I have decent amounts of Speer, Remington, Winchester, & WCC (military). Lesser amounts of Federal. Can anyone rank these according to longevity and case strength? I'll be loading some up at/near max (+P). This stuff is all range-floor brass, but all once fired.
This will be my first time reloading this caliber.
I've mused on this subject before, and had commenters say that, no, changing loads published for reloading is not because of lawyers, but I'm not convinced.
I recently acquired a fine Savage 99f, in 300 Savage caliber. Since it's inception in 1920, right after the conclusion of World War One, which convinced everyone that blackpowder cartridges, pressures and ballistics were gone forever, the 300 Savage has remained a popular chambering for North American big game.
As the owner of this fine, pre-war Model 99f, I got interested in the history of the loading of the cartridge, so I got down my own reference materials to look it up. First I looked at Hodgdon's 2012 tables, which, in IMR 4895 (the closest thing I have in powder to the factory loading) shows the "do not exceed" load to be 38.5 grains, which pushes the 180-gr bullet at 2,390, showing a CUP of 45,700, for a Muzzle Energy of 2,283. That seemed a bit low and slow, so I dug deeper.
In my Speer #8 manual, printed in 1970, the DNE load for IMR 4895 is listed at 44.0 grains, and there is no load shown below 40.0 grains! 5.5 grains difference in the DNE loads is a HUGE amount, and that load chronys out at 2,618 fps, a good 228 fps higher than Hodgdon for the same 180-gr bullet. The muzzle energy jumps 456 #/ft, or 19%. Compare this to a near-max load for the .308 Winchester (developed from the 300 Savage) with the 180-gr. Loading W748 powder at 46.5 grains, the .308 Win muzzle velocity achieved is 2,610 at 48,500 CUP. The Speer 300 Savage DNE load beats the .308 Winchester by a few fps, so these loadings were nearly identical 43 years ago.
Going back to 1967, and the Lyman #44 manual, they listed less powder in the max loading, only 40.0 grains of IMR 4895, for a speed of 2427, only 37 fps faster that the modern Hodgdon loading.
My research convinces me that the 300 Savage will do anything the .308 Winchester will do. BTW, I have a Savage 99e in .308, so I am set for a range test. I don't have any factory 180-grain ammo for the .308, always hunted with 150-gr Power Point, but there should be some around if I look hard enough.
There might just be a fine, historical, range comparison of the two cartridges, in the same rifle platform, coming to a blog near you soon!
You may move along this weekend, not much new to see here. Your blogger will be putting on a big reloading push during the hours I usually blog.
Y'all have fun. I will be!
If the results come out like I'm hoping, I'd qualify to be an "arse-anal" in Kalifornika, heheheheheheh. Free pun that, help yourself.
UPDATE: 08182013 1352 PDT: .223 loading evolution completed. 430 rounds loaded. 107 were IMR 3031, 22.0 gr, 55 gr spire point boat-tail. 323 were IMR 4198, 20.0 gr, same bullet, except the last 30 were Speer 55 gr Spitzer. Ran myself out of 3031 and almost out of 4198. Have full jugs of 4895, 4350, W748 and 2400 left for rifle loading, Unique and W231 for pistol. I guess I'm getting low on powder, need to order some. Did score a brick of Small Rifle primers, though, so am 570 primers UP in inventory. Next loading evolution will be 300 Savage 180 gr, then some .410 ga pumpkin ball in .444 Marlin rifle cases. I have a pair of Silly Savages to zero in, a Model 99f and a Model 24 O/U .22/410. They are both long guns from better, bygone days.
Yep, still in jammies, but that's how bloggers get noticed, right? It worked for a couple of blogger-babes, anyway.
I was dressed long enough to answer the doorbell at 0900...couple of Boy Scouts collecting canned food for a food bank they run. You should have seen the look on their faces when I admitted them to my prepper's pantry, telling them they didn't have enough bags to haul away what I was about to give them...they went away VERY happy, and so did I. No, I didn't add it up, it was probably $50 or so worth of food, but I couldn't get THAT kind of Happy Ending if I'd just paid the best whore in town for a night's worth of her talent. I am SO delighted to be able to help out this beleagured outfit.
Now, I'm watching the Georgia-Alabama game. It was tough getting through all the SEC-love being spouted by the sportz-blatherers before the game, but now the matter is being settled on the gridiron, as it should be. It will be further settled in Miami for the BCS Championship, where the upstart Snappers wait for the winner of this game. If Notre Dame wins that game, it will probably be the end of the BCS, and I agree with President Obama, that would be good riddance to bad rubbish.
Just confirmed a rumor I heard about the .410-ga shotgun, which I now have an example of, the Savage Model 24D. The survival-gun secret to the over/under .22/.410 is to have some way to reload the .410s. I just found that system: a hand priming tool, a 16-penny nail and a pencil. Yep, I just confirmed that .444 Marlin hulls are just the right size to fit the .410 chamber. The .444 Marlin is a long straight case that is about 1/8" short of a loaded 3" .410 round. There are some Brit cases from the old black-powder/early-Cordite days of Dangerous Game rifles that also work, but the cases are rare, and the .444 Marlin is still available. My TEOTWAWKI kit will have my RCBS hand-priming tool, .444 hulls, primers, powder, shot, wads, pencil and maybe some slugs (if and when I figure out the best boolit to load). The non-digital scale is already in there. I have to figure out if the hulls will need re-sizing, but I doubt it for the shot loads.In fact, my test hulls were fired under factory loads in a levergun, and they fit unsized even as they show a slight base-bulge. Since the shotgun load won't generate but a third or less of the pressure of a heavy rifle load, I doubt that there will be any sizing issue at all.
Here's an "Uncle Cliffy" warning. Preparing for the FearSome Cliff: #1: Pay your house payment and any loans due for 12-31/01-01 early. If the "cliff" causes a collapse, you don't want your obligations to get lost in the confusion. There are sharks out there planning right now how to profit from such a collapse.
It's almost half-time in the tied game, so it's time to think about sommething to put in the skillet for lunch. Later, maybe.
...this is a "44 Day", so the only thud will be if I drop something at the reloading bench. Of course, if I do that, I will follow the mechanic's usual sanction: a six-pack to share among all present for the dropped tool event. Gosh, I'd have to drink it all myself...too bad. Make it Terminator Stout, meck-a-neck. Actually, it's a continuation of "44 Week", because earlier this week I have already loaded some 44 Magnum, mid-range loads with 240 XTP-JHP and 10.0 and 10.2 grains of Unique for chronograph and accuracy trial. Some 44 Special have also rolled off the press, loaded with Xtreme Bullets' 200-gr Copper-Plated Flat-Nose and shoved along by 5.1 and 5.4 grains of Unique. Those are for the charter Arms snubbie.
Note the similarity? I'm thinking of Unique as my go-to powder for all things handgun-caliber, and my Winter load development will reflect this. Last Winter, my 44 development centered on "Skeeter" heavy rifle loads in 44 Magnum, and I was not happy with the results. The Hornady XTP apparently doesn't like speeds in the light-bullet twist of my Marlin 1894C much over 1500-1700 fps, and some of mine approached 1900. They were 6-10 MOA at 100 yards, from a rested rifle, some even keyholed, and two recovered bullets from the berm showed the effects of wiped rifling marks, showing that the bullets jumped the rifling towards the end of the barrel. So, my first cure is to go from the H110 they were loaded with (max load of 23.5 in the 44 maggy) to a hotter Unique, and maybe even to Blue Dot, to get all the pushing done in the first third of the carbine barrel.
We'll see. Could be that the XTP bullet itself is the issue, not the powder. Maybe a gas-checked cast boolit solution here? Buffalo Bore's site says not to use a bullet over 270 grains at all in the Model 1894, the super-slow one-in-38 twist rate doesn't support heavy boolits. If that's the case, I'll melt and recast some of the Oregon Trail True-Shot 310's I got into a 240-gr SWC Lyman mold I have and try those. The Oregon Trail lead is very hard, should work well at 1500-1700 or so.
Very advanced. You might have to be a serious benchrest shooter to answer this.
Problem: I have acquired a rifle in the caliber of .300 Savage. Highly advanced for it's 1921 day of introduction, the 300 Savage had the approximate power of the .30-06 Springfield, but was built into a shorter case. Chuck Hawks says that much later, in the 1950's, the .308 Winchester, then the 7.62X51 NATO was developed from the 300 Savage, and of course we know of the provenance of the .308 Winchester.
Here's my personal problem: time has passed this caliber by. Once the most popular non-military deer AND elk caliber in the Northwest woods (Northwest hunters are cheap bastards, and used a lot of milsurp rifles to hunt with), it is still available, but there is little in the way of new cases to be reloaded, and the ammo itself commands a high price, almost $30/box. Hulls are over $25 for 50, and they are VERY hard to find.
I just completed some study, both in the SAAMI charts and by detailed measurement with a dial caliper, and it seems to me that the body of the 300 Savage cartridge case is virtually identical to the .308 WIN from the base to the start of the bottleneck. The only difference below the bottleneck is that the rim-cannelure (is that called the rebate or the extraction-channel?) is much wider in the .308 WIN than it is in the 300 Savage. I would guess that the 300 Savage, being designed for bolt or lever guns only, would not need as wide an extraction-channel as the .308 WIN, which was designed with semi-auto and full-auto battle rifles and MMGs in mind.
So, the big question is: Can the profile of a .308 WIN case be changed to the 300 Savage profile? Of course, the bottleneck in the 300 Savage is much steeper, it reminds me of Ackley-Improved calibers, and the actual case neck is much longer in .308 WIN, but that is just a matter of using a case trimmer on it. The main thing is changing the angle-profile of the bottleneck.
Can that be done?
If it can be done, there might be a few grains of difference in powder capacity between a re-made .308WIN/300SAV hull, but that can be measured and the powder loads recalculated so as to have the right pressures.
Secondary question: if the change can be made, will it best be made with dies or fire-forming?
Another secondary question: what will the longevity of these changed hulls be? My intent would be to use them with cast-boolit loads, which are much lighter in pressure than high-power jacketed hunting loads.
On the left is the .308 WIN round, a Hornady 168-gr AMAX match round. On the right is the 300 Savage round, a 150-gr Remington Corelokt. This gives you an idea of the cartridge profiles, side-by-side.
Another sXs view:
Well, there you have it, advanced gunnies. All advice welcome. Of course, I also know that I can just start hoarding the scarce 300 Savage ammo, but apparently, it is only made by Remington now, and I just don't like the Core-Loct bullets. Yeah, I have killed deer with them myself, and they did their job, but that little lead protrusion at the tip gets beat up easily, and I figure it causes some inaccuracy. I suppose I could pull the Core-Loct bullets from factory, and reload with my choice, that's always an option as well. I have a large selection of .308 bullets to try out in load development, everything from 110-gr up to 180-gr with several in between.
It's going to be a fun Winter, both at the bench and the range. Speaking of winter, it starts here in the PacNorWest in 2 days, so I need to get my bippy iun gear and put all the summer-living stuff away.
I just signed on to a new gunboard (new for me, CastBoolit.com has been around for a while).
Some old heads over there raised a suspicion that I have held for a while: since the 2A is about GUNS, not ammo, a wannabe gun-grabbing gummint could put a severe crimp in the 2A by just shutting down ammo supply, without much chance of an immediately-successful challenge.
After reading some posts over at CastBoolit, it re-enforces this belief that I've held before now.
Accordingly, I give this advice:
Stop buying guns to bulk-up or improve your inventory. When you have the basic inventory on hand (3 guns/person: rifle, shotgun, handgun), concentrate on buying ammo.
Several things to consider: an actual "gun-grab" by the .gov would meet with immediate resistance (perhaps except for guns like 50BMG, which I think could be grabbed without SCOTUS opposition). An ammo crunch would be harder to resist successfully. By Executive Order (remember, Obama has issued close to 1,000 of those, eclipsing all the previous POTUS' together), all imports of ammo would cease. No more CommBloc stuff for your AKs or RPKs. No more milsurp stuff from anywhere, and that cheap Russ steel-case stuff would also stop.
That's only Day One of an ammo freeze. It gets harder for the .gov after that, but imagine if an Executive Order froze powder shipments, or declared any component of ammo as HazMat? Maybe an Executive Order declaring copper and/or lead to be a strategic and controlled supply item. I seem to recall that there is already an Executive Order on the books for that, but it was never put into practice.
Don't dismiss these musings with, "Well, CalGuns or 2AF or NRA or JPFO would fight THAT". Of course they would. When is the last time you saw some sort of Executive Office plan to delay a legal process? If you're a Geezer, think back to Watergate, but just recently, we had Gunwalker, which is not resolved yet despite an entire Congressional Session investigating it. Oh, yeah, those Oval Office people know how to delay things, yes they do.
Here's the program:
Buy ammo. Buy it/load it often. Develop a system to keep track of it, storage systems to protect it's quality, and possibly be ready to hide it from .gov eyes if some sort of "Arsenal Law" is declared.
Plan on having enough ammo for the duration of an Obama second term. If an "Arsenal law" gets declared by ObamaFiat, it will be in effect immediately on publication in the Federal Register, and that can be done in days, maybe hours. All ammo sales will likely be immediately frozen until the Registration requirements for the Arsenal Law are worked out.
Don't talk about your ammo supply any more. Not on your blogs, not to anyone outside of necessary household members who have to help you with ammo logistics.
If your State/Muni gummint already registers/limits ammo purchases, you are screwed, unless you have found a way around them (like driving to a neighboring State and purchasing, making you an instant criminal). NEVER talk about such lawbreaking to ANYONE.
Consider caching most of your ammo away from your primary residence. If you DO get known as an ammo hoarder, and I'm sure I am known that way already, you MUST have off-site and dispersed storage.
Reloading: reloading is a long-term solution to an ammo ban, but reloading components/equipment will likely be embargoed as well as loaded ammo in the Arsenal Law. We will all have to pack up our reloading benches/rooms and prepare to hide/disperse them also if ammo gets banned by fiat.
Okay, you're a gunny who isn't a Type A prepper. How about YOU? How long until your ammo supply runs out at your present rate of use without re-supply, Grasshopper?