Webley MK VI

[Baltimoreed]

They are certainly man stoppers. Lot of history in them.

[Thumbcocker]

Covet covet

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[jordanka16]

I got my mold today and got some bullets cast up. I measured one and input it into quickload to see what it says. Well I think it can't handle the hollow base calculations very well. It's got a place to enter them but it still came up really off. It said Outpost75s pressure tested load of 3.5gr bullseye would be at 23,000 PSI and nearly 800 fps. So it looks like that's about useless unfortunately.

[Drydock]

If you can find a Lee 1st edition (red) reloading book, it has good load data for the Webley mk ll. I like Blue Dot under the heavy bullet. I also use Accurate mold 45-262m, and have had Dougguy clean up my cylinders.

[Tokarev]

You are unlikely to blow the cylinder, if you approach it conservatively. The worst thing that can happen is a bullet stuck in the barrel. Then you get a bulge and the value of the gun goes down the toilet. So I would start close to 4 gr of Unique or an equivalent load, chrono it and and go up or down one notch, depending on what you see. My RIC's case capacity is considerably less than 455 but the bullet is quite heavy. I already cannot remember what the original Kynoch design drops since I have not shot the RIC in a long time. 240gr? Could be that. All I know is that above 4.2gr of Unique the recoil becomes less than enjoyable. The thin-walled brass that I made from 303 cartridges shows no pressure signs. I can probably get 3 reloads out of it. So for my RIC, I consider this a safe load.

[rintinglen]

This my Mk VI, a high number, post war civilian gun that was cut for 45 acp/AR ammunition. It has Birmingham proofs but no military markings, as well as a 4 inch barrel.

[pettypace]

I was gonna ask if it had been established whether the round nose bullet "tumbled." But then I saw this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSlnLBcWbHA So maybe not?

[Bigslug]

I was gonna ask if it had been established whether the round nose bullet "tumbled." But then I saw this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSlnLBcWbHA So maybe not?

We go off into that quite a bit on the stickied .38/200 thread. From what I've seen, the short version on the .455 MKII bullet is that:

1. It's hollow-based, and therefore somewhat drag-stabilized in flight.

2. Because of the hollow base, most of it's 265 grains are in the nose, so it doesn't want to swap ends on impact, like, for example, a tail-heavy M193 55 grain 5.56 will.

I thumped jugs and even a pumpkin - couldn't see anything indicating it would reverse itself even a little bit.

I DID manage to confirm on that thread that the MKI .380/200 bullet WILL tumble on impact, which was a bit surprising to me in that I had previously determined that the very similarly-shaped and weighted Lyman 358430, in trying to duplicate the same load, definitely does NOT tumble.

[Outpost75]

I got my mold today and got some bullets cast up. I measured one and input it into quickload to see what it says. Well I think it can't handle the hollow base calculations very well. It's got a place to enter them but it still came up really off. It said Outpost75s pressure tested load of 3.5gr bullseye would be at 23,000 PSI and nearly 800 fps. So it looks like that's about useless unfortunately.

Using the Oehler 35 PBL with strain gage pressure was under 14,000 psi by actual measurement, not a computed estimate.

Larry Gibson has published his data and methodology which is well documented and calibrated against factory loads.

I don't consider QL estimates to be reliable.

[jordanka16]

Yeah that's what I meant if it wasn't clear. That it was way off with actual pressure tested data so I couldnt really use it for N320 data. I'll have to just wing it.

[jeepyj]

Very interesting post. Thanks for sharing the photo. Another to add to the watch list.