P14 .303 loads hotter?

[dualsport]

I just got a nice Winchester P14 in .303 Br. IF I wanted to could I safely increase loads over standard pressures? I know the action is up to it no sweat. The brass? Same brass used to make .303 AI type loads, right? Just curious, not a real good reason otherwise. Just a 'for the heck of it' deal.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

In theory I think you could do it. You are correct that the action is stronger. I have converted a number of these to suitable magnum cartridges, which involved at a minimum re-chambering and opening the bolt face, and sometimes installing a new barrel. BUT (and there is always at least one, sometimes more than one) the chambers of these rifles are sometimes a bit oversized to allow for ammo being dirty in combat conditions, so you might just find that one shot with a hot load might ruin your brass case. You may also encounter accuracy problems because the rifling in the barrel was geared for the military ammo at standard velocities and would necessitate the use of a different weight/design bullet or different rate of twist. Given a good chamber and a gradual increase in the load I think you might find some success. Personally, and I own 3 of the P-14s, I have no desire to do it. They are a fine rifle just the way they are, and there are others better suited to hotrod loads.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

If it is of quality brass of normal proportions around the head area, I should say it is fine. It is heatedly debated whether rimmed construction, other things being equal, confers extra strength, but it certainly doesn't give less. All the ifs buts and maybes are about brass, not steel. The P14 has frequently been rebarreled for the magnum case, including my .300H&H, and as well as high pressure they have a larger internal cross-section to exert it on.

[Texas by God]

After the first firing neck size only and work your way up to published maximums if you wish. There's no point in trying to +P the .303-it's a fine cartridge outright. A 180gr bullet at 2400 fps will do what needs to be done most days. Best, Thomas.

[Larry Gibson]

I just got a nice Winchester P14 in .303 Br. IF I wanted to could I safely increase loads over standard pressures? I know the action is up to it no sweat. The brass? Same brass used to make .303 AI type loads, right? Just curious, not a real good reason otherwise. Just a 'for the heck of it' deal.

Certainly you can. Modern new 303 cases are made of the same brass as other cartridges with higher SAAMI psi MAPs. Certainly the P-14 action is of sufficient strength. You shouldn't have any problems with new Winchester or Remington cases.

I did exactly what you ask only I used a Canadian Ross M-10. It has a solid front lug lock up with a 30" barrel. The chamber in my rifle is not chambered over size. I used fire formed neck sized R-P cases. T

I also affixed a strain gauge to the barrel over the SAAI specified location to measure pressures via an Oehler M43. The SAAMI MAP for the 303 British is 49,000 psi (transducer/strain gauge). CIP (European) is 53,000 psi. Most all of the milsurp 303 British I've tested has been close to the CIP MAP with some a tudge higher. I set the upper MAP limit for my test of the 303 in the Ross M-10 at 60,000 psi.....the SAAMI MAP for the 30-06.

NOTE; my Ross M-10 has a 30" barrel so velocities would be proportionately less out of the shorter P-14s barrel. Probably 100 - 150 fps less.

Any way I use the Hornady 150 gr .312 SP bullet over IMR 4895. With a MAP of 60,000 psi the load produced 3030 fps.......Best accuracy was at 2960 fps with a 58,00 psi MAP, not much over the CIP MAP. The cases showed no sign of distress and are still in use. I don't use that load, just did it for S & Gs. However, I have contemplated putting a scope on the Ross (it was "sporterized" to sell stateside) and then I'd work up a +P load with the 180 Sierra .311 SP which should then make a nice hunting combo "on the cheap" so to speak as I only paid $85 for the Ross.

If you decide to give it a try just be prudent and watch closely for any pressure signs.

Larry Gibson

[Ballistics in Scotland]

The action was designed as the P13 for the .276 Enfield round, which was very similar to the 7mm. Remington Magnum, and with modern components might have been just as successful - though winning another Boer War on the open veld wasn't what anybody needed to be successful in. Smokeless powders weren't very predictable at the time, and I believe users of the .276 would sometimes, know it or not, be using higher than 7mm. Remington pressures. Noise, flash, nickel fouling, recoil and bore erosions were all criticised in troop trials on a fairly large scale. But I don't think the Enfield-made trials rifles were found wanting in strength.

[Bad Ass Wallace]

I have several including a Remington P14 chambered for 303 Epps Improved. 170gn Hornady at 2940fps is really powering.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v152/BAWallace/Epps303.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/BAWallace/media/Epps303.jpg.html)

[Multigunner]

Only objection I would have to building up hot high velocity loads for a P-14 would be the possibility of these being fired in a beat up old SMLE by mistake.

British target shooters who use 7.62 NATO chambered rifles often load their ammunition to exactly the same ballistics as that of the .303 Mk VIIz.
The standard .303 loading is already an inherently accurate loading. While the P-14 is a very strong action use of standard pressure .303 loads will pretty much baby it so its likely to last many more generations.

That said the only real excuse for building hot loads for a P-14 actioned .303 might be if one lived in grizzly or Polar Bear stomping grounds and wanted some extra insurance, like the heaviest .303 bullet ( 225 gr?) he could find pushed at the highest sane velocity to get the job done with a good margin for error.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I have several including a Remington P14 chambered for 303 Epps Improved. 170gn Hornady at 2940fps is really powering.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v152/BAWallace/Epps303.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/BAWallace/media/Epps303.jpg.html)

Now that chambering would also undo the peculiarities of shoulder shape and width which is found in so many Lee-Enfields, assuming they aren't too wide in the head area as well. I think that is more a characteristic of some No4s than the P14 though, and I don't quite share in the condemnation of some. The No4 chamber was designed for cases which would never be reloaded, with the memory of a war in which the ability to function in the worst possible conditions was worth more than the ultimate in accuracy.

The possibility of special P14 .303 loads being used in a Lee-Enfield, especially the SMLE with its slimmer receiver, is certainly something to guard against. The Lee-Enfields can be irreparably harmed by less pressure than most front-locking rifles, although it is less likely to take the form of a catastrophic explosion. Really heavy bullets are certainly worth having for dangerous game, although I am sceptical about how much difference velocity makes. It isn't going to be dangerous from a distance that needs a flat trajectory.

[dualsport]

Thanks fellas for the good info. I am finding I like this P14 way more than I expected to. Nice combination in my book-a front locking lug Mauser type action with one of my favorites, the .303. The hot loads are for curiosity and entertainment sake only. Not a necessity for me. No griz around here! For starters maybe just go with a case full of WC860 and a 314299.

[Texas by God]

I envy your rifle. The P14 and the US 1917 just feel right, somewhat the way the M1Garand feels right! Best, Thomas.

[texasnative46]

dualsport,

The old (post WWI) "special" load for the P14 was a RN bullet of 220 grains at about 2100FPS. - I'm told by "folks who KNOW" (as they hunted a great deal with that rifle in British East Africa. - One old friend shot a LOT of game "on control" for the Game Department there.) that that particular load was A KILLER on game, including Cape Buffalo & the Big Cats, presuming that the hunter was "a fair shot".

yours, satx

[Multigunner]

"RN bullet of 220 grains at about 2100FPS."

That's close to the ballistics of the MkVI ball cartridge.
In tests the British found the round nose MkVI bullet would penetrate at least 6" deeper in packed earth than the pointed MkVII bullet. The Mkvi passed through 48" of packed earth while the MkVI stopped at 42". Many WW1 era snipers preferred to use the MkVI cartridge. The added danger space of the MkVII bullet was academic since snipers seldom tried for extreme range shots. Both types were used of course according to supply lines.
Fighter pilots also preferred the MkVI bullet when available, it did more damage to the sturdy German inline aircraft engines and had a much better chance of penetrating the armor of German ground attack fighter bombers.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

"RN bullet of 220 grains at about 2100FPS."

That's close to the ballistics of the MkVI ball cartridge.
In tests the British found the round nose MkVI bullet would penetrate at least 6" deeper in packed earth than the pointed MkVII bullet. The Mkvi passed through 48" of packed earth while the MkVI stopped at 42". Many WW1 era snipers preferred to use the MkVI cartridge. The added danger space of the MkVII bullet was academic since snipers seldom tried for extreme range shots. Both types were used of course according to supply lines.
tFighter pilots also preferred the MkVI bullet when available, it did more damage to the sturdy German inline aircraft engines and had a much better chance of penetrating the armor of German ground attack fighter bombers.

I think official supply of MkVI ammunition would have been very limited, and due mainly to the use of civilian sporting .303 sighted for it. At a guess any large stocks of it would have gone to other theatres, where the Indian Army and others still had Long Lee-Enfields and Martini-Enfields. It was accurate, though. I have "With British Snipers to the Reich" by Captain Christopher Shore, who ran a sniping school in WW2 and received a donation of old MkVI from a civilian rifle club. He found it very accurate, and perfectly accommodated by the throating of all the selected No4 rifles they had.

For aerial combat anything like rifle accuracy wasn't much of a consideration. 200 feet was commonly considered the maximum possible against fast-moving targets in WW1, possibly extended to yards by WW2 technology. Actually in WW1 most of the results were probably gained at almost rudder-chewing distances. I don't believe there would have been a MkVI tracer, which had great advantages in the air, as it wasn't introduced for the MkVII until 1915.

[texasnative46]

To All,

Fwiw, I load a very similar round for my "EX- British Home Guard" P-17 rifle. - The Home Guard "reamed-out" the .30-06 barrel to use .303 British bullets with .30-06 cases.
(Oddly, that particular rifle is the MOST accurate rifle that I own, inasmuch as I paid 200.oo for it. = It shoots 220 grain GCCB @ 2150FPS beautifully.)

yours, tex

[Ballistics in Scotland]

To All,

Fwiw, I load a very similar round for my "EX- British Home Guard" P-17 rifle. - The Home Guard "reamed-out" the .30-06 barrel to use .303 British bullets with .30-06 cases.
(Oddly, that particular rifle is the MOST accurate rifle that I own, inasmuch as I paid 200.oo for it. = It shoots 220 grain GCCB @ 2150FPS beautifully.)

yours, tex


We should never say "never" about those days, but I know of no large contract for doing this job, and it would be far more troublesome than supplying ammunition for the very large numbers of M1917 and P14 rifles which remained in their original state. 8x57mm. ammunition was made throughout the war for the BESA tank machine-gun, and making a slightly smaller size of bullet was a lot less trouble than making a new size of case. The M1917 rifles used by the Home Guard was distinguished by a red painted band around the forend.

[texasnative46]

Ballistics in Scotland,

I don't believe that I said that there was a "large contract" to do what was done to my P17. - Nonetheless, a former (& now passed away) member of the Home Guard in 1973 told me that .303 bullets were available & (at least where he was) .30-06 M2 Ball was NOT available, so at least some P-17 were "field modified" to use what was AVAILABLE.

As to "red-banded rifles", the truth is that MANY or even a large MAJORITY of P17 rifles were "red-banded" though any number of P-17 rifles were NOT "banded", as there are numerous reports of "incorrect ammunition" being received for "un-banded" rifles that were received/issued for use in .30-06 caliber.
(Roger L________ said that the "field modified" rifles were SOMETIMES fired with M2 Ball ammo but that accuracy was "inadequate".)

The former SGT, British Home Guard, said that "- - - - early in the World War we had all sorts of donated shotguns, sporting rifles, assorted handguns & any other weapon that was available. We even received a few Tommy-guns from America but those were received without ammunition."
He also told me that after American USAAC personnel "arrived in our area" that we got "by various means" some American-made ammunition & equipment.

ADDENDA: One "well-to-do" retired American COL, who was living in London & married to a British lady, organized an "All American" Home Guard unit & bought/paid for (out of his own pocket) enough TSMG to outfit the whole company. - He also privately bought uniforms/equipment for the whole "American" HG unit.


yours, tex

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Ballistics in Scotland,

I don't believe that I said that there was a "large contract" to do what was done to my P17. - Nonetheless, a former (& now passed away) member of the Home Guard in 1973 told me that .303 bullets were available & (at least where he was) .30-06 M2 Ball was NOT available, so at least some P-17 were "field modified" to use what was AVAILABLE.

As to "red-banded rifles", the truth is that MANY or even a large MAJORITY of P17 rifles were "red-banded" though any number of P-17 rifles were NOT "banded", as there are numerous reports of "incorrect ammunition" being received for "un-banded" rifles that were received/issued for use in .30-06 caliber.
(Roger L________ said that the "field modified" rifles were SOMETIMES fired with M2 Ball ammo but that accuracy was "inadequate".)

The former SGT, British Home Guard, said that "- - - - early in the World War we had all sorts of donated shotguns, sporting rifles, assorted handguns & any other weapon that was available. We even received a few Tommy-guns from America but those were received without ammunition."
He also told me that after American USAAC personnel "arrived in our area" that we got "by various means" some American-made ammunition & equipment.

ADDENDA: One "well-to-do" retired American COL, who was living in London & married to a British lady, organized an "All American" Home Guard unit & bought/paid for (out of his own pocket) enough TSMG to outfit the whole company. - He also privately bought uniforms/equipment for the whole "American" HG unit.


yours, tex

It is very unlikely that it would have been dangerous or inaccurate to fire the M1917 with bullets made for the .303, if necessary. The American Squadron of the Home Guard, formed by a General Hayes, became quite notorious when Joseph Kennedy criticised them shortly before the sudden end of his ambassadorship. He said their participation risked causing all available Americans to be shot when Germany invaded. I believe they kept participating.

[texasnative46]

Ballistics in Scotland,

Pardon me for asking if you perhaps have "a reading comprehension problem". = I did NOT say that firing a .303 British bullet in a "reamed-out" .30 caliber barrel (like mine) was either inaccurate OR "dangerous" but rather that firing M2 Ball in a "reamed-out" barrel was reported to be inaccurate.

Also, since Joe Kennedy was dismissed from his DoS post by FDR for making PRO-German comments, I don't regard that his comments about "The American Squadron" were either "notorious" or even factually correct.
(Given Joe Kennedy's rather "questionable" past, one wonders WHY he was ever appointed as an ambassador.)

YES, "The American Squadron" of the HG continued to be active throughout WWII, though some individual members were recalled to active duty with the regular US Forces. = The Squadron had numerous retired US Armed Forces members that were "recalled".

yours, tex

[Ballistics in Scotland]

We must just try to be ourselves. I meant, and I think may often have been understood as saying, that there was no real need to enlarge the bore of a .30-06 M1917, since if there really was a shortage of standard ammunition, loading with the bullet intended for the .303 would have been a better solution.

[texasnative46]

Ballistics in Scotland,

Could it be that in 1939-41 that the HG ordnance personnel believed that firing a .303 British projectile in a .308 caliber barrel was potentially dangerous??
Otherwise, I cannot imagine WHY they would bother to ream-out the barrel.
(That said, I cannot in 2017 "read the minds" of the British servicemen of >75 years ago.)

Btw, I was told that empty US cases were reloaded with "an industrial sort of cordite". - I have no information as to what the load was.

yours, tex

[Multigunner]

Its possible some M1917 rifles may have had the throat altered for better accuracy when using the MkVI or MkVII .303 bullets.
Most M1917 bores run .310 or larger, which was the standard for the .30-40 Krag, still tighter than the minimum .313 bore of the P-14 rifle.
A rough M1917 bore could be lead lapped to improve performance , if so the .303 bullets might be a better fit.
Also if .30-06 ammunition was reloaded using the larger diameter .303 bullets it would be prudent to ream the chamber neck a hair larger to allow proper expansion of the case neck on firing, otherwise chamber pressure might be increased. The notable variation in the diameters of wartime production .303 bullets could be a problem, though these were most often under sized rather than over sized.

There really wouldn't have been a tracer version of the MkVII bullet as such, the two piece construction of the MkVII bullet would leave no room for a tracer compound. Any .303 tracer ammunition would have had a completely different bullet. The Mark of a cartridge was based on the construction of the bullet.
Various Mks of .303 aircraft gun tracer bullets weighed a great deal less than the MkVII bullet. This was a constant problem when firing at any distance since the tracers had a very different point of impact. If you tried to walk in your bursts by watching where the tracers went you'd waste 5/6 of your ammunition. Some pilots got around this by loading entire belts with tracers only.

The French when they received British manufactured .303 ammo for their aircraft guns in that caliber pulled the bullets, replaced the cordite with poudre B and replaced the bullets with bullets of their own design intended to maximize damage to enemy aircraft. Basically they just used the primed cases and sent the salvaged cordite and bullets back to the British when convenient.

[leadman]

I have a 1917 in 30-06 and the bore is so large I do use the .311" or .312" bullets with no problems. Don't know what the bore measured when new, which it is far from now, but it works well the way I load it now.

[bruce drake]

Bill Ruger was not the first engineer to design a throat reamer to allow a larger bullet to be safely swaged down to be fired in a tighter bore...Bill did it for his Ruger Mini-30 to allow Russian 7.62x39 surplus to be fired in his .308 barrels.
The Germans in 1905 did it for their older 1888 Commission Rifles to fire .323" bullets in their older .318 bore barrels.
I'm pretty certain there are some smart British Engineers that could modify a 30-06 chambered 1917 enfield to fire a .303-06 reloaded cartridge.

[Texas by God]

Forgive my ignorance but didn't Remington,Winchester,and Eddystone use the P14 barrel and just chamber it for 30-06?

[Multigunner]

"didn't Remington,Winchester,and Eddystone use the P14 barrel and just chamber it for 30-06? "

No, the confusion came in because the M1917 bores were cut according to the earlier dimension tolerances of the .30-40. The Enfield pattern rifling was better suited for a slightly looser bullet to bore fit.

[Texas by God]

Thanks. I made an assumption based on expedience of wartime manufacture. The only 1917s I had experience with were rebarreled with 2 groove barrels and parkerized. By the way the only Krag I've owned slugged .309"-and it was a great shooter. Best, Thomas.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

General Hatcher mentions a common belief that the bore dimensions of the P14 were retained for M1917 production, but denies it. What they carried over was the five grooves and left-hand twist. He illustrates the standard M1917 bore as having a .310 groove diameter and .300 lands, which with its equal width grooves and lands made a marginally tighter bore than the M1903 rifle.

That doesn't mean that the standard was always complied with, however. It is known that production of the P14 in quantity was slowed by failure to meet specifications. Matters were greatly speeded up by the appointment of the future Lord Reith of the BBC as chief of the inspectorate, a job he got by being shot through the head and shoulder by a sniper on the brickstacks at Cuinchy, and walking to the dressing station with the stretcher-bearers tagging along behind.

He was a rather terrifying 6''6" Presbyterian fundamentalist, oblivious on principle to what people thought of him, and yet much of his problem-solving consisted in compromise on petty quibbles which had given his predecessors a good living. It is likely, though, that some deviation on bore diameters did take place in the M1917 phase. Even the occasional use of P1 barrels from stock isn't to be ruled out.

Does anybody have firm information on how the barrels were rifled? My guess is that they were cut rifled on Pratt and Whitney machines, which are just portable enough to be a mainstay of limited-production barrelmakers even nowadays, if they can get them. If there is any error in groove diameter with those, I think it is more likely to be in the direction of shallow than of deep. But if broaching was used, cutting the rifling in a single pass of a tool with five rows of graduated teeth, it could be both. The tool was very expensive, so the tendency was to make it oversize (slightly would be nice), and reduce it by occasional sharpening until it is undersize.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Thanks. I made an assumption based on expedience of wartime manufacture. The only 1917s I had experience with were rebarreled with 2 groove barrels and parkerized. By the way the only Krag I've owned slugged .309"-and it was a great shooter. Best, Thomas.

Those two-groove WW2 rebarrellings were with the same bore dimensions, or meant to be, as the war emergency M1903A3 barrel. I think it is truer to say that the tolerances, rather than a specific dimension, were carried over from the Krag, and in general produced accuracy sufficient, or better, for ordinary infantry use.