Old 303 ammo, is this cordite?

[Multigunner]

I've loaded thousands of pulled .303 FMJ's alone and don't do the squib or light loads. Never ever encountered such a prssure oddity..sounds like an old wives' tale to me.

And yes the cartridge shown is Iraqi...I broke down several hundred of them 3 months ago for the bullets..... and they do quite fine with lodas in the 2400 - 2500 FPS range.

No one said anything about "squib" loads, and what constitutes a light load is a matter of opinion.

If you are suggesting that no precautions be taken when substituting one bullet for another of similar weight but greatly different bearing surface I suspect you haven't done much if any serious handloading.

Read and learn.

Bearing Surface
Bryan Litz's book, Applied Ballistics for Long Range Shooting, shows the bearing surface of the Berger 185 gr. to be 0.360" versus 0.393" for the Sierra 190 gr. However, measuring my lot of older Sierra 190's reveals a bearing surface of 0.460". Bryan's data is based on current production bullets so it's reasonable to conclude that Sierra has updated their design over the years, but it also points out the need to measure your particular bullets. With a 0.100" reduction in bearing surface, you can see a good part of the reason why the 185 gr. Berger is a better performer at 1000 yards than my old lot of Sierra 190's. Please don't confuse measuring bearing surface to compare various types of bullets with sorting a particular bullet by bearing surface variance which is a separate discussion.

A bullet's bearing surface is a major contributor to the pressure level that will be generated with a given powder charge. Comparing the Berger 185's 0.360" bearing surface to the Lapua 185 gr. D46 (a very old design) at 0.408" is a solid indication that the Lapua will create higher pressure with the same powder charge; therefore, those two bullets should not be interchanged without an appropriate load adjustment. How about that old stand-by, the Sierra 180 gr. Match King? About 20 years ago, Sierra redesigned that bullet, going to a blunter, shorter boat tail design. The old long boat tail version has a 0.400" bearing surface whereas the new version has a 0.462" bearing surface. These are significant differences, it pays to check before making substitutions!

It would be a shame if a vistor to this site were to end up losing an eye or wrecking a decent rifle by not heeding basic safety practices.
The Loose chambers of the Lee Enfields, few of which meet commercial specifications to begin with, coupled with often undersized cases, make caution when working up loads a necessity.

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com...conundrum.html

PS
Disregard for basic safety practices is why the Lee Enfields converted to 7.62 were subjected to bans and mandated re-proofing by the NRA UK.
In large part due to handloaders believing the old wives tale about overly tight bores or over sized bullets not causing an increase in chamber pressures. The Birminghan Proof house and Radway Green proved otherwise by extensive scientific testing, as opposed to accepting blindly claims made on the internet..

[twildman]

I have never smelled cordite and been aware of it; does it smell like that powder the Russians use that smells like cat pee when it burns?

[shooterg]

Got 2 boxes of 50 each labeled as cordite. Think I'll just leave 'em on the shelf - although the cigarette trick above sounds more effective than no smoking signs !

[WineMan]

One time back in the late 1970's we were scuba diving at Paradise Cove California (Where the Rockford Files was filmed). We found a 5" 38 cal case which still had the foil covering. There was no projectile. We took the "powder" which was cylinders about 1/2" long and 1/4" in diameter with small holes going in the long direction, and filled beer (soda) cans and put it in the coals of a beach fire. After about 30 seconds the can would whoosh off trailing sparks. No explosions. The empty brass case polished up nicely and it was displayed at the New England Divers Store in West Los Angeles for many years. I do not remember the smell and I always wondered if it was Cordite.

Wineman

[gew98]

No one said anything about "squib" loads, and what constitutes a light load is a matter of opinion.

If you are suggesting that no precautions be taken when substituting one bullet for another of similar weight but greatly different bearing surface I suspect you haven't done much if any serious handloading.

Read and learn.


It would be a shame if a vistor to this site were to end up losing an eye or wrecking a decent rifle by not heeding basic safety practices.
The Loose chambers of the Lee Enfields, few of which meet commercial specifications to begin with, coupled with often undersized cases, make caution when working up loads a necessity.

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com...conundrum.html

PS
Disregard for basic safety practices is why the Lee Enfields converted to 7.62 were subjected to bans and mandated re-proofing by the NRA UK.
In large part due to handloaders believing the old wives tale about overly tight bores or over sized bullets not causing an increase in chamber pressures. The Birminghan Proof house and Radway Green proved otherwise by extensive scientific testing, as opposed to accepting blindly claims made on the internet..

Ah , what does this "overly tight bore or over sized bullet" snippet have to do with anything here...nothing of course
Your ballistician manual "strong indications"..... but never once gave any measurements of anything that would indicate that.... like he did no testing, no ?.
So you again assume because you are a fountain of bookworm knowledge with little applied practical skills , that anyone else with MORE practical hands on is daft by your "standards". Thank god we have such smart people. Bullet diameter and it's weight coupled with the proper poder have never let anyone down. So someohow a bullet with .100" more bearing surface will put you in blowupville ?. Give us a break not all of us care to shoulder Model 1903 kaboomers.
Since I have actively been reloading for 33 + years in multitudes of military calibers too..I guess I'm a noob to book read specialists...I'll stick with practical application types thank you.

[303Guy]

I suppose if it is in the form of cords it is cordite? Would that be made from gun cotton or some other nitrocellulose material. I know movie-film can be used to make 'powder'.

[EOD3]

Plus, if you fire it, you will understand what all the mystery writers are talking about when they refer to "the stench of cordite." Of course, most of them say it when referring to guns that were never loaded with cordite.

The most accurate word I've found for the smell is "acrid". It's either that or burned cat pee.

[Multigunner]

I suppose if it is in the form of cords it is cordite? Would that be made from gun cotton or some other nitrocellulose material. I know movie-film can be used to make 'powder'.

Cordite is a term meant to be reserved for the NG/NC double base rifle or naval gun propellant in stick form. The term later came into use for the NG/NC propellant in ribbon or other forms sometimes used by manufacturers of sporting ammunition, though these propellants usually went by a brand name. Manufacturers of sporting rifle propellants bought cordite in a paste form, using their own machinery to produce flakes, strands, or ribbons.


The British Naval manuals describe "Cordite NC" as a single base propellent sometimes used when muzzle flash was a concern, by then cordite was commonly used to describe just about any propellent. Otherwise they used cordite.The U S used single base NC propellants for all main guns.
Because cordite doesn't absorb water, flooding of a powder magazine wouldn't alway prevent a chain reaction explosion.
Ships using only single base propellants have taken direct hits on the magazine by torpedoes and still survived by rapid flooding of the magazine.
A half dozen incidents of British warships being destroyed by detonation of the magazine, sometimes at the docks far from any combat zones.
A few Japanese ships were also destroyed by cordite magazine explosions, one ship was at anchor and the forced air ventilation of the magazine failed. At temperatures over 125 degrees cordite can sweat nitroglycerine.

The original Cordite formula contained 58% Nitro-Glycerin, the same percentage as Gelignite mining explosives. Abel and Dewar appear to have based their formula on Gelignite using the same percentage of NG but eliminating all other ingrediants other than NC, the percentage of NC was then raised to make up the difference, later they added a few percent of mineral jelly to create a flim of carbon in the bore that reduced jacket metal fouling. Without the mineral jelly bores could loose accuracy within 400 rounds. Flake cordite for pistol use didn't contain mineral jelly.
Gelignite in stick form is often called cordite.
Since the use of Ng/NC to prodce Gelignite was no longer protected by patent, and Alfred Nobel had worded his aplication for a patent on his double base rifle propellant formula in such a way that could be worked around leaving the field open for Abel and Dewar.

[JeffinNZ]

Without the mineral jelly bores could loose accuracy within 400 rounds.

See what I mean? "Erosive".

That is some SERIOUS erosion potential. No wonder well used .303's require a bullet a foot long to engage the rifling. I once owned a MLe the first half of the barrel of which was basically smooth. For a hoot I shot handloads in the old girl and she shot into 2.5 inches at 100m!

[Multigunner]

Without the mineral jelly bores could loose accuracy within 400 rounds.

See what I mean? "Erosive".

That is some SERIOUS erosion potential. No wonder well used .303's require a bullet a foot long to engage the rifling. I once owned a MLe the first half of the barrel of which was basically smooth. For a hoot I shot handloads in the old girl and she shot into 2.5 inches at 100m!

The rapid degradation of accuracy when the first formula without mineral jelly was used was less due to erosion, which is another problem they had to solve, but rather due to jacket metal becoming so strongly fused to the bore in the leade that it constricted the bore there when the bullet got past the built up metal fouling it would then be undersized and a loose fit.
The metal fouling also had a tendency to break loose in patches which further ruined accuracy and was unpredictable.
The built up fouling was so difficult to remove that the bore became irreparably damaged very quickly.
When testing other propellents alongside cordite they found that when a few rounds of the other powders had been fired before firing cordite rounds there was far less metal fouling. The other powders left a coating of carbon that reduced direct metal to metal contact.
The erosive nature of cordite also produced a microscopic scoring of the steel at the throat, giving the jacket metal a surface to grip.

After the addition of mineral jelly greatly reduced metal fouling they then had to deal with erosion.
When early cordite loaded ammo was used without a card wad erosion continued to destroy accuracy within a few thousand rounds. The over the charge glazed board card coupled with mineral jelly greatly reduced erosion.
The deeper grooves of Enfield pattern rifling held up better to erosion, so it replaced the earlier Metford pattern rifling.
Then they found Cordite Mk1 was unsuited for a lighter bullet at higher velocity, so Cordite MD with lowered Ng content and higher NC content was developed.

Even with the more durable Enfield rifling the average accurate bore life of the SMLE was determined to be 12,000 rounds while the contemporary GEW 98 had a accuracy life of 19,000+.
The accuracy life of a SMLE when used for long range sniping was said to be around 1600 rounds, after which it could not be trusted to deliver precision accuracy necessary for the job. The bore life varied greatly under combat conditions, some rifles began losing accuracy after as few as 500 rounds.
Cleaning methods had a great deal to do with it. Hesketh Prichard stated that the pull through should not be used to clean a sniper or sharpshooters rifle, only cleaning carefully with a rod could preserve the bore for precision shooting.

While NC loaded ammo was available, the broad tolerances of the SMLE bores meant some could handle it with a high degree of accuracy while other rifles could not. Nitro-Cellulose powders did not have the initial punch to bump up the bullet enough to give good results in an oversized bore.

I have read that the M1917 rifle with Enfield pattern rifling and bores made to closer tolerances for the .30 bullet could have an accuracy life of over 30,000 rounds. There was a push to adopt Enfield pattern rifling for all U S weapons, but the convential rifling of the Springfield was capable of greater accuracy for the first 4000-5000 rnds and gave reasonable accuracy for up to 18,000 rounds.
Since most military rifles suffered bore damage from hamhanded cleaning long before the maximum bore life was reached it was felt that superior accuracy for up to 4,000+ rounds was more important than the maximum bore life. The Springfield when using NC propellants actually increased in accuracy through the first 3,500 rnds so long as properly cleaned.

[atr]

Interesting,,,,I had some of the same ammo and pulled the bullets but the cordite in my ammo did not look anything like yours....mine was grey and the sticks were long and wavey.
I shot alot of mine and it worked OK, some had lag time between striking the primer and full ignition, but never any real duds.
atr

[EOD3]

Interesting,,,,I had some of the same ammo and pulled the bullets but the cordite in my ammo did not look anything like yours....mine was grey and the sticks were long and wavey.
I shot alot of mine and it worked OK, some had lag time between striking the primer and full ignition, but never any real duds.
atr

Different manufacturing processes were used by various countries. I don't remember which country actually developed Cordite but, I'm thinking it was the frogs. In any case, a method of launching projectiles without the HUGE cloud of smoke.

[EOD3]

Careful Multigunner, someone will come along and accuse you of being a book-worm as apposed to someone LUCKY enough not to have blown his head off, YET.

Fire in the hole...

[Multigunner]

Different manufacturing processes were used by various countries. I don't remember which country actually developed Cordite but, I'm thinking it was the frogs. In any case, a method of launching projectiles without the HUGE cloud of smoke.

The French came up with a single base powder for the 8mm Lebel.
Cordite was a British invention, though basicaly a rip off of Alfred Nobels extremely similar formula for Ng/NC double based propellants.
The British government, working through loyal stooges, ripped off a number of inventors to avoid paying royalties. The inventor of the Snider rifle died in poverty before his heirs were awarded what was due him, and then only because a member of parliment was disdgusted by the way he had been treated and raised sand about it.

The Germans outright stole several features of the French 8mm cartridge and forward locking bolt from the French through paying a French traitor to steal one of the Lebel rifles and some ammo. The Lebel was reverse engineered at Spandau and elements of the design were incorporated into the Gew 88 rifle.
Oddly the French MAS 36 action looks very much like a Mauser patent drawing for a rear locking action he'd designed before the Germans stole the Lebel front lug design.

[EOD3]

Expediency has a way of trumping "rights" when governments are involved. Take, for instance, the Springfield. We finally had to pony-up a few bucks for the patent infringement but even then it was a wink and a nod deal. Not that I'd let that get in the way if I found the right rifle

[Multigunner]

Expediency has a way of trumping "rights" when governments are involved. Take, for instance, the Springfield. We finally had to pony-up a few bucks for the patent infringement but even then it was a wink and a nod deal. Not that I'd let that get in the way if I found the right rifle

ROYALTIES FOR THE USE AND MANUFACTURE OF PATENTED ARTICLES.

The payment by the United States of a royalty for the right to manufacture and use patented articles after the expiration of the term of the patent is not authorized.

The War Department is not authorized to enter into a contract for the payment by the United States of a royalty for the prior use and manufacture of patented devices, such prior use being in the nature of a tort for which the United States is not liable.

(Comptroller Tracewell to the Secretary of War, February 28,

1905.)

By your reference, dated February 21, 1905, of a .communication of the Chief or Ordnance dated February- 17, 1905, you request my decision of the questions therein presented. Omitting paragraphs 5 and 6, the communication is as follows:

"1. I have the honor to inclose herewith proposed articles of agreement between the United States and Messrs. VonLengerke & Detmold, of New York, providing for procuring from them the right to manufacture and use a breech-loading magazine arm, certain features of which are covered by United States letters patent owned by them, on the payment of a license fee therefor.

"2. The appropriations which it is believed authorize the proposed contract are as follows:

Manufacturing, repairing, procuring, and issuing arms at the

national armories (Stats, at Large, vol. 32, p. 942) $1,700,000

Manufacturing, repairing, procuring, and issuing arms at the national armories (Stats, at Large, vol. 33, p. 275) 1,700,000

"These appropriations are available until exhausted, not exceeding two years. (Stats, at Large, vol. 25, p. 833.)

" ' Hereafter all moneys arising from disposition authorized by law and regulation of serviceable ordnance and ordnance stores shall constitute one fund on the books of the Treasury Department, which shall bo available to replace ordnance and ordnance stores throughout the fiscal year in which the disposition was effected and throughout the following year.' (Stats, at Large, vol. 33, p. 276.)

"3. The letters patent enumerated and referred to in the proposed contract were originally taken out by Mr. Paul Mauser, but articles of assignment have been furnished by the Patent Office showing that Messrs. Von Lengerke & Detmold are the owners and are also entitled to all rights and claims which may have arisen under them prior to the transfer to them.

"4. The contract provides for a license fee of $200,000, payable at the rate of 50 cents per arm manufactured, but it is provided in the contract that in case the Government shall manufacture a less number of arms than 400,000 the license fee will be correspondingly reduced, but that for all arms manufactured in excess of 400,000 no license fee will be paid. It is possible, but not probable, that payments of the license fee might extend beyond the date of expiration of the patents. *******

"7. The contract also provides that in case all the arms for which the license fee will be paid can not be manufactured under the present appropriations, the United States shall have the right to renew the agreement under the same terms and conditions.

"8. The contract also provides that the contracting parties shall pay all judgments against the United States on account of any suits or claims which may be made by any persons for infringement of their patents in the manufacture and use of the breech-loading arm and cartridge clip, as covered by the letters patent recited in the contract.

"9. A bond will be required from the contracting parties in the sum of $50,000 to insure the pa3rment of such judgments should any arise.

*' 10. A decision is requested as to whether or not this Department can enter into such a contract to bind the United States. If there are any features in the contract which are not lawful. it is requested that the decision cover such modifications as may be necessary, so that this Department may be enabled to manufacture the magazine arm under the letters patent enumerated and referred to."

From this communication it appears that your Department contemplates manufacturing for the use of the United States, under authority of the appropriations specified therein, breech- loading magazine arms containing certain improved devices for which letters patent have been granted and are still in force, and are now owned by Messrs. Von Lengerke & Det- mold, and that you propose to enter into a contract with them by which, in consideration of a license to the United States to manufacture and'use said improved devices, the United States will agree to pay the said owners of said letters" patent as compensation for said license a royalty of 50 cents on each arm manufactured, not to exceed in the aggregate $200,000.

If the said owners of the said letters patent have thereunder the exclusive right to manufacture, use, and sell the improved devices to be used in the arms to be manufactured and used by the United States, I am of opinion that, under the appropriations specified, you are authorized to enter into a contract with them for the purpose specified, and to provide therein for the payment of reasonable compensation for said license.

But there is one feature of the proposed contract that is not free from doubt. If the contract provided for the payment of a royalty for the manufacture and use of improved devices for which one letters patent only had been granted, I do not think you would be authorized to provide therein for the payment of the royalty for the manufacture and use of the devices after the expiration of the term of the patent. In the case presented seven distinct letters patent are specified, which were granted on six different dates. It is presumed that each letters patent was granted for a term of the same length, beginning on the date when granted. The terms of six of the letters patent 'frill therefore expire at different times. The improved devices for which the several letters patent were granted may also have different values. If. under this state of facts, the royalty which it is proposed to pay is the aggregate value of all the improved devices for which the seven letters patent were granted, I do not think the terms of the contract submitted would authorize the payment of the full amount of the royalty after the expiration of the term of one or more of the letters patent, and in such case the terms of the contract do not provide what amount of royalty should then be paid.

It may be, however, that in fixing the amount of the royalty allowance was made for the differences in the time of expiration of the terms of the letters patent and for the difference in the value of the improved devices, and that the amount agreed upon is deemed appropriate compensation to be paid for the manufacture and use of the improved devices during the varying terms of the several patents until the expiration of the term of the patent of latest date. If,so, I think this intention should be made clear in the terms of the contract.

There is another feature of the proposed contract which requires particular consideration. In paragraph 5 of the communication of the Chief of Ordnance he says:

" 5. The contract also provides for making payment of the license fee for all arms manufactured subsequent to March l*i. 1904. The reason for the insertion of this date in the contract is that on that date this Department addressed a letter to the AVaffenfabrik Mauser, the owners of the letters patent described and referred to before the transfer was made to Messrs. Von Lengerke & Detmold, in which letter reference was made to the making of an agreement providing for the payment of royalties in case any of the features of the magazine arm no*v being manufactured by the Government was covered by any of the letters patent owned by the Wafl'enfabrik Mauser."

The letter to the Waffenfabrik Mauser, to which he refers, is as follows:

"1. As an examination would seem to indicate that some of the features of the cartridge slip recently adopted for the United States Armv mav be covered bv vour United States letters patent Nos. -402605, 482376, and 547932. it is requested that your attorney in this country call at this office for the purpose of determining what, if any. of its features are eovered by your patents, and if .so, to arrive at an agreement as to the royalties which should be paid therefor."

In paragraph 6 the Chief of Ordnance further says:

"6. It is the understanding of this Department that the writing of this letter constitutes an implied contract under which a license fee may he paid the owners of the letters patent enumerated and referred to, and the proposed contract accordingly makes provision for this payment. A copy of the letter referred to is inclosed."

I do not concur with the Chief of Ordnance in the opinion that the letter to the Waffenfabrik Mauser, referred to by him, constitutes an implied contract for the payment of a royalty for the manufacture and use of the improved devices for which the letters patent mentioned therein were granted. This letter suggests that some of the features of the "cartridge clip" which had been " recently adopted" for the Army ''may be covered" by those patents. It does not indicate whether any of the cartridge slips had been manufactured or not. It then requests that an attorney of the Waffenfabrik Mauser call for the purpose of investigating the question of infringement, and, if it should be 'found that there was, ''to arrive at an agreement as to the royalties which should be paid therefor.'1'

The letter and the facts presented leave in doubt the question whether the proposed agreement for compensation had reference to cartridge clips which had been manufactured or were to be manufactured. In the former case no compensation would be authorized, for the infringement would be in the uuture of a tort, for which the Government would not be liable. In the case of Rwsell v. United States (182 U. S., 535), which was a case of the infringement of a patent by the manufacture and use by the United States of the Krag- Jorgensen rifle, the Supreme Court said:

"If petitioners have suffered injury it has l>een through the infringement of their patent, not by a breach of contract, and for the redress of an infringement the Court of Claims has no jurisdiction. This doctrine may be technical. If the United States was a person, on the facts of this record, * * * it could be sued as on an implied contract, but it is the prerogative of a sovereign not to be sued at all without its consent or upon such causes of action as it chooses. It has not chosen to be sued in an action sounding in tort. * * *"

Until an agreement has been entered into for compensating an owner of a patent for the manufacture and use of any device for which such patent has been granted the manufacture and use thereof is an infringement, and if the infringement is by the United States compensation can not be recovered for the injury.

I am therefore of opinion that you are not authorized to to enter into a contract to pay royalty for the prior manufacture and use by the United States of any of the devices referred to.

The Chief of Ordnance overstepped his authority, the Chief Bean Counter called him on it, Mauser was stuck in the middle.
I have yet to find any documentation on an actual lawsuit filed by Mauser.

[gew98]

And we ( USA ) still got stuck with a sub par rifle for combat...now on the target range they may have been queens when they did not blow up until they got the heat treat problem figured out after only a million plus were made , but hey that's another story. Ask guys like Dunlap and George whom had to use these in field envirionments..nuff said.

[KCSO]

Now if yo section the bullet you will find a small dab of kapok in the tip too.

[Multigunner]

Now if yo section the bullet you will find a small dab of kapok in the tip too.

I've heard the term Kapok used for the compressed wood fiber filler, but I'm not sure if thats a correct term.
We still used Kapok filled life jackets back in the 50's and I don't see any resemblence between the materials.

[303Guy]

Correct me here, I have the understanding that the original nose filler was rubber of sorts and that the wood fibre was a cost saving. I have had old MkVII bullets that did have that hard rubber filler.

Was the aluminum filler used for its hardness and hense improved penetration in non-human targests as in machine gun ammo?