Oh, Thanks very #@*&%$* much......

[BLTsandwedge1]

Well folks, you finally did it to me.....after 3 years of hanging 'round talking about pistol bullet casting and listening to the milsurp rifle casters, I dun bought an 03A3 (Remington). Now for dies, another few moulds, different lubes to try, different powders, shell holders an' all that money sucking junk. Any tips on loading 30-06 would be greatly appreciated- as well as what bullets work best. I'll never put a scope on it- the rifle is in NRA fine condition an' I'll leave it as-is. So, most of my shooting will be limited to my eyesight- prob'ly about 100 yards. Now I can join in on the milsurp postal matches.

Thanks in advance for any tips/pointers on seating depth, alloy, bullet design, best powder, best gas checks/lube etc..........

Regards..........

[Leftoverdj]

Sucker!

Welcome to the club.

You just have a vague idea of what you have let yourself in for. Some of your questions are easy. Any new GCs you buy are going to be Hornady, no matter what the box says or the price. WW with 1-2% tin added will do you fine for alloy. NRA formula or Felix are good lube choices. 5744, 4759, and 4198 are good powder choices. You're only shooting 100 yards, so 1800 fps is plenty of velocity. I'll let other folks fight over the best mould.

I find that I easily get 2 MOA with a good scoped rifle with little or no sighting error. I sweat blood for every .25 MOA under that.

Have fun. You're off to an adventure.

[Buckshot]

..............About dang time! So is it a 2 or 4 groove? Most any 30 cal mould design is going to work. I've shot from the Lyman 77gr 311252 to the Ly 311284 at close to 220gr and everything has pretty much been simple and agreeable.

The Lee C309113F is a great plinker boolit so you're not sending off bunches of lead, and the Ly 311291 is a classic. For most all my shooting in my Springfield I use either Unique or H4198. Lube has historicly been Javalina.

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

[NVcurmudgeon]

Congratulations on the '03A3. Springfields are arguably the most accurate milsurp around, and yours is the one with the most user-friendly sights. You already have some good reccomendations from Leftoverdj. I would like to add my favorite powder for your consideration, Alliant 2400. 2400 is not position-sensitive (no fillers needed) according to Ed Harris and thousands of rounds fired by me. Mr. Harris reccomended 16.0 gr. 2400 (1500 fps +/-) as a good starting load in most of the milsurps, and I have found it to be my favorite accuracy load. Four moulds that seem to shoot well in everybody's '06 are the Lyman 311410-170 gr. flat point, 311299-200 gr. RN, 311284-210 gr. RN, and RCBS 180 gr. flat point. Good luck.

[sundog]

BLT, Hooah! Ly 311291 and 21.0 4227. You may have to change out front sights to get on paper at 100 yards. One good way to find a boolit that works for you is to beg samples from everyone on the board before spendig gazillions $$$s on moulds. sundog

[BruceB]

You're very *!^#^%#@$(* welcome!


Now, come on Tom, you KNOW you're enjoying all this.

I'm very much reminded of a famous quote from W.C. Fields, in which he said,

"A woman drove me to drink, and I never even wrote to thank her."

You're not eggzackly thanking us, yer very own good ol' bosom buddies, are you? We're here for you, pal.....we understand how futile it is to try resisting the call of yet ANOTHER neat old rifle (and we'll try to talk you into selling it to us ASAP, too).

At least it wasn't a Carcano or Swiss RIMFIRE Vetterli or some other real oddball. We have a Springfield addicts' therapy group, some members of which have already spoken-up. Cheer up...there can't be more than ...ohhhh, maybe sixty or seventy boolit designs you HAVE to try, plus a few dozen others that "might" be worthwhile, AND the custom designs which fill the gaps among the paltry few .30-caliber designs available.

Go with the flow, pard; the Force is ALREADY with you.

[BLTsandwedge1]

Bruce, the W.C. Fields quote is directly on point. I put no more than 100 rounds through the old 1894 and that was it- hooked on centerfire rifle. I'll still do lots of pistol, but casting for rifle is the true test of a reloader's ability to reason through issues. The A303 will come home in 10 days- CA's waiting period. I'm pleased to see that a .45ACP shell holder will also work with .30-06. I bought a used set of Dillon dies today for $15 at the same time I paid for the A303. I'll have a bunch of cast rounds ready to go.

I spent too much money on the rifle- $500- I know it. I could have gotten one cheaper at auctionarms or some such website. But, it's in outstanding condition and I got to touch the thing before buying. The more compelling reason that I paid too much for it is because there are exactly two gun stores within a 75 mile radius of where I live. I really want to support these folks- they're not making a ton of money and the shooting community needs them. Small businesses deserve our support.

Buckshot, it's a two groove. Does that make a difference in bullet design? I already ordered a Lyman 311041 for the .30-30; Lyman's cast handbook says that the '041 and two others account for the best accuracy they've found.

I'm very much looking forward to the alchemy!

Thank you fellas.......you'll need to tolerate me on the board with a bunch of questions as we go........

Best regards........

[drinks]

BLT;
You dun dun it now, off down the slippery slope of casting for rifles, you will never rest until you have at least a steamer trunk of molds and sizers.
Lee has 4 molds I use, all do well for one purpose or another, the C309-113-F is a nice plinker, tin can buster and squirrel and rabbit whacker.
The C309-150-F is fine in rifles with tubular magazines, the CTL-312-160-2R is a nice all round bullet for single shot and vertical magazine rifles, the C309-200-R is my favorite for .303 Savage and .308 for hogs.
Liquid alox works nicely, as does LBT soft blue, I use gas checks on everything, Lee sizers crimp them on at a low cost.
Have fun!
Don

[waksupi]

I wouldn't want to lead you astray, old buddy. But consider this. That shell holder that works for the .30-06 and .45 ACP, also fits 6.5X55, 7X57, .243, .308, 8X57,.358 Win., and a whole bunch of others.

So you see, having this vital part with so many uses, you may want to consider buying a rifle in each of the other calibers, so as to maximize your investment.

Glad to have been of help.

[sc03a3]

hi bltsandwedge1, i shoot a smith corona 03a3 [4 groove] in our local military bolt matches, and i have excellent results with the lee #90385 155gr. this boolit falls out of the mold at .313 and i use a lee sizer to size to .310. this boolit works great with a number of powders, but my best 100yd groups are with 13.5gr of sr-4756, no filler...dick

[Buckshot]

"At least it wasn't a Carcano............" Now just hold on there a minute ol Bruce. I have 2 of'em and I do have to say the M38 FC in 7.35mm has been a very accurate thing (the fixed sights notwithstanding) to date, with sized down 150gr Lee's. Leave us not be bad mouthing one of the more common mils-urps extant. At least for those few who will fess up to owning one, that is

Why the Carcano is literally COVERED in glory. The Italian legions used it to good effect in overwhelming the......... ah, the ah......... Well they did kick some butt in Albania for awile. Doesn't mean the rifles are no good



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

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Italian naval saboteurs were as good as anybody's, and their regular forces did very well in hard fighting against the British and Indians in Eritrea. It wasn't their fault that somebody had put them where there couldn't be any supply lines. It would be fair to say that war, like racing Ferraris, is a minority pursuit in Italy. But if you've allowed a Mafia capo into power, and never much wanted a desert for anything, that does some credit to your judgement.

I agree the Carcano has received an unfairly bad press - though I dare say some, from the State arsenal rather than Beretta production - are badly made. On comparing cross-sections I can see no reason, unless there are metallurgical ones, for them to be weaker than the Dutch and Romanian Mannlichers, or (pause for respectful intake of breath) the Mannlicher-Schoenauer. The target shooter need never use the most abominably inconvenient safety I know.

The rifle and its cartridge preceded any 6.5mm. Mannlicher. Indeed the cartridge, designed by Count Luigi Douglas Scotti (whose name obviously invokes trust) is so nearly identical to the 6.5x54 that I suspect interchangeability would be possible in some rifles. Besides the gain twist, it was the first military cartridge to use tubular powder grains. It sounds to me like the decision to miserably download the cartridge wasn't his. Probably all that loud noise lowered the tone of battle, or something.

[Buckshot]

...........BiS, good evening (or morning or afternoon as the case may be). I feel guilty in subverting the thread but I do like Carcanos so will grab the opportunity . For the 18 year life of my 01 FFL the Carcano managed ot be invisible to me, as did the various Moisins, and SMLE's. I don't know really why.

Naturally after giving up my liscense I somehow managed to aquired a couple of each (except the SMLE still evads me). In any event, after first aquiring the the M38 Fucile Corto in 7.35x51 I decided to do some reading on the Carcano from sources and varied as Frank DeHass to true Carcanophiles on various places around the net.

As a result the M38 pictured in the post above now has the correct bent down bolt handle. As it turns out the Italians after accepting the action design searched all over Europe for someone to supply the steel they felt they needed for the construction of the rifle. Krupp was among the choices but the Italians decided on a Czech firm to buy from. The materials were as good as any and probably much better then what our own Krags were made from.

The action design was state of the art for the time including the exposed magazine or clip housing. It's a simple design with no unnecessary protuberances or frills and is robustly proportioned for the power of the cartridge it was to contain. Neither of it's 2 locking lugs are split for an ejector as is several other designs plus they are longer. It's reciever ring walls are thicker then most.

While it's true that some of the later produced examples may not be as finely finished as some others, all the critical dimensions were held, and it's materials were not compromised.



The above is my M38/91 Moschetto TS (Truppi Especiale) post capitualtion produced and in 6.5x52. The M38 7.35 was sent to Finland to help fight the Soviets so is SA marked. These 6.5's did not sport the gaintwist of the M91 long rifles.

The M38/91 is a tiny carbine with it's 16.5" bbl. You may very easily hold it out one handed and fire it with no problem. It favorably compares to the M1 Carbine in size. It appears to have been un-issued and is just about in perfect condiiton. It is well finished and polished. While some machine marks are visiable inside, externally it's very well done.

While cocking on the upstroke of the bolt, it requires a bit of effort to compress the mainspring and this was common. The troop's instructions were to operate the bolt 'Energeticly'. I find it easy to describe the little carbine as 'cute'. And it seems so to me but it was a serious combat weapon.

Perhaps the Italians were a bit ahead of times with the rudimentary and simple fixed sights. True effective combat is supposed to be at 400 yards max and that's about what these sights were good for. A difference though is that the troops were to bury the fron blade in the rear V for close in stuff, and then to elevate the blade in the V as ranges increased. A sight hold common to most of us with the top of the blade even with the top of the rear V would have you shooting about a foot high at 100 yards, and 'on' at about 400 yards.

Regardless, it was effective for slender tall targets (humans) to that range. It was also supremely simple and not liable to get out of order. Simple to teach and also to use in the heat of battle. Not real good for target work on the range though. It's certainly in stark contrast to the fine but fragile Buffington sights of the 1903 Springfield.

While state of the art in 1891, the M91 rifles were definatly dated by WW2 as was the bolt action rifle for all intents and purposes, certain combat doctrine notwithstanding.

So all in all these are pretty nifty well constructed rifles, of good materials. They're interesting and I especially like the short rifles and the several carbines. I still need to add a cavalry carbine (Per Cavalleria) to the collection.

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

[BLTsandwedge1]

I wouldn't want to lead you astray, old buddy. But consider this. That shell holder that works for the .30-06 and .45 ACP, also fits 6.5X55, 7X57, .243, .308, 8X57,.358 Win., and a whole bunch of others.

So you see, having this vital part with so many uses, you may want to consider buying a rifle in each of the other calibers, so as to maximize your investment.

Glad to have been of help.

Oh yeah....thanks very ^%#$@* again! I knew about the .308 an' .243 ('06 being the parent) but now I gotta get a Swede and a 7x57. While we're on the subject of 7x57- was there at one time a Remington rolling block in 7x57? My brother has a rolling block that's too small to be a .30. He doesn't use it and I'd imagine it isn't worth a lot except to people becoming rapidly addicted to rifle bullet casting......................as I am.....hence the name of this thread......Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times.......

[waksupi]

The Mexicans turned out a fair amount of those 7X57's.

[drinks]

Sorta like the 400 years of collected German humor, book,short, it was part of Ethiopia, and that is about it.
Don ;D

[Char-Gar]

I have not been without an 03 or 03A3 since 1960. My current 03A3 is a full military Remington that was rebuilt at Ogden and remained unfired until it fell into my hands about 20 years ago. I didn't get around to firing it until about two years ago.

I find no problem in getting ten shot 100 yards groups of 2MOA or a little under. I have three bullets that can be depending on to deliver the goods in the 03A3..The Lyman 311291, 311467 and RCBS 165 SIL. I have tried a number of others and none of them have been bad, but these three come out on top.

Welcome to the cult of the cast boolit! There is no turning back...

[Buckshot]

Oh yeah....thanks very ^%#$@* again! I knew about the .308 an' .243 ('06 being the parent) but now I gotta get a Swede and a 7x57. While we're on the subject of 7x57- was there at one time a Remington rolling block in 7x57? My brother has a rolling block that's too small to be a .30. He doesn't use it and I'd imagine it isn't worth a lot except to people becoming rapidly addicted to rifle bullet casting......................as I am.....hence the name of this thread......Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times.......

Remington produced 2 in 7x57. The models 1897 and 1902. Both very similar with the main differences being sights and the thumb flag on the breechblock. The '97's is up as per usual and the '02's is straight off to the right. One oddity of the 1897 is that Remington for some reason used the old style sliding extractor, but reverted to the newer rotary with the 1902.

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

[9.3X62AL]

BiS--ah, Mannlichers........gotta love that marque. The quintessential hunter's rifle.

The Italians do design and build beautiful things, for certain. Buckshot's Moschetto is a fine tool, its utility is readily apparent, and its mechanical/design integrity is obvious.

Another example of this Italian style--the Beretta 92/96 pistol series. There are a lot of good service autopistols out there, but only one can be termed "elegant"--the Berettas. The design's only real defect is its size--a little large for the calibers it houses.

I'm about as off-topic as I can get here.

[BLTsandwedge1]

I have not been without an 03 or 03A3 since 1960. My current 03A3 is a full military Remington that was rebuilt at Ogden and remained unfired until it fell into my hands about 20 years ago. I didn't get around to firing it until about two years ago.

I find no problem in getting ten shot 100 yards groups of 2MOA or a little under. I have three bullets that can be depending on to deliver the goods in the 03A3..The Lyman 311291, 311467 and RCBS 165 SIL. I have tried a number of others and none of them have been bad, but these three come out on top.

Welcome to the cult of the cast boolit! There is no turning back...

Thanks Chargar- I know now you're right- rifle bullet casting is where the art truly lay. I must've cast tens of thousands in every pisol caliber, but nothing as intriguing as casting for rifle. There are so many variables one can keep busy for a looooong time. One thing I did find interesting- I'm used to casting 500+ pistol bullets during a short session- in that same short session I'll get 100 rifle bullets after culling. But the rifle bullets last so much longer through the relaoding and shooting process. It is indeed an art.

Two questions- (1) what powder are you using for the two Lymans you mention above? Weight?

(2) I've been culling anything outside of a 2 grain tolerance for a particular bullet mould and alloy- and separating the keepers by 1/4 grain increments. E.g. if I get 100 keepers, 30 will be 174 grains from a 311041, 37 will be 172.5 grains, 23 will be 172 grains and 10 will be 173.5 grains. The odd number lots are saved for the next batch of cast bullets- and added to until a full box (or string) can be loaded with comparatively exact bullet weights. Is 1/4 grain too loose? Should it be 1/8 grain?

Many thanks and regards.........