At Last - A Good Day at the Range

[grumpy one]

I went to the range this morning to try some relatively soft bullets for the first time, and to try to get my 336 30-30 shooting after a disastrous experiment with electrolysis. Results were so much better than I'm used to that I just had to talk about it.

First the 30-06. This is a milsurp FN K98 30-06, ex Columbian army and allegedly manufactured in 1952 as part of a contract (serial no. in the 13 thousands). Chamber is fairly tight, bore 0.2986, groove 0.3096 to 0.3102. Bullet is 311291, sized 0.311, cast in 3% tin 5% antimony and water-dropped. Winchester cases, WLR primers, 50/50 beeswax/alox lube, old Lyman gas checks. All five shot groups at 55 yards (50 meters).
20.5 grains IMR4227 (my reference load) 1.0"
20.2 grains AR2205 (H4227) 0.6"
19 grains SR4759 0.6"
20 grains SR4759 1.6"
21 grains SR4759 0.7"
25 grains AR2208 (Varget) 0.9"
27 grains AR2208 (Varget) 1.8"

What went wrong with the 20 grains of SR4759? I don't know, but for now I have to suspect I'm getting variability, and it might apply to the other loads as well if I repeat a few times. My IMR4227 reference load has given me everything from 0.6" to 1.6" in the past with ultra-hard (foundry-type) bullets. So far as Varget is concerned, I think I'm just way too low on the powder charge and need to step up - carefully - toward higher loads. Those Varget groups exhibited vertical stringing, which is sometimes due to pressure variability.

Now the 30-30. This has a bore of "at least 0.306" (bullets with a nose diameter of 0.306 can be chambered and extracted with no rifling marks visible on the nose). Groove diameter is 0.3116 - 0.3112" (breech to muzzle). Bullet is Lee C309-170-F sized 0.312, with oval nose 0.304 - 0.306. Alloy is 3% tin 5% antimony water-dropped. FP cases, WLR primers, 50/50 beeswax/alox lube, old Lyman gas checks. All five shot groups at 55 yards (50 meters). I've never used correctly-sized bullets in this rifle before and have consequently never seen a decent cast bullet group from it before.
15 grains IMR4227 0.8"
16 grains IMR4227 1.2"
17 grains IMR4227 2.6" (4 into 0.9")
18 grains IMR4227 0.6"
16 grains SR4759 0.7"
17 grains SR4759 0.6"
18 grains SR4759 0.6"

Again, what went wrong with 17 grains of IMR4227? Dunno, but 16 grains didn't give all that special a group either. Seems like I need to investigate further, including going a little higher than 18 grains. It's interesting that all of the SR4759 groups were both small and fairly round, which seems promising so far as that powder is concerned. Once again I seem to need to investigate the effects of *slightly* more powder.

All in all, I call this a very successful two hours at the range. I'm obviously still getting some mysterious results, but both rifles seem capable of doing a good job. Considering that one is a milsurp that I bought twenty-five years ago for $50 with grease in the barrel and no idea as to its condition, and the other is a rifle I was pretty sure I'd destroyed after a nasty experience with home electrolysis, I'm now feeling much happier than when I got up this morning. It's a bit surprising that the dark, very rough and loose microgroove barrel in the 30-30 is grouping as well as the deeply-rifled and extremely shiny barrel of the K98, especially when I haven't yet tried properly-fitted bore-riders in the 30-30, but I guess surprises are what keeps us interested in this hobby.

Geoff

[BruceB]

Geoff;

Well, dang...speaking only for myself, and not the rest of our motley herd, I'd say that you had a VERY fine day at the range, and at the loading bench, too.

You didn't mention the sighting equipment, but if those groups were shot with the issue irons on both rifles, then you have nothing whatever left to prove.

Color me green (with envy, not sick). In fact, may I suggest you abandon your curmudgeonly handle, and adopt something like "Ol' Smiley"????

[grumpy one]

Thanks Bruce, seeing as how you are "the man" in my opinion so far as shooting these things is concerned, I only wish I could say I had done some good shooting. However both rifles are wearing 4x32 scopes. The Marlin 30-30 has a very ordinary-or-garden-variety Tasco attached to the factory-drilled holes on top, using aluminium Weaver parts. When I bought it a Williams peep sight was fitted, but I substituted the scope because I was conscious of my eyesight not being good enough to do justice to any decent rifle with iron sights. My sight hasn't deteriorated all that much, it never was very good to start with.

The K98 is a slightly more interesting story. Of course it had the usual open ramp battle sight when I bought it, and I found that my vertical control was inadequate, so I fitted an E69 Lyman - a click-adjustable target type receiver sight. I got by with that for many years, but just a few months ago I realised that I wasn't all that sure where I was pointing it. Not wanting to bubba-ize the rifle (I'm a bit embarrassed about having drilled and tapped two holes years ago to mount the Lyman aperture in fact) I wasn't prepared to drill the action for scope mounts, so I made a device that attaches to the base of the issue iron sight, and which in turn holds a pistol scope in scout position. I needed two tapped holes of course to mount the device to the sight base, and there was one there already (a 4 mm tapped hole at the front of the sight base that takes a small flat-headed screw which retains the hand-guard). I decided I could stretch a point enough to drill and tap a matching hole at the back of the sight base, where it would be covered up by the issue sight when that is fitted. I didn't drill into the barrel of course; it's a blind hole just through the sight base. So, two or three hours on the milling machine, followed by a ridiculous amount of hand fitting because the "flat level" areas at the two ends of the issue sight base aren't level or even parallel to each other, and I had turned a piece of inch square mild steel into a short Picatinny rail to mount standard scope rings. Bought a Ruko pistol scope on ebay, and suddenly I could see what I'm shooting at. I'm still a lousy shot - I estimate that about 0.2" of each of those group sizes is due to me. I can see the reticle waving across the target while I'm squeezing, and watch it leaping wildly in every direction during recoil, but never the same way twice. No conception of recoil control at all.

Geoff C.

[Bass Ackward]

I went to the range this morning to try some relatively soft bullets for the first time

Bullet is 311291, sized 0.311, cast in 3% tin 5% antimony and water-dropped.

My IMR4227 reference load has given me everything from 0.6" to 1.6" in the past with ultra-hard (foundry-type) bullets. Geoff


Geoff,

I would be open to measuring the hardness of your fairly soft bullets for you Geoff. Chances are they were actually harder. My foundry type measurements in the past were 29 BHN on my hardness tester. I have a fair amount of experience with a mix close to yours and water dropped 30s usually are about 35 BHN even though they don't "ring" quite like the foundry giving a false hardness impression.

Is the measurement of .311 actual or sized through a sizer measurement? Might be your .... "wild ones" were just different in diameter if sizing wasn't done when all bullets were the same hardness. Here is an example. If I mold and water drop 30s for two hours and then immediately size after, I will have diameters ranging from .3092 to about .310 using a .309 sizer. If I wait for a couple of days, then I get a consistent .310. So I just wait and size then HT if I want the bands hard too.

So you haven't hit .... soft metal yet. But I see experimentation in your future now. :grin:

[Buckshot]

..............I can't see much of anything wrong with those groups myself. Scope or no. For me, with visually inspected slugs over thrown charges I consider 50 yard groups of 1.5" or less fine. Even if a groups measured 3" because of a flyer, if the other 4 were tight I'd discount the flyer as a defect.

Overall as an average it sure looks like the 30-30 outshot the boltgun! HEck, I'd reload the same loads over again and then shoot them at 100 yards.

................Buckshot

[grumpy one]

Bass,

I have no measurement of bullet hardness. According to the literature my foundry type bullets should have been 30-33 BHN air cooled. In practice all of my foundry type bullets were water-dropped, but I've heard - and haven't confirmed - that heat treatment has no substantial effect on those very highly alloyed bullets, so I've always regarded them as being about 30 BHN, without trying to check. However I do know that with the foundry type ones, I could chuck them by the bullet nose in my lathe chuck (to make laps) and there were no jaw marks on them afterward. When I chuck the water-dropped 3%/5% alloy in the same way, the nose is quite visibly damaged. Incidentally those quenched foundry type bullets were brittle like glass - I've found the same thing with pieces of foundry type before smelting.

I haven't measured bullets after sizing, just because of the messiness of the lube. What I do is mike every bullet across the drive bands (at right angles to the parting line) before sizing, and reject all the ones that are over .0002" less than the nominal sizing diameter. I agree that the most obvious, perhaps the most likely, source of flyers is if the odd undersized bullet gets through the process, and of course since I mike the bullets a hundred at a time, it is quite possible I've somehow missed one or two undersized ones. I do usually find a few to reject when I'm measuring them that way.

So far as time lags are concerned, my system is simple and crude. I cast a batch of bullets - usually 150 or more - and put them aside. Then each time I am loading a batch, I size and lube exactly that number of bullets. This should mean that the bullets have been cast at least a day or two, but sometimes a couple of months, before I size them. However I haven't been doing anything to make sure that a two day minimum applies.

Now that you have sensitized me to the issue of undersized bullets sneaking through my quality control, I think I'd better tighten up my process for miking bullets. For a start, I can re-run all the bullets in the pipeline to ensure there aren't any undersized ones I've missed. I can also be more careful to ensure that I never size a bullet within two days of casting it.

Geoff

[grumpy one]

..............I can't see much of anything wrong with those groups myself. Scope or no. For me, with visually inspected slugs over thrown charges I consider 50 yard groups of 1.5" or less fine. Even if a groups measured 3" because of a flyer, if the other 4 were tight I'd discount the flyer as a defect.

Overall as an average it sure looks like the 30-30 outshot the boltgun! HEck, I'd reload the same loads over again and then shoot them at 100 yards.

................Buckshot

Thanks Buckshot,

I wasn't using anything like "visually inspected slugs over thrown charges" here. While I didn't weigh these particular bullets (I usually do), both moulds have been lapped to suit the specific rifle; bullets were measured across the lands before sizing to eliminate undersized ones; cases were deburred, neck turned, and after each resizing are gauged and trimmed to SAAMI length plus nothing minus .003"; all cases are partially FLS sized every time (i.e. RCBS sizing die set to suit the chamber then set about 1/3 turn longer); I only use one set of 35 cases for each rifle for all load development work; charges were weighed as closely as my old mechanical scale can measure them - well within + or - half of a tenth of a grain. It isn't that I'd do anything of that nature to reproduce a successful load once I had it - I just do this stuff for load development to try to reduce variability so I can find the true optimum for whatever I'm varying at the time.

My concern at the moment is to see how much these results vary when I try to replicate them. Up to now, with the ultra-hard bullets I've been using, repeatability has not been all that good - as you can see from the reference load results. I would like to do some repeatability checking, extend the load ranges upward a bit, use a slower powder to try for 2000-2100 feet per second in both rifles (I'm thinking Varget, W748, perhaps BLC(2)) and then move to 100 meters if I seem to be getting somewhere. I'm expecting a whole lot of new challenges at longer ranges as the weaknesses in my bullet-making start to become more obvious. Meanwhile I've already lapped my 30-30 mould to increase the nose diameter to 0.306-0.3075, so it will be an interference fit in the bore. Right now I'm using up the undersized bullets in stock. The 30-06 mould already gives 0.300 to 0.301 bullet noses, which are sufficiently oversize for the 0.2986 bore.

Geoff

[Newtire]

(try for 2000-2100 feet per second in both rifles (I'm thinking W748, perhaps BLC(2))

In the 30-30, try around 30 gr. H-335, 31-33 gr. Win. 748. I use Felix Lube now but used Liquid Alox on those 170 gr. bullets . (311041 and 311407). There is no leading.
I used 35 gr. H-4895 in my .30-06 with both of these bullets also as well as with the RCBS 165gr. Silhouette. They all three shoot great. Have no idea of the velocity other than what the Lee manual says. I haven't tried any more powder with the 30-06. I am also going to say that the AA 2520 is a great powder for full power loads in that 30-30 as well as is IMR 4064. My Marlin isn't quite as "dimensionally challenged" as yours but shoots cast stuff just fine. Bore is a bit bigger than one of my :Winchester '94's but about the same as the newest one I have. (new to me). About to go down and whip up some H-4227 loads in the 30-30 now that someone has posted some. Thanks!

[grumpy one]

Thanks for the load information. With regard to the 30-30 I can't get Hogdon powders here except for the ones that are made here, which does not include H335, but W748 is available and I have some. I'm conscious of Felix's warning that 748 may not work unless I use a stiff enough load to get it to ignite well, so your loads should give me a place to work around. So far as IMR4064 and AA2520 are concerned their burning rate is allegedly just about identical to Varget (AR2208), so I guess I should try Varget in the 30-30 as well as in the 30-06. It seems a bit slow for that small case. I like the idea of BLC(2) in the 30-30 because I've seen it work well in cases of about that size (with jacketed bullets). It's AR2206 here, which is simply an update of that company's original powder, AR2201, developed for 7.62 NATO. I may even use up my last quarter pound of AR2201 with cast bullets in the 30-30 - it isn't getting any younger.

Concerning the 30-06 of course I can get H4895 (it's AR2206H here), but first I want to see how the Varget (AR2208) goes because it's just a bit slower and seems well suited to the case size. Besides, I've got some. If it doesn't work well, H4895 makes sense as the next thing to try.

Geoff

[Bass Ackward]

Geoff,

Just realize that springback occurs. All bullets sized that are the same hardness when sized, will result in the same diameter. I have 8 sizers just for 44 Mag to allow me flexibility to achieve certain diameters with almost any mix. As long as you understand that, then you can work around that.

Any mix that has arsnec will heat treat. No arsnic, then bullets remain the same. But I just checked the last two bullets from a similar mix that were water dropped. The 44s were 22 - 24 BHN and the 30s were 34-37 BHN. Remember that in addition to hardness Felix likes to mention toughness as a factor.

Once you get .... adicted, a tester is going to be in your future. Kind of like good glass. It ain't really necessary, but when it's there you wonder how you got by without it.

[grumpy one]

I left a few issues open in this thread - some follow-up tests that seemed necessary - and when the weather finally improved enough I went back to the range today and performed them.

All of the variables except powder type and amount were the same as in the previous test series.

Today's results: 30-06
20.2 grains AR2205 (H4227) 2.0" This was a repeat of a load that gave 0.6" last time.
35 grains AR2208 (Varget) 1.7"
37 grains AR2208 (Varget) 1.2" (4 into 0.4")
39 grains AR2208 (Varget) 1.1"
41 grains AR2208 (Varget) 3.5"
42 grains W748 2.4"
44 grains W748 3.6"

Once again, the variability I'm getting with both kinds of 4227 is evident. Meanwhile Varget shows some promise - there might be an opportunity somewhere around 38 grains. It is probably a matter of getting as close to the speed limit as I can.
The W748 seems like it is above the speed limit at 42 grains. I've either run out of bullet strength or lubricant capability. I can try a bit lower in load.

Today's results: 30-30
19 grains IMR4227 1.3"
18.5 grains SR4759 0.9"
19 grains SR4759 1.3"
WARNING: ALL OF THESE THREE ARE AT OR ABOVE MAXIMUM LOAD FOR 30-30. Lyman lists 36,100 psi for 18.5 grains SR4759. My Marlin (nearly new) was happy with these loads, though I did find one cratered primer.

32 grains W748 1.1"
34 grains W748 3.0"
26 grains AR2201 1.3"
28 grains AR2201 2.0"

SR4759 continues its record of producing an ultra-smooth load-vs-group size curve in this rifle. A load of about 17.5 SR4759 needs to be tested repeatedly on different visits to the range to see if it really is repeatable or I've just been lucky with the smooth curve.
W748 may be worth further investigation, probably at loads slightly below 32 grains, which is probably about 2000 fps. For the AR2201, 27 grains is listed as providing 2010 fps with a 170 grain jacketed projectile, so once again it looks as if my speed limit might be about 2000 fps. I can experiment with loads just below 26 grains.

If anyone knows what velocity I'm likely to be getting in the K98 30-06 with 39 grains of Varget, I'd appreciate hearing about it. I'm currently guessing it is about 2000 fps, and the speed limit is the same for both rifles. I'm using the same bullet alloy in both, the same gas check, and the same lube.

It's a bit frustrating to be finding a speed limit of no more than 2000 fps. I had hoped to get about 2200 fps, so that I could run the 30-30 at factory load duplication with the 170 grain cast bullet. However I'm using water-dropped 3% tin, 5% antimony so I don't think a lot more bullet strength is going to be forthcoming without getting into some things I'd rather avoid. I've also got 20 more sticks of 50-50 beeswax-Alox lube in stock.

I should mention that going to higher velocities for the first time this week, it seems to me I'm getting noticeably more smoke than I have seen before. On the other hand it might just be lube being thrown off the bullet by centrifugal force.

Geoff

[Bass Ackward]

It's a bit frustrating to be finding a speed limit of no more than 2000 fps. I had hoped to get about 2200 fps, so that I could run the 30-30 at factory load duplication with the 170 grain cast bullet. However I'm using water-dropped 3% tin, 5% antimony so I don't think a lot more bullet strength is going to be forthcoming without getting into some things I'd rather avoid. I've also got 20 more sticks of 50-50 beeswax-Alox lube in stock.

I should mention that going to higher velocities for the first time this week, it seems to me I'm getting noticeably more smoke than I have seen before. On the other hand it might just be lube being thrown off the bullet by centrifugal force.

Geoff

Geoff,

The smoke is from using / burning up your lube for some reason and there are a few.

I seriously doubt that you are running into a speed limit at this point. I use 14 BHN to 2600 fps in my o6, but I must be over 80 degrees to get it sub MOA because of the lube.

What you are more likely reaching is a pressure limit during acceleration that is altering / distroying the bullet base and why you see so much smoke. And thus the fliers. Try using pistol primers. They are much more consistent and will give you a more .... gentle start with the same powders. In the class you are talking, you can add about 1 grain for the same velocity.

One more trick is PSB like for shotgun shells. I never use over .7cc and since this stuff needs compression to keep it seperate, that means a slow enough powder to give you high 90s for case fill.

And almost any caliber, almost any case design, 4831 or slower equivalents will put the smile on your face.

[grumpy one]

Thanks Bass. I'll see about getting some large pistol primers - I only have small ones in stock. The same applies to the slower powders - I currently don't have anything slower than W760, but of course I can get H4831 (AR2213SC here) and the even slower Hogdon powders, all of which are made here. Not sure I can get the PSB here in Australia though - I've never seen it here.

With regard to the lube issue, it was cold (by Australian standards) at the range yesterday - about 45-50 F, which meant zip-up jacket and hands in pockets when not shooting. Certainly it was way too cold to have been able to get the 50-50 lube to go through the lube sizer. Was that the reason for the smoke? My recollection is that I had lots of smoke from the Varget loads in the 30-06 - and by my standards that's a pretty slow powder. I'd have expected it to be gentler in accelerating the bullet than the H4227, for example - though of course I was using quite a bit more of the Varget, and could actually feel some push on my shoulder (though well below service load standards).

So far as fliers are concerned, I'm attracted to a theory that 4227 may not burn all that consistently at relatively low pressures. In the 30-30 case, the 4227 results seem highly variable, but so far the SR4759 has performed consistently. I've graphed the group size versus powder charge for IMR4227 and SR4759, and tried to attach it, but it probably hasn't worked since it doesn't show in the preview.

I'll give the pistol primers a try, and see if that improves the results with Varget in the 30-06. I should also try Varget in the 30-30, as a test on a rather slow powder in relation to the size of that case. Some consistency checks on SR4759 in the 30-30 would also be interesting, since it might answer the question of whether the variable results from 4227 are just the powder, or something I'm doing wrong.

Meanwhile thanks to whoever recently posted on posture at the bench. I lifted my shooting position just two inches, and today I find I have neither a sore nor purple shoulder. Looks like my gradually increased sensitivity to recoil happened because I had gradually lowered my shooting posture, it wasn't Old Father Time at all.

Geoff

[Newtire]

Hi Bass,
Just wondering what kind of a load are you using with 4831 in the '06 that works good? I have never used that stuff with CB's before but have a whole pound of it. Still mavelling at how well the H4895 does with cast in the '06. Took my old Springfield out of mothballs again and it shoots just as good as ever. It likes the 311407 group buy followed by the 311041 with the same 35.5 gr. charge of 4895. Might try more of that just until things start spreading out.

[Bass Ackward]

Hi Bass,
Just wondering what kind of a load are you using with 4831 in the '06 that works good? I have never used that stuff with CB's before but have a whole pound of it. Still mavelling at how well the H4895 does with cast in the '06. Took my old Springfield out of mothballs again and it shoots just as good as ever. It likes the 311407 group buy followed by the 311041 with the same 35.5 gr. charge of 4895. Might try more of that just until things start spreading out.

Geoff,

<<My recollection is that I had lots of smoke from the Varget loads in the 30-06 - and by my standards that's a pretty slow powder. >>

What you will find out is that it's the cast bullet that will have to tell you what a slow powder is. It went way beyond what I thought too when I first started out.

Don't they have shotguns down there? PSB is a fairly standard shot buffer. Some guys here use cream of wheat. I don't because it draws moisture if it sits around. I can't think of anything else right at the moment. But it compacts under pressure and seems to keep you barrel clean while it keeps pressure away from the base. The compression ensures the fire gets going right off.

NT,

I use RL19 which is almost a ringer for IMR 4831 for lead up to 170 grains in the 06. Then drop to RL22 / 25 for mid range stuff. I am forced to drop all the way down to H-870 for the 311284 which is a weak bullet design as it is a bore ride. And you will need a torch to ignite that. Remember, this is all concerning attempts to shoot cast like jacketed. Otherwise, 4759 is usually in the case for squib stuff.

[grumpy one]

We had good enough weather to go to the range today so I pursued the mysteries further. All the variables were the same as previously, again, except powder type and quantity.

Today's results: 30-06
40 grains W760 2.0"
42 grains W760 2.0"
44 grains W760 1.3"
46 grains W760 1.7"
40 grains AR2213SC (H4831) 1.7"
42 grains AR2213SC (H4831) 0.7"
44 grains AR2213SC (H4831) 1.9"
46 grains AR2213SC (H4831) 1.3"

I don't know if I've reached the limit with W760 yet, so I'll have to try a further load increment. The POI at 55 yards moved up an inch and three quarters between 40 grains and and 46 grains, but there was no sign of smoke with the 46 grains - in fact there was no smoke from any load I fired today.
The H4831 loads I've tried so far all seem to be kiddie loads - I think I have quite a way to go with this one. POI for 46 grains H4831 is more than three quarters of an inch below where it was for 40 grains of W760.

Today's results: 30-30
16.5 grains SR4759 1.5"
17.5 grains SR4759 1.0"
29 grains W748 0.9"
30 grains W748 0.9"
31 grains W748 0.9"
26 grains AR2208 (Varget) 1.3"
28 grains AR2208 (Varget) 2.1"
30 grains AR2208 (Varget) 1.2"

The SR4759 groups were run purely because I'd never seen a bad group before using this powder in the 30-30. Well, now I have, and my pretty graph of group size versus powder charge has been ruined by both of today's groups. Nevertheless I think 17.5 SR4759 probably makes a decent reference load for this rifle, and may be good enough to use to check for effects of bullet sizing etc.
The W748 tests were run because I found on the previous range visit that 32 grains gave 1.1" and 34 grains gave 3.0" and a barrel-full of lead, so I wanted to check the actual limit. Looks as if it's probably about 31 grains, which might be close to 2000 feet per second with this 170 grain bullet. Not good enough, but a workable load if it were repeatable - about 1.6 MOA.
The Varget loads were the real purpose of today's tests. This Marlin 336 30-30 has a 20" barrel, and it may not be easy to get the 170 grain bullet to the objective of 2200 feet per second with good accuracy: I can't use an ultra-slow powder because I'd run out of acceleration time in the short barrel. Load data shows 1976 FPS for a load of 29.5 grains Varget with a 170 grain J bullet, and 2168 for 33 grains - but those results are from a 24" barrel. So, allowing for the higher velocity achieved with cast bullets with the same powder charge I'm well above 2000 FPS at this point. Pity about the group size, though - about 2.1 MOA. I need to do some more work to find the load limit with Varget, then feel around that region to see if I can get a better group size. Incidentally, POI with 30 grains Varget is 1.4" above where it is with 31 grains W748.

I haven't yet taken up Bass's recommendation to use pistol primers, because so far I've been a bit chicken. Years ago I tried magnum pistol primers in my K98 30-06, and by the time I'd fired 80 of them, three had been pierced by the firing pin. They were only squib loads of pistol powder with a cast plain-base bullet, but it eroded the tip of my firing pin and made a dirty mess in my bolt and magazine. However, I guess I'll have to face my fears and try again if I'm going to actually get decent field loads with cast bullets.

Geoff

[Bass Ackward]

1. Nevertheless I think 17.5 SR4759 probably makes a decent reference load for this rifle, and may be good enough to use to check for effects of bullet sizing etc.

2. The Varget loads were the real purpose of today's tests. This Marlin 336 30-30 has a 20" barrel, and it may not be easy to get the 170 grain bullet to the objective of 2200 feet per second with good accuracy: I can't use an ultra-slow powder because I'd run out of acceleration time in the short barrel.

3. Pity about the group size, though - about 2.1 MOA. I need to do some more work to find the load limit with Varget, then feel around that region to see if I can get a better group size. Incidentally, POI with 30 grains Varget is 1.4" above where it is with 31 grains W748.

4. I haven't yet taken up Bass's recommendation to use pistol primers, because so far I've been a bit chicken. Years ago I tried magnum pistol primers in my K98 30-06, and by the time I'd fired 80 of them, three had been pierced by the firing pin. They were only squib loads of pistol powder with a cast plain-base bullet, but it eroded the tip of my firing pin and made a dirty mess in my bolt and magazine. However, I guess I'll have to face my fears and try again if I'm going to actually get decent field loads with cast bullets.

Geoff


Geoff,

As to #4, Remember, I use a magnum pistol primer. That is because with it I get the heat of a rifle primer, but not the concussion that will start a bullet moving by itself. And they tend to be more consistent. Obviously, if you have a mechanical reason of firing pin protrusion or roughness that pierces a primer, you won't be able to use them. But I shoot them all the time up to 40/45,000 without one fail yet.

If you read #3 what you will see is two powders very close to the same burn rate and one is burning much better at these load levels. Ball powders tend to burn erratically unless you get the pressure up. So the Varget would benifit from the pistol primer, the 748 might not at these levels. The 4831 would benifit, but I am not sure the 760 will unless you go on up with it. What you want to avoid is click, bang. Now you realize that I shoot mostly sticks huh?

#1 gets you in the ball park for sizing. But each bullet design will have a sweet spot that may NOT be the norm that you think you establish. For most all factory designs my dad's 30/30 likes .311. A 311440 shoots 2 to 2 1/2" at .311 and is easily misdiagnosed as an inferrior bullet design for accuracy because of the really blunt nose. Size it to .3095, and it drops to 3/4". As I said this in another post, all bullet designs are still around because they work for someone. Why not you?

And you may be right on #2 without using hard bullets. But 1900 with a 14 BHN or less bullet is preferable to a hard bullet at 2200. (IMO) I suspect 1900 is going to be about tops with the 4831. Do you think the animal is going to be able to tell the difference between 1900 and 2200? Our's aren't that smart up here.

[felix]

Geoff, I know you are having fun, but after narrowing down what you want, the final load kept as gospel should show the same accuracy as the powder weight is varied by a grain, or two ideally. The center load is the one to pick at room temperature ambient. ... felix

[grumpy one]

Bass,
#1 I have an exceptionally large groove size in the 30-30 (0.3116 at the breech and 0.3112 at the muzzle) and I'm sizing to 0.312, so I thought at some point I should try 0.313 and see what happens. I also currently have the bullet nose slightly loose in the bore, and I've already lapped the mould to make it tight, I'm just using up the previous stock of bullets. So I have a couple of tests to make there. I thought it would be nice to have a fairly consistent load to use to make the comparison tests. As a further complication I'm wondering whether it might be a good idea to try 150 grain flat nose instead of 170 grain - the reason I haven't tried it yet is that to make the experiment in the 30-30 I have to lap the nose diameter of my nice RCBS mould to a size where I won't be able to shoot it in the 30-06.

#2 I've read enough posts on this board to understand that a 1900 FPS load in the 30-30 will be just as good a meat-getter as a 2200 FPS load, but because I'm using a scope and am a not a good judge of distance anyway, I have issues with the banana-shaped trajectory that goes with low muzzle velocity. I know in the old black powder days everyone had banana trajectories, and good shots were taking game at hundreds of yards range; I just wish I were that good a shot. So if I can I'd like to get a trajectory like a factory loaded 170 grain J bullet, which I think means about 2200 FPS. If I can't, I guess that's the way the cookie crumbles.

#3 I can try the magnum pistol primers in the 30-30, I'm just wary about them in the K98, which really smacks those primers. I guess the military are not fond of misfires. I'm planning to put the W748 aside for now, because you've convinced me I'm not going to get above 2000 FPS with it. It does look like there are useful short-range hunting loads to be had with the W748 though, in the region of 30 grains (allowing for Felix's point that you should be able to go a grain either way without losing accuracy). For the 30-30 the next step looks like being a bit more work with Varget using pistol primers, and some experiments with W760. I'm using W760 rather than AR2209 (H4350) because I have a couple of pounds of it in stock. If it seems to be capable of giving me higher velocity than I can get with the Varget, I'll probably have to buy some H4350 and see what that does.

#4 It seemed to me that when those old CCI 350 large pistol magnum primers were hit in the K98 they were just hit way too hard. Of course the more of them that got perforated, the more the firing pin tip got eroded and the less rounded it was, too. I doubt it will be an issue in the 30-30, which is a pussycat to its primers compared with the way the K98 treats them. If I find advantages in the 30-30 with the pistol primers perhaps I can find a brand of them that is a bit more resistant to perforation than the CCI 350s were, so I can use them in the K98 as well.

For the 30-06 it looks as if I can get some velocity with the W760, and I just need to look for the load limit and see if it gets accurate before I run out of bullet strength. If the bullets fail before the W760 starts burning properly, that will just be one more example of ball powder not making it with cast bullets. Meanwhile the H4831 is going to need quite a bit more work before I find the load limit. Seems like that slow powder is expensive to use - it gets burned by the bucketload. I'm also finding now that I have to keep waiting for the barrel to cool, because I'm burning more than twice as much powder as I was with 4227 and 4759. With the squib loads I pretty much didn't have to wait, by the time I stood up, walked around to the spotting scope, inspected the used case, then single-loaded another round, (about 30 seconds total) I was good to go. With the W760 and 4831 I can't fire a group without waiting for cool-down along the way. And the variation I'm finding in thrown charges with the 4831 seems to be more than double what it is with the W760. Of course I'm trickling and weighing anyway, but if I ever find a load that works I want to be able to use thrown charges after that. This re-emphasises the importance of Felix's point about only adopting loads that are pretty insensitive to charge variation.

Geoff

[grumpy one]

Geoff, I know you are having fun, but after narrowing down what you want, the final load kept as gospel should show the same accuracy as the powder weight is varied by a grain, or two ideally. The center load is the one to pick at room temperature ambient. ... felix

Thanks Felix, I've always thought that way but have been a bit misled at times by some very experienced loaders who mutter about a tenth of a grain each way and then just make sure you load accurately. As you say, normal seasonal variation in ambient temperature makes a much bigger difference than a tenth of a gain in a rifle load. Not only that, but because I'm water dropping cast bullets, and my casting technique isn't all that flash to begin with, I'm probably seeing some varations in bullet characteristics that the J-bullet guys don't have to contend with. Focusing on repeatability across different batches of bullets, different seasons, different states of barrel cleanliness, etc must be a more important issue for cast bullet users than it is for J bullet users.

One point that I'm finding so far: when pressures get fairly high, the point of impact varies quite a bit vertically with just one grain difference in powder charge. That might be because cast bullet trajectories tend to be rather banana-like even when approaching the bullet-strength limit, and at the same time one grain difference in powder charge makes a fairly large difference to maximum pressure when close to the top limit. That probably means that if I choose a load that is, say, one grain below the bullet strength limit, and then shoot groups at that load, one grain above, and one grain below, all at the same target, I'm likely to find quite a bit of vertical spread even if the horizontal spread is small.

Geoff

[felix]

Geoff, POI differences in slight powder differences are normal. This suggests to up slide all three powder weights up a tad, to say maybe a full grain. If you see a lessening POI effect, and a lower ES as the weights are upped, then keep going. If pressures go to high, then pick a faster powder and start the whole shootin match all over. Nice to have the same powder in many different lots for this kind of game. Primer change can help to, but that usually just tightenes the groups a little. ... felix

[Newtire]

Hi Geoff,
Looking at your posts I believe you said that you were getting lots of leading with 34 gr. Win 748 in .30-30. I had great luck with 33gr. 748 with 170 gr. 311041 (both the group buy and an over the counter Lyman 2-cavity and a group buy 311407. I was using Liquid Alox and now switched to the Felix-Lube stuff. I got no leading with either lube. bullets sized .310" for Winchester and .311 for Marlin 336 micro-groove. Another powder that is great is the H-335 with same bullets and top load of 30.5 gr. If you are getting leading, then my guess is that your barrel needs a bigger bullet.

Now for the .30-06, someone suggested a load of 35gr. H-4895 fo have been using that with those same 170 gr. bullets. I tried that and was really amazed at the accuracy. As for the 150gr. & lighter, haven't been able to push them that fast without groups opening up. For instance, my top load is around 20-23 gr. with any of the medium burners and 150 grainers. I know that is not consistent with what I see some of the guys using here. I haven't figured how you can get 2600 fps with cast but some people on here have so maybe they could unlock their secrets?

[Four Fingers of Death]

I gotta hit the sack and I don't have time to read all of this, I'll come back tomorrow because it is interesting. I wouldn't get too excited about not getting top velocity, anything over 16-1700fps should give you impressive performance with cast on game. It seems with jacketed, you need all the velocity you can get, 2000fps should be murder on pigs and goats. Sounds like you are definetly having more fun that me at the moment. Forgive me if you have covered this already, Mick.

[felix]

Of course you are correct, Mick, but that's no fun for an experimenter first, and hunter second. I personally tend to follow Geoff's path because I am not a hunter and would desire for my boolits to fragment upon contact because of where I shoot (at the river). Too many go-carts and fishermen in the area. The buzzing sound of a boolit has no directional indication, and therein causes a problem with inexperience folks around guns. They think you are shooting at them! ... felix

[grumpy one]

Hi Geoff,
Looking at your posts I believe you said that you were getting lots of leading with 34 gr. Win 748 in .30-30. I had great luck with 33gr. 748 with 170 gr. 311041 (both the group buy and an over the counter Lyman 2-cavity and a group buy 311407. I was using Liquid Alox and now switched to the Felix-Lube stuff. I got no leading with either lube. bullets sized .310" for Winchester and .311 for Marlin 336 micro-groove. Another powder that is great is the H-335 with same bullets and top load of 30.5 gr. If you are getting leading, then my guess is that your barrel needs a bigger bullet.

Now for the .30-06, someone suggested a load of 35gr. H-4895 fo have been using that with those same 170 gr. bullets. I tried that and was really amazed at the accuracy. As for the 150gr. & lighter, haven't been able to push them that fast without groups opening up. For instance, my top load is around 20-23 gr. with any of the medium burners and 150 grainers. I know that is not consistent with what I see some of the guys using here. I haven't figured how you can get 2600 fps with cast but some people on here have so maybe they could unlock their secrets?

With the 30-30 with 32 grains and upward of W748, it was clear from the group sizes that I'd over-stressed the bullet in some way. I'm shooting 3% tin, 5% antimony, water-dropped, so these are not high-strength bullets - I believe Bass estimated 22 BHN after aging. I've seen others post about higher charges of W748 than my maximum of 31 grains, but I don't know what alloy and heat treatment they are using. I haven't seen leading until I push it so hard that the bullet base fails and the groups scatter. However I agree that I need to experiment with a slightly bigger bullet - I'm currently sizing 0.312 for a barrel that is 0.3116 at the breech.

For the 30-06, I'm trying to find ways to get some velocity but keep the bullet from collapsing. I ran a series with Varget, which is equivalent to IMR4064, or one grade slower than AR2206H (H4895) and I ran out of bullet strength at 39 grains. I'm trying to get a lot more velocity than that achieved, so following Bass' advice I've moved to H4831, which is a great deal slower. My first experiment with H4831 gave low velocity (very low POI), highly variable groups, and the worst hard-carbon fouling in the barrel that I've ever experienced. These are all signs of way too low a powder charge. Since the lowest recommended H4831 load for a J bullet in 30-06 is 54 grains, and I've already found that 46 grains is way too little, my next series of tests starting at 48 grains and going up in 2 grain increments will most likely get up close to the bullet strength limit. Most of the time the minimum load for J bullets is just slightly above the bullet strength limit for my lead alloy. If I were feeling bold, and if I were not posting my results on a board, I might have just gone straight to 50 grains rather than starting at 40, but that would be poor practice in my opinion so I did it the careful way.

Concerning what it takes to get higher velocity with cast bullets, I'm following Bass' process: accelerate the bullet slowly by using slow powder, so the bullet base won't collapse during acceleration. It seems to me that with both rifles the process is working: I've already achieved considerably higher velocities (with Varget in the 30-30 and W760 in the 30-06) than I'd ever achieved with the faster powders I'd been trying previously. So, my plan is to stick with the formula, trying to find a powder that treats the bullet pretty gently but still achieves a high enough maximum pressure to allow even burning. If I can get the velocity without bullet or lube distress, I can move on to trying to get better group sizes - but that is another whole can of worms, because it might easily be at cross purposes with the powder selection (due to pressure being too low). This whole process might take a while, unless I have the good fortune to be able to use something that Bass, or Felix, or somebody else has already tested and found to work.

Geoff

[Bass Ackward]

This whole process might take a while, unless I have the good fortune to be able to use something that Bass, or Felix, or somebody else has already tested and found to work. Geoff


Geoff,

It will and it does take time. Unlike common cast bullet velocity levels, high velocity loads can turn out to be very finiky for each rifle. That is why most people never experience success at higher levels. You have to be systematic and run the same tests over and over as you change one "minute" variable at a time. In the 06 for example, a strong bullet design uses 56 grains in two rifles and 57 in the third. Two rifles prefer seating into the lands and one does not. All three prefer .3095 which for two are over bore diameter and for my Springfield is .... bore. And temperature / lube can be a difference maker. Understand that while you are up at these levels using hard bullets, I use 14 BHN.

From my past results, the faster "I" go, the softer the bullet and the smaller the bullet diameter I need to allow the bullet to over come inertia. Same effect as using slower powder on the base. Most people prefer about .002 over or to fill the throat which works well at slow velocity as ignition is improved. But when you get up to higher pressures, powders burn better on their own and don't need these effects. Seating into the lands provides alignment and guidance. I hesitate to say this until you find it out on your own. Hard lead ain't what it's cracked up to be sometimes. And you need to be able to diagnose when.

The main point here is that many people believe that the best cast accuracy comes at 1600 - 1800 fps. That is NOT true. The easiest accuray occurs there, but often the best accuracy comes at the highest pressure level for the mix when that and your barrel harmonics click. But all reloading variables .... widen in their error range as you reach for these levels with cast. Some things tend to narrow them and you will just have to see what they are. Pistol primers, slow powders, and PSB are the things I fall back on the most. Meaning that when the chips are down to bring in a load, that's the direction I always end up in.