon lists Two Loads for the .25ACP with 50 Gr FMJ bullet and employing Titegroup, they are based upon thje following basic criteria:
Winchester Case; a 1:16" twist; Federal 100M Small Pistol Match Primers; 2.00" Barrel Length; case Trim Length of .610"; Cartridge Overall length of .900".
Load #1 = 1.10gr; Velocity = 657fps; Pmax of 14,500 CUP (which does not easily convert to psi, although there is a method that gives approximate conversion estimates).
Load #2 = 1.30gr; 762fps; 17,200 CUP.

I started by inputting the Hodgdon Load #1 data into QL base data for the .25ACP (changing the case length, and COL to match then adjusting the Case Volume to get the calculated Velocity to match. This occurred at case volume of 5.000gr for Titegroup; Note that the volume adjustment 'tweaked' the MV value to match Hodgdon's without affecting the Calculated Pmax.

QL used the CIP Pmax limit of 17,405psi (piezo) and a Laupa .251", 50gr FMJ-RN Bullet of .401" length/.171" seating depth and calculated bore Cross section area of .04827 sq.in.
The #1QL of 1.10gr gave 50.9% fill; Pmax=13,470psi; MV = 657fps; MEP =4314psi; Burn = 87.2%.
Changing barrel length to 24" results in the Following:
Load #3QL 1.10gr; 50.9%; Pmax = 13470psi; MV =1023fps; MEP = 219psi; Burn =100.0%.
NOTE: the Propellant burn is now 100% AND the Muzzle Exit Pressure (MEP) is Much lower (about 1/20th of the Hodgdon load out of a 2" barrel).
Load #4QL 1.26gr; 58.8%; Pmax = 17499psi; MV =1117fps; MEP = 237psi; Burn =100.0%.
DANGER: Calculated Pressure EXCEEDS Pistol Maximum limit. DO NOT USE THIS LOAD!
Load #5QL 1.47gr; 68.1%; Pmax = 24035psi; MV =1227fps; MEP = 261psi; Burn = 100.0%.
DANGER: Calculated Pressure EXCEEDS Pistol Maximum limit. DO NOT USE THIS LOAD!
Note that this is about the typical Pmax for 22RF cartridges.
Load #6QL 2.10gr;100.4%; Pmax =58262psi; MV =1535fps; MEP = 335psi; Burn = 100.0%.
DANGER: Calculated Pressure Grossly EXCEEDS Maximum Pressure Limit. DO NOT USE THIS LOAD!
Note this is about a 'Double Charge' for the Hodgdon Titegroup recommended start load, and it still would burn 100% with a MEP below 400psi, less than 1/10 of the Hodgdon load MEP out of a 2" barrel!

These are THEORETICAL CALCULATED numbers for discussion ONLY!

From this, and some other calculation runs I have done, my personal feelings are that Titegroup is OK for Low Report and low to moderate Rifle MV cartridge loads but pressures rise faster than Velocity in this small case at 24" barrel length (this is the SAAMI Recommended Test Barrel Length for RIFLE cartridges).

Hodgdon HP-38 needs a corrected case volume of 4.760gr to match QL to Hodgdon Data.
1.84gr of HP-38 results in 100% fill and Pmax = 35300psi; MV =1380fps; MEP = 317psi; Burn = 100.0% STILL EXCEEDS Pistol MAXIMUM Pressure Limit.

Hodgdon Universal needs a corrected case volume of 4.800gr to match QL to Hodgdon Data.
1.58gr of Universal results in 99.8% fill; Pmax =20750psi; MV = 1260fps; MEP = 336psi; Burn = 99.8% STILL EXCEEDS Pistol MAXIMUM Pressure Limit.

The other Hodgdon Powder listed, "CFE-Pistol", is not listed in QL Data Base yet; so I did not runt it. There are also five 'IMR" powders listed on Hodgdon's Web Site that I have not Checked on QL.

Comments anyone?
Best Regards,
Chev. William