Re: 30/06, 180 grain Bullet 2900 fps? Published P

13 October 2004, 12:02

The load is not shown on Hodgdon's web site either.

http://www.hodgdon.com/data/rifle/30-06.php

Of course, that could just mean that they haven't updated their web site in awhile and that the booklet seafire has contains newer data than the data on their web site. The data at the link above is not showing the short cut 4831.

-Bob F.

14 October 2004, 03:30

bajabill

any earth shattering news for 150gr bullets in the Hodgdon booklet???

14 October 2004, 03:33

Brad

Quote:

I have the Hodgdon Basic Reloaders Manual 2004 in my hand.
On page 20 30-06 data.

180 Gr. SIE SPBT
H4350 59.0 Gr. 2938 FPS 49,000 CUP

I'll bet that's a typo... I have every Hodgdon load pamphlet going back ten years... max with a 180 has always been 57.5 gr's H4350 for 49,000 CUP. 59-59.5 gr's has always been max for the 165's.

15 October 2004, 01:44

<eldeguello>

Quote:

Quote:

One thing that I don't understand is why the 270 is rated for 52,000 cup and the 30-06 is rated for 50,000.

Believe it or not, Scot, the reason for this is in deference to the early '03 Springfields out there ("low numbered '03's") that may have brittle receivers, the ones that probably should not be shot with ANY ammo! And to such other early .30/'06's like the M95 Winchesters, etc.
Like another said, weak old actions, like the '95 Winchester lever action.

14 October 2004, 03:05

<eldeguello>

Seafire, thanks for the info on the new Hodgdon pamphlet.

13 October 2004, 12:46

AZCoues

Observations on the TSX 180gr in two rifles chambered for 30-06:

Winchester, pre64 FWT, 22" barrel
WW Brass, WLRM primers, Reloder 19
2,870fps .85 MOA 5/100 average of five groups

Ruger No1B, 26" barrel, same load
3,014 fps .70 MOA 5/100 average of five groups

PACT Pro chronograph, velocities 15' from muzzle

Brass has been reloaded up to eight times, trimmed once, before primer pockets began to feel loose. Velocities with previous 180gr bullets were about 150fps lower (Nosler partition). Best accuracy has been with the TSX.

The TSX shows little tendency toward fouling. Montana Extreme is my solvent of choice followed by Sweets. Both rifles clean up fast and easy.

Two bull elk have been taken with the Winchester. No bullets were recovered; performance was superb.

These are only two examples, but, it has prompted me to begin a switch with other chamberings to the TSX. I've taken three bucks with the TSX in a 257AI and consider it the best performing bullet I have used in the quarter bore.

To think, I used to avoid Barnes!! I believe they have a unique bullet with the TSX and as more field examples come in we may be able to better evaluate it.

13 October 2004, 16:27

Displaced Texan

I have the Hodgdon Basic Reloaders Manual 2004 in my hand.
On page 20 30-06 data.

180 Gr. SIE SPBT
H4350 59.0 Gr. 2938 FPS 49,000 CUP

14 October 2004, 08:09

denton

I like the typo theory. At their website, 59 grains H4350 is listed as the max for a 165 grain bullet, and the MV is 2938, exactly what we're seeing listed for the 180. They list the pressure as 49,400, though, rather than 49,000 as you are seeing in the new manual. Bet it's a mistake.

14 October 2004, 03:03

denton

Hunterbug...

I think the difference in SAAMI specs between the '06 and the 270 probably comes from the fact that there are older, weaker '06 actions still around. That didn't happen to the 270, so you can set a spec for the 270 that is a bit higher.

13 October 2004, 17:29

denton

In my '06, 57.5 grains of H4350 gives me 2797 fps and 56.4 KPSI in cool weather, with 180 grain bullets.

In that case, with that powder, a grain is about 50 fps and 2,000 PSI. So, for me, 59 grains should be about 2875 fps, and 59.4 KPSI... don't have a real good reason to go there.

14 October 2004, 05:50

Atkinson

I intend to try the new 4831 SC load and chronograph it..Just to satisfy my curiosity..thats some load and at neat pressue levels...

As to the other loads mentioned here, I think I'll just use my 300 H&H as I can get the same velocity at lower pressure....

Besides I have found the 06 and its 180 gr. bullet at a piddling standardized 2700 FPS sufficient to kill any thing that I have shot with it, including several cape buffalo....I doubt that a couple of hundred feet per second more would have made any great changes in its effect...I never have been able to tell any practical difference in the 06 and several 300 magnums I have used...

14 October 2004, 04:53

Jim in Idaho

Quote:

Quote:

I have the Hodgdon Basic Reloaders Manual 2004 in my hand.

On page 20 30-06 data.

180 Gr. SIE SPBT

H4350 59.0 Gr. 2938 FPS 49,000 CUP

I'll bet that's a typo... I have every Hodgdon load pamphlet going back ten years... max with a 180 has always been 57.5 gr's H4350 for 49,000 CUP. 59-59.5 gr's has always been max for the 165's.

Yes, even though this thread is about published proof, that's a LOT of any 4350 powder for any 180 grain bullet. That's a pretty high charge weight for a 165 grain bullet as well, although not totally unreasonable.

Those Sierra Boat Tails most likely will have a shorter bearing surface than a flat base, so I'm not saying this isn't correct but, geez, I'd be very leery of putting that much 4350 powder, IMR or H, under any 180 grain bullet. Has anybody called or emailed Hodgdon to double check this?

14 October 2004, 06:51

M 98

SEAFIRE
i was the culprit who posted the question in relation to SAM FADELA getting such high velocities in his 06 with H 4831 S/C....over 2900 fps with the 180 gn proj ...i said it was in guns and ammo ...in fact it was in rifle shooter

Seafire mentioned that the hogdens manual states they used H4831 others say its H 4350...WHICH POWDER IS IT!!!!!

I i have tested H 4350 in the pressre gun
180 gn nosler part
POWDER H 4350
CASE Lapua
Primer WLR
CART OAL 85 MM

57 gn 2750fps 60,000psi
58 gn 2810fps 63,000psi
59 gn 2838fps 665000psi
60 gn 2880fps 70500psi

im not one to load the 06 with cotton wool but i feel 2900 fps is overley optimistic if not a bit stupid
in fact im pressure testing the 06 with most avaliable powders and will post the results and i bet that not one powder will give me over 2900 fps with the 180 gn nosler with a pressure thats sane in a 24 inch barrel
stay tuned
regards daniel

15 October 2004, 02:33

Brad

SeeFire, you're hanging your hat on Sam Fadala... you're kidding, right?

Haven't tested the loads you refer to? Been loading the 06 for a long time and have used quite a variety of loads from H414/WW760 to IMR/H 4350 and RL22. H4831 sc tops out, in my 22" bbl'd rifle, at 60 grain's... not 63 grains for over 2,900 fps which is not safe... there's no free lunch sir, not even for you and your Pixey Dust barelled 06'.

As to being "cordial"... when someone posts this sort of balderdash on the internet for someone else to pick up and get hurt with cordiality is out the window.

Funny, I've seen you refer to Magnum's you've owned. I've also seen many occasion's where you're the first to jump on the "non-magnum" bandwagon while simultaneously being the only Internet Jockey I've met who's determined to turn a 30-06 into a 300 mag.

21 October 2004, 13:17

denton

I'm not sure, but I believe that the formulas in QuickLoad and such are emperical formulas that predict muzzle speed from case size, bore, charge, etc.

OTH, if you have the curve of pressure vs. time, which you get from most strain gage systems, you can also derive muzzle speed from that... different approach.

Since speed is the integral of acceleration, you can derive muzzle speed of the bullet by expressing acceleration in terms of mass (weight divided by g), net force (pressure x base area - friction), and performing the integration. That is the direct conversion from pressure to fps.

14 October 2004, 05:23

scot

Quote:

One thing that I don't understand is why the 270 is rated for 52,000 cup and the 30-06 is rated for 50,000.

Like another said, weak old actions, like the '95 Winchester lever action.

15 October 2004, 04:46

M 98

HOTCORE
pressure equals velocity and velocity equals pressure ... however an important factor which is often not seen is the pressure curve and more specifically the area under the pressure curve
i maintain there is no free lunch in getting high velocities and as a consequnce i do not belive in fast barrels and slow barrels ....let me explain and this is just an EXAMPLE................ RIFLE A gets a velocity of say 2800 fps with 58 gn of H 4350 at a pressure of 65,000 psi RIFLE B gets a velocity of 2600 fps
with the same load ...58 gn s of H 4350....with rifle B PRESSURE will be a lot lower than rifle A
now with rifle B if you increase the charge of powder till you hit 2800 fps pressure will be very close to what RIFLES A PRESSURE is even thou the powder charge may be approching 60 gns of H 4350 .....you can probabley name a dozen good reasons for the diffrences in velocity and powder charge in the two rifles ...but the fact remain that no matter what the powder charge with the particular powder is , once you hit the velocity of lets say 2800 pressure will be about 65,000 psi.....im saying this because i have seen it on pressure guns and right now my loads are being tested in a new border barrel and we had to drop charges by i think 1.5 grain in order to get the same pressure and velocity as with the old worn out H.S PRECISION PRESSURE barrel
SEAFIRE ...I have done tests with the slower powders and 200 gn proj in the 06 and the best i can get is 2700 fps and that is right on the dot of 65,000 psi again i will post all the results once i get them ...but 2700 with the 200 nosler part is about the max vvn 165 is a real suprise packet but its a compressed load

regards daniel

21 October 2004, 18:43

B17G

This shows how nuts this forum can get.

Originally I just mentioned the place that I found out the information that Sam Fadala got this info from on his article about the Three Kings which included the 30/06 where he stated a MV of 2930 fps out of an 06 with a 180 grain bullet.

It was M98 who had originally asked about it, and the source.

Who could have believed that it ended up with 1650 plus hits on it??????

You would think there would be interest in more interesting topics!

Hope everyone got that ironed out and off of their chest!
ONE would think this was an AA meeting!
Do we need a group hug??? LoL

Cheers and good shooting
seafire

15 October 2004, 03:28

Hot Core

Quote:

Question is HAS anyone tried it by working up and saw the results. ....
Arguing over published data, is something constantly people do on this forum . However it is fewer who get out and check out something they question, yet many are ready to jump at something to engage in an argument over. ....
Some guys need to get out of the armchair and go out and get THEIR OWN RESULTS, since they are so quick to question or engage in an argument at the drop of a hat on the subject...

There is the basic problem. You have people saying something can't be done because they haven't seen it. But at the same time are not going to do any experimenting with the specific components to see if the claim is valid or not in their own firearm.

One of the people heaping the criticism on you Seafire is a person that can't even work a bolt action rifle (bradly's own words not mine). So for you to waste your time attempting to engage in any kind of worthwhile conversation concerning guns or reloading with him is an error in judgement on your part.

---

Then we get to this "Classic" from Dan:

Quote:

VELOCITY EQUALS PRESSURE AND PRESSURE EQUALS VELOCITY

I don't know Dan, haven't followed his posts. But I do know the entire premis for that thought process is wrong. Though you do need Pressure to create Velocity, it is certainly not as simple as raising Pressure and Velocity increases.

The critical misunderstanding comes from overlooking the relationship of the specific sustained Pressure from moment-to-moment as the bullet is transitioning the barrel. Basically a simple understanding of " dv/dt " in Physiscs 101 shows how the above statement (V=P) just doesn't work.

Another way for everyone to see it easily is to look in a Hodgdon Powder Manual. So as not to confuse the issue, I'll stay with a 180gr bullet in a 30-06. I have a Hodgdon #26 close at hand, so I'll use it. Lets see here, go to page 357 for these numbers:

Below is an example of basically the same Velocity, but Pressure is totally different.

H1000...64.0gr...2564fps...38,200cup
BL-C2...47.5gr...2550fps...49,200cup

Below is an example of basically the same Pressure, but Velocity is totally different.

H4350...56.0gr...2733fps...48.800cup
H322....42.0GR...2399FPS...48,400CUP

The Hodgdon Data supports Physics in that Velocity does not equal Pressure. It is totally misleading and incorrect to extrapolate that when using even the exact same Powder and components listed in any Manual, the end result will have the exact same Velocity and Pressure in a different firearm. Too many variables for it to always work out that way.

That is why it is always important to develop Loads from below watching for all Pressure indicators, not just Velocity and certainly not just Pressure.

---

By the way Seafire, one of the largest differences I've noticed in the Manuals was with a 120gr 0.284" Sierra Listing for use in the 7mmRemMag. A Pennsylvania buddy emailed me about a Load he was going to try and (I believe) it was 6gr of that specific Powder ABOVE any listed 120gr Load I could find. I called him and he emailed the page directly from the Sierra Manual.

So, perhaps the 180gr 30cal Sierra SPBT has something different about it which will also allow lower typical Pressures for a specific amount and type of Powder as well.

I do know for a fact the few 2-diameter Hornady bullets which they still make allow for much lower Pressure with the same amount of Powder when compared to other 1-diameter bullets. An example would be their 150gr 30cal RN which is a 2-diameter design.

15 October 2004, 03:38

CDH

I can't believe you brought differential calculus (dv/dt) into a discussion...

Not trying to nitpick...but the issue Brad has to understand is not with pressure, but PEAK pressure. The differnece needs to be stated, IMHO.

Yes, pressure=velocity (technically the cumulative pressure effect on the base of the bullet)...but peak pressure=danger.

How many times has this been rehashed on these forums??? Twice a month???

13 October 2004, 12:29

Alan R

Gents - the booklet Seafire is referring to is the 2004 booklet from Hodgdon (appx. 8"X6")...not the annual manual.