Subsonic .308 with bullseye?

[Eddie2002]

I was working with BE in the 1.5 to 3 grain range for a 7.7 Jap and a 100 grain .312 boolit and found that below 2 grains it became position sensitive. I have been using a very small pinch of cotton to keep the powder positioned in the bottom of the case with no problems. When working with the extra light loads proper neck tension is very important, I got some key holing with looser necks along with no accuracy at 15 yds.

[35remington]

fec, you still don't know if the powder is position sensitive or not.

Often rifles are carried muzzle down and raised for the shot. If you never tested with powder all the way forward for sure, and all the way backward, for sure, you're really not answering the question.

Next time try it and be able to say you definitively answered the question rather than guessing whether it was addressed or not.

If the question is to be addressed, model the conditions that cause it with certainty.

Here's a hint: after so doing the numbers will not look as favorable as those you recorded. Said by a guy that positions his powder with certainty in rifle cases....because he wishes to answer the question.

[358 Win]

When Accurate Arms was located in McEwen Tennesee I was in correspondence with one of their tech reps named Ed Fallan. I was working with subsonic loads using cast bullets in my .308 Winchesters and he was very helpful. One of my super accurate loads was 6.5 grains of N100 under a Lyman 31141 178 grain flat nose cast bullet designed for the 30-30. No filler was used and the spark was provided by a standard Remington 9 1/2 primer. That load produced penny sized five shot groups at 50 yards and the speed was 1100 fps. Shooting was done with my totally stock Rem 788 and 4x Bushnell Banner. I was in my mid twenties at the time and was just starting out on my cast bullet adventures. Now I'm in my mid 60's.

Another great load I used to use was the same Lyman 31141 bullet and 6.5 grains of Hercules Red Dot along with a 9 1/2 Primer made by Remington. That also produced 1100 fps and on a given day would challenge the accuracy of the N100 load and on some days would beat it. Again NO filler was used.

There are many powders out there for cast boolit shooting, none of which I ever used fillers with. One powder I've used more than any other is Hercules/Alliant 2400. My experiments have indicated to me that the Federal 215 primer eliminates high extreme spreads and lowers the standard deviation markedly. The speed is much higher than when using the faster burners and is right at 1650 fps with 16.0 grains of 2400 in the 30-30, .32 Win Special, .300 Savage and .308 Win cartridges. A deer could be killed with the above load if the distance was not too great and shot placement was good. I've never killed a deer with my cast boolits but a pickup truck could not hold all the groundhogs I've killed.

358 Win

[Kveldulv]

Thanks everyone for all of your insight and information. I wanted to share my results of my findings. My original call to Alliant resulted in the Marketing rep (who said he has been reloading for 50+ years) telling me to go to C. E. Harris and look for "The Load" for a starting point. This marking rep also advised me to use Red Dot or Unique for reduced loads.


Before posting on this forum i looked up "the Load" and crossed another article by C. E. Harris which was "Cast Bullet basics for military surplus rifles". This is actually where i original began my hand at developing sub sonics loads. This is also where the marketing reps advise becomes skewed based on his recommendations. IE: the very person he tells me to look up and trust is the very persons data i originally used to make my subsonic bullseye loads.


Here is a snippet of the loads charges from the above mentioned article;


1. 125-gr., plainbased "small game/gallery"
900-1000 f.p.s., 5 grains of Bullseye or equivalent.


2. 150-gr. plainbased "100-yd. target/small game",
1050-1250 f.p.s., 7 grs. of Bullseye or equivalent.


Now are you can see the data C.E. Harris gives out is a load showing bullseye 5gr with a 125gr cast bullet. There are 3 variables I changes in my load which is as follows;


Magnum Large rifle primer
5.4-5.6 gr Bullseye
170gr Cast Lee bullet


Specifically Mr. Harris, in his articles mentions to NOT use pistol primers but there are no mention of magnum primers and also do NOT use filler (which i never did as original this was the data i based my first tests on). Like wise he DOES mention that the loads should be used with a common bullet weight of said caliber and since .308 has a common weight of 147-180gr i am within that weight limitation.


Now since i am using magnum primers i didn't have to increase my charge weight as the primer is going to increase velocity more than a standard primer but what i get out of this is higher consistency of burn rate due to such a low charge. For this i simply adjust down on the charge weight to meet the velocity requirements i am wanting.


Now we have the information from C.E. Harris, whom alliant marketing rep said was who i should trust on reduced loads. Now lets take a look at the burn rates of the powder recommended by said marketing rep as a replacement to bullseye;


Red Dot - Sightly faster than bullseye but only marginally at best, most loads show interchangeability with bullseye with minor tweaks to charge weights. (So why is this guy recommended red dot when its almost identical to bullseye!?)
Unique - Slower than bullseye


Ok so now i am thinking, is this guy smoking crack? I fire up QuickLOADs and take a look at some data, i am more so looking at pressure and case fill percentage.


Bullseye - 5.4-5.6 gr = 18.7%-19.3% case fill, 1045-1067 FPS (18" barrel) and 9,604-10,146 PSI
Unique - 5.4-5.6 gr = 19.2%-19.9% case fill, 989-1011 FPS (18" barrel) and 8,672-8,196 PSI
Red Dot - 5.4-5.6 gr = 24.8%-25.8% case fill, 1030-1050 FPS (18" barrel) and 12,220-12,836 PSI


Looking at this data the unit is close to the same case fill as bullseye but unique is a slower power with lower pressure so I get the reason for recommending that powder. Now what gets confusing is the Red Dot recommendation, while it has a higher case fill (only by 6.1%-6.5% more) the pressure are higher with the same charge weight (which is still no where near max pressure of a .308 mind you).


At this point I am still scratching my head as to why i was given these two powders when they are both so close to bullseye. In that case i give my friend a call who is a cowboy action shooter and has been reloading for much longer than I have, not to mention he speaks with guys at the competitions who have been reloading longer than we have both been alive.


He laughs and confirms the same as some of you have on this form, if there was an issue, we we have known by now as many many shooters have been using reduced loads in rifle cartage's for matches for 50-60+ years.


At this point I figured, ok the guy just doesn't know about the powder specifically and is just playing it safe so people do not do something stupid with it. At this point i figured that i would give Alliant another call back and run it by a bullseye powder specialist. Upon this call i spoke to a guy name Jason in which case he confirms the same results as the previous marketing rep advised me about, but in more detail.


He explained to me that, while bullseye has been used for about 60+years in cowboy matches, that the technology for testing pressures were very crude and unreliable. He proceeded to explain how people back then would just pick a powder and start working up a load charge to their velocity and relying on pressure signs (flat primers, etc) as an indicator as to over pressure. He then proceeded to explain that Alliant tests all their powder with real world results and gathers the data through a piezoelectric machine that registers pressure in the chamber for accurate real world testing. He confirmed the possibility of hang fire (but confirmed that across ALL powders), he also indicated that any reloading books before they started using piezoelectric machines are novelty and do not use them (even though later in the conversation he explained that many old world loads carried over, i am sure after testing and confirmation on the piezoelectric machine).


I explain to Jason about my findings in QuickLOADs and apparently this was a no no as he indicates that QuickLOADs, while a good program, isn't fit for working up data on well known cartridges such as the .308. He goes on to indicate that again, just like watching for flat primers on pressure signs, QuickLOADs is not a good indicator of pressure or safe charges and shouldn't be used for known cartridges but only for wild cat rounds where there is no load data.


His bases for this goes back to the fact that QuickLOADs is a mathematical guess on pressure and without real work testing, will not be nearly accurate. Lastly he continues to give me examples of people using low charge weights and they get calls all the time about people loosing fingers, eyes or worse from low charging bullseye. So i ask the question about pressure signs and the fact that if there was over pressure enough to cause an failure, would it not be more so attributed to the fact that with bullseye and the case fill capacity, that you are more prone to double or even triple charging the casing. Which he indicated this is possible however the low charges are just as dangerous. He goes on to explain how minimal use of low charges of bullseye isn't the issue such as shooting 1-500 rounds isn't the issue, its when you get up into the 1000-2000 range as consistent use of such a low charge of bullseye and high pressure creating from that will slowly stretch your receiver and action over time until it weakens the metal enough to cause the catastrophic failure. He goes on to explain that you also wouldn't see pressure signs in the primer from a low load of bullseye but your still getting super high pressure.


This didn't sit well with me as logic tells me that if you have pressure, regardless of where it happens or comes from, pressure wants to escape some how and it has to go somewhere.... This is the basis of a firearm as it is controlling the direction of the created pressure to push the bullet out of the barrel and as newtons law every action as an EQUAL and OPPOSITE reaction, this still resulting in one of two things, FLAT primers or if your using a semi auto (and the pressure spike happens after the bullet passes the gas port) increased recoil. Am i completely delusional on this?


Another question to Jason was, "well do you have any load data on testing with bullseye in reduce loads of any kind for rifles?" (this came after he tells me they test stupid things just to see what will happen, such as squibbing a load and firing another round behind it to create a failure from barrel obstruction) and his responses was, "no we don't have any test data". Ok, so how do they know bullseye will not work? His response... "its math"... ok so why not go with QuickLOADs because it is also math? Originally he told me , don't trust math go with real world data...


The last comment he made was "if it isn't in any reputable reloading books such as from us, another powder manufacturer such as Hodgedons or in books like Hornady, Lyman, etc, do not use or trust it. If you do and you loose your fingers and eyes then you will not have anyone to pick up your medical bills for the accident as you used off the books loads.". To my understanding, no company would do that anyway since reloading is a use at your own risk, am i wrong on this too?


Now lets go back to this 1000-2000 round mark Jason was talking about. With this new information i bring it back to my buddy to ask about this in his experience. He gets a long laugh out of this one and goes on to explain to me he knows guys on the competitions he goes to using very old rifles with as low as 2.5-3 gr of bullseye with upwards of 20k rounds through them or more with zero issues. Again it goes back to, if there was a problem we would have seen it by now and there would be data all over the place backing up the claims of Alliant stating how many accidents they have with the bullseye and there would be warning labels all over the powder bottle about not using it in rifles for reduced loads, etc.


In conclusion, alliant has not data support or debunking the use of Bullseye powder in very load charges that have been used in cowboy action matches for 50-60+ years were as 50-60+ years of cowboy action shooters using said load through 20k+ rounds with zero issues shows the real world data it is safe.


With that being said, i went ahead and continue my development with bullseye and sent some rounds down range. Here are my results;


Mix headstamp brass (all military head stamps from LC, WCC, PSD, TAA08, and SBS)
cut to 2.005"
5.4gr and 5.6gr of bullseye
Wolf magnum primers
170gr Lee flat note .309 lead cast bullet from wheel weights (Water dropped) no gas check
Seated to the drive band
COAL: 2.510-2.520"
Light factory taper crimp
Rifle: Kel-Tech RFB 18" barrel with the gas system shut off
8x scope
100 yard target


5.4gr FPS test:
1. 996.6
2. 954.5
3. 987.7
4. 976.1
5. 990.9
Group size: 3.567"
SD: 16
Average Velocity: 981


5.6gr FPS test:
1. 1051
2. 1034
3. 1009
4. 1052
5. Error 1 (sensor 1 didnt pick up the bullet in flight)
Group size: 3.77"
SD: 20
Average Velocity: 1037


Felt recoil: Less than a pellet rifle
Pressure signs: None and mean None to the point of it didn't even fire form the case and the primers look like i just pressed them in (minus the dent in the center)


Final thoughts. I think the issues are more along the lines of a kaboom due to triple charge since i ran the numbers and it would take 18.5 gr of bullseye to be dangerous on pressure based on QuickLOADs calculations. Other issues are rifle head spacing issues, out of battery discharges or the use of jacketed bullets (yes you run a jacketed bullet in quick loads you will see that the start pressure for the bullet is to high for such a low charge so do not use jacketed bullets for sub loads of bullseye) as the culprit for catastrophic failures when it comes to sub loading with bullseye. Lastly i think the information given to me from Alliant is more along the lines of "since we don't have data we can't recommend said charge" and they are just covering their butts.


Disclaimer: I am not responsible for any thing that might happen to you or anyone around you due to the use of my load. Use at your own risk.

[Michael J. Spangler]

http://www.gmdr.com/lever/lowveldata.htm

This is a good read.

It might be from that link or something else I read on the subject. I read that when testing accuracy with lower velocity loads always take into consideration trans sonic instability.
Lots of these loads are just barely over the speed of sound at the muzzle. They may shoot terrible at 50 yards but when test out to 100 they shot better. Same goes for being accurate at 50 yards and shooting patterns at 100 yards.
You can see a lot of the data on the link above shows better groups with charges that are just under or decently over the speed of sound.
Makes sense.
No .308 data there but you could get some ideas off of similar cartridges.

There is a system you can buy that uses strain gauges that are taped to barrels in the chamber area to give real pressures.
It's not cheap but might be worth it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[35remington]

Bottom line?

High pressure creates high velocity. There are no "hidden" pressure spikes with light charges of Bulleye. Or you would see abnormally high velocities.

Use Bullseye for your planned application. It will not cause problems.

Period.

[Kveldulv]

Bottom line?

High pressure creates high velocity. There are no "hidden" pressure spikes with light charges of Bulleye. Or you would see abnormally high velocities.

Use Bullseye for your planned application. It will not cause problems.

Period.

In short yep, thats the conclusion i have come to at this point.

[35remington]

You came to the right conclusion. I am sorry you had to endure a lot of misinformation along the way, but that is common when getting advice about reloading. What is unfortunate is you have received advice from an industry "professional" that appears to have a poor understanding of his job.

[Wolfer]

As they say, the concept of getting the most velocity from a given cartridge is pretty well understood. Going the other way is not generally understood except by a few. I suspect a good many of them show up here on occasion.

Ive never shot any Bullseye. I've had an 8 lb jug of clays that is almost gone. I generally load 5 gr in any cartridge with any boolit. Velocity will vary with the weight of the boolit and the space in the case but the groups and the fun factor always puts a grin on my face.

[Kveldulv]

Alright everyone, per my testing of the bullseye I decided to give some more a test. Accuracy is good enough for sub sonic (2-3 MOA), while I could improve the accuracy through playing with the charge, gas checks, etc, I just don't see a point since the bullet drop is about 7ft at 300 yards.

What I was looking for was any kind of pressure signs, just to make sure everything was good. I have included the pictures in this posting and thought I would share.

The results.. absolutely zero pressure signs. The primer looks brand new other than the dent from the firing pin strike, the radius of the primer shows zero signs of flattening (refer to the picture for evidence)



Also I took all the fired shell casings and toss them into my go-no go chamber gauge just to see if they were even getting fire formed... yeah ZERO fire forming. There is not enough pressure to even expand the casing to the chamber! I can say this is for sure a safe load from my testing. (see the picture of the go-no go)

[35 Whelen]

For a year or a bit more I used a subsonic load in my Swiss K-31 (7.5x55) for High Power competition on a reduced course. The load was 6.7 grs. of B'Eye under a 150-ish gr. FP bullet. Given the period of time I used the load and the number I fired in matches, I would've fired somewhere around 1000 of these loads, maybe a bit more. Never had a single hang fire or other problem.
Your mileage may vary...

35W

[35 Whelen]

Want to add, I never used filler of any kind and no attempt to level or elevate the cartridges was made during shooting. Very accurate load too.

35W

[leeggen]

Do a search on here and or look in the archive for Larry Gibson's write up. He has worked thru the loads for 30 cal rifles in reduced powder loads.
CD

[Andy]

I did a bunch of testing for subsonic loads in my swedish mauser. I know there are a lot of differences between that and what you're doing in your rifle but you may find the info helpful, here's a link to the thread with all my data/discussion: http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...swedish-mauser

I am down near the absolute minimum velocity that could be considered useful for anything (most of my testing was 300-700fps range) so it is a bit different from what you're doing. I didn't have any bullets stick in the barrel at the extreme lower velocities using bullseye so I would think you are okay in the speed range you are working with.

[RU shooter]

For a year or a bit more I used a subsonic load in my Swiss K-31 (7.5x55) for High Power competition on a reduced course. The load was 6.7 grs. of B'Eye under a 150-ish gr. FP bullet. Given the period of time I used the load and the number I fired in matches, I would've fired somewhere around 1000 of these loads, maybe a bit more. Never had a single hang fire or other problem.
Your mileage may vary...

35W

I fully agree did the same as 35W has except with the 30-06 in a Springfield almost a full HP season using 6 gr of Bullseye and the Lee 155 never once worried about tipping the muzzle one way or the other between shots just work that bolt and fire . No hang fires Miss fires nothing just a nice relaxing accurate load enough to shoot expert on reduced matched even out to 200 yds . Larry Gibson recommended that load to me when I first joined cast boolits .

Tim

[Texas by God]

Wolfer-get a lb.of Bullseye and try it. That took guts to admit you've never used it. Billions of very accurate rounds have been loaded with it. To quote Terry Weiland- An eight pound jug of Bullseye is the reloading equivilent to the loaves and fishes! Best, Thomas.

[95GTSpeedDemon]

I know this thread is very old... I was curious if the people who have tried this have updates.
Im looking to try loading some .308 winchester with 180 and 220gr coreloks i was given and bullseye i have.
These are jacketed bullets so i wanted to find out if jacketed stuff will still work or its cast only.

[HumptyDumpty]

I know this thread is very old... I was curious if the people who have tried this have updates.
Im looking to try loading some .308 winchester with 180 and 220gr coreloks i was given and bullseye i have.
These are jacketed bullets so i wanted to find out if jacketed stuff will still work or its cast only.

I acquired a smattering of partially-full pistol powder cans about two year ago, and I tried them all out, including Bullseye, with 220gr, jacketed projectiles. I've misplaced my notes, but other than a true rainbow trajectory, I had no issues. I still have a few mixed into my "miscellaneous plinking 308" can; they are darn quiet with a suppressor, and smack-down bowling pins in a satisfying manner.

[95GTSpeedDemon]

Thats excellent to hear.
I found no published data and only one or two random people that said jacketed .308 worked with BE in subs as most used cast boolits, so i was super hesistant to try. I got my hands on quickload and it yelled at me about the starting pressure, which others said it does with jacketed bullets.
Did you use a filler?

[RickinTN]

I know this is an old thread but apparently new interest in the subject. Mr. Harris himself told us under no circumstances to use a filler with the fast powders. What does it take? A white dove with a handwritten note from the Good Lord Himself telling us not to? Adding fillers is a good way to ring a chamber and ruin a good rifle.
Good Luck all, and take care,
Rick